The History Place - World War II in Europe Timeline: June 30, 1934 - The Night of the Long Knives The Night of the Long Knives The four million brown shirted Nazi storm troopers, the SA (Sturmabteilung), included many members who actually believed in the 'socialism' of National Socialism and also wanted to become a true revolutionary army in place of the regular German Army. But to the regular Army High Command and its conservative supporters, this potential storm trooper army represented a threat to centuries old German military traditions and the privileges of rank. Adolf Hitler had been promising the generals for years he would restore their former military glory and break the "shackles" of the Treaty of Versailles which limited the Army to 100,000 men and prevented modernization. For Adolf Hitler, the behavior of the SA was a problem that now threatened his own political survival and the entire future of the Nazi movement. The anti-capitalist, anti-tradition sentiments often expressed by SA leaders and echoed by the restless masses of storm troopers also caused great concern to big industry leaders who had helped put Hitler in power.

Hitler had promised them he would put down the trade union movement and Marxists, which he had done. However, now his own storm troopers with their talk of a 'second revolution' were sounding more and more like Marxists themselves. (The first revolution having been the Nazi seizure of power in early 1933.) The SA was headed by Ernst Röhm, a battle scarred, aggressive, highly ambitious street brawler who had been with Hitler from the very beginning. Röhm and the SA had been very instrumental in Hitler's rise to power by violently seizing control of the streets and squashing Hitler's political opponents. However, by early 1934, a year after Hitler came to power, the SA's usefulness as a violent, threatening, revolutionary force had effectively come to an end. Hitler now needed the support of the regular Army generals and the big industry leaders to rebuild Germany after the Great Depression, re-arm the military and ultimately accomplish his long range goal of seizing more living space for the German people.

The average German also feared and disliked the SA brownshirts with their arrogant, gangster-like behavior, such as extorting money from local shop owners, driving around in fancy news cars showing off, often getting drunk, beating up and even murdering innocent civilians. At the end of February, 1934, Hitler held a meeting attended by SA and regular Army leaders including Röhm and German Defense Minister General Werner von Blomberg. At this meeting Hitler informed Röhm the SA would not be a military force in Germany but would be limited to certain political functions. In Hitler's presence, Röhm gave in and even signed an agreement with Blomberg. However, Röhm soon let it be know he had no intention of keeping to the agreement. In April he even boldly held a press conference and proclaimed, "The SA is the National Socialist Revolution!!" Within the SA at this time was a highly disciplined organization known as the SS (Shutzstaffel) which had been formed in 1925 as Hitler's personal body guard.

SS chief Heinrich Himmler along with his second-in-command, Reinhard Heydrich, and Hermann Göring, began plotting against Röhm to prod Hitler into action against his old comrade, hoping to gain from Röhm's downfall. On June 4, Hitler and Röhm had a five hour private meeting lasting until midnight. A few days later Röhm announced he was taking a 'personal illness' vacation and the whole SA would go on leave for the month of July. He also convened a conference of top SA leaders for June 30 at a resort town near Munich which Hitler promised to attend to sort things out. On June 17, Vice Chancellor Franz von Papen, who had helped Hitler become Chancellor, stunned everyone by making a speech criticizing the rowdy, anti-intellectual behavior of the SA and denouncing Nazi excesses such as strict press censorship. Papen also focused on the possibility of a 'second revolution' by Röhm and the SA and urged Hitler to put a stop to it. "Have we experienced an anti-Marxist revolution in order to put through a Marxist program?" Papen asked.

His speech drastically increased the tension between German Army leaders and SA leaders and further jeopardized Hitler's position. But for the moment Hitler hesitated to move against his old comrade Röhm. A few days later, June 21, Hitler went to see German President Paul von Hindenburg at his country estate. Hindenburg was in failing health and now confined to a wheelchair. Hitler met with the Old Gentleman and Defense Minister Blomberg and was stiffly informed the SA problem must be solved or the president would simply declare martial law and let the German Army run the country, effectively ending the Nazi regime. Meanwhile, Himmler and Heydrich spread false rumors that Röhm and the SA were planning a violent takeover of power (putsch). On June 25, the German Army was placed on alert, leaves canceled and the troops confined to the barracks. An agreement had been secretly worked out between Himmler and Army generals ensuring cooperation between the SS and the Army during the coming action against the SA. The Army would provide weapons and any necessary support, but would remain in the barracks and let the SS handle things.

On Thursday, June 28, Hitler, Göring, and Goebbels attended the wedding of Gauleiter Josef Terboven in Essen. Hitler was informed by phone that he faced the possibility of a putsch by Röhm's forces and also faced the possibility of a revolt by influential conservative non-Nazis who wanted Hindenburg to declare martial law and throw out Hitler and his government. Hitler then sent Göring back to Berlin to get ready to put down the SA and conservative government leaders there. The SS was put on full alert. Friday, June 29, Hitler made a scheduled inspection tour of a labor service camp and then went to a hotel near Bonn for the night. He was informed by Himmler that evening by phone that SA troops in Munich knew about the coming action and had taken to the streets. Hitler decided to fly to Munich to put down the SA rebellion and confront Röhm and top SA leaders who were gathered at the resort town of Bad Wiessee near Munich.

Arriving in Munich near dawn, Saturday, June 30, Hitler first ordered the arrest of the SA men who were inside Munich Nazi headquarters, then proceeded to the Ministry of the Interior building where he confronted the top SA man in Munich after his arrest, even tearing off his insignia in a fit of hysteria. Next it was on to Röhm. A column of troops and cars containing Hitler, Rudolf Hess, and others, sped off toward Röhm and his men. At this point, the story is often told (partly conceived by the Nazis) of Hitler arriving at the resort hotel about 6:30 a.m. and rushing inside with a pistol to arrest Röhm and other SA leaders. However it is more likely the hotel was first secured by the SS before Hitler went near it. Hitler then confronted Röhm and the others and sent them to Stadelheim prison outside Munich to be later shot by the SS. An exception was made in the case of Edmund Heines, an SA leader who had been found in bed with a young man. When told of this, Hitler ordered his immediate execution at the hotel. A number of the SA leaders, including Röhm, were homosexuals.

Prior to the purge, Hitler for the most part ignored their behavior because of their usefulness to him during his rise to power. However, their usefulness and Hitler's tolerance had now come to an end. Later, their homosexual conduct would be partly used as an excuse for the murders. Saturday morning about 10 a.m. a phone call was placed from Hitler in Munich to Göring in Berlin with the prearranged code word 'Kolibri' (hummingbird) that unleashed a wave of murderous violence in Berlin and over 20 other cities. SS execution squads along with Göring's private police force roared through the streets hunting down SA leaders and anyone on the prepared list of political enemies (known as the Reich List of Unwanted Persons).

Included on the list: Gustav von Kahr, who had opposed Hitler during the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923 - found hacked to death in a swamp near Dachau; Father Bernhard Stempfle, who had taken some of the dictation for Hitler's book Mein Kampf and knew too much about Hitler - shot and killed; Kurt von Schleicher, former Chancellor of Germany and master of political intrigue, who had helped topple democracy in Germany and put Hitler in power - shot and killed along with his wife; Gregor Strasser, one of the original members of the Nazi Party and formerly next in importance to Hitler; Berlin SA leader Karl Ernst, who was involved in torching the Reichstag building in February, 1933; Vice-Chancellor Papen's press secretary; Catholic leader Dr. Erich Klausener. Saturday evening, Hitler flew back to Berlin and was met at the airport by Himmler and Göring in a scene later described by Hans Gisevius, a Gestapo official, present. "On his way to the fleet of cars, which stood several hundred yards away, Hitler stopped to converse with Göring and Himmler.

Apparently he could not wait a few minutes until he reached the Chancellery�From one of his pockets Himmler took out a long, tattered list. Hitler read it through, while Göring and Himmler whispered incessantly into his ear. We could see Hitler's finger moving slowly down the sheet of paper. Now and then it paused for a moment at one of the names. At such times the two conspirators whispered even more excitedly. Suddenly Hitler tossed his head. There was so much violent emotion, so much anger in the gesture, that everybody noticed it�Finally they moved on, Hitler in the lead, followed by Göring and Himmler. Hitler was still walking with the same sluggish tread.

By contrast, the two blood drenched scoundrels at his side seemed all the more lively�" As for Ernst Röhm - on Hitler's order he had been given a pistol containing a single bullet to commit suicide, but refused to do it, saying "If I am to be killed let Adolf do it himself." Two SS officers, one of whom was Theodore Eicke, commander of the Totenkopf (Death's Head) guards at Dachau, entered Röhm's cell after waiting fifteen minutes and shot him point blank. Reportedly, Röhm's last words were "Mein Führer, mein Führer!" On Sunday evening, July 1, while some of the shooting was still going on, Hitler gave a tea party in the garden of the Chancellery for cabinet members and their families to give the appearance things were getting back to normal. By 4 a.m., Monday, July 2, the bloody purge had ended. The exact number of murders is unknown since all Gestapo documents relating to the purge were destroyed. Estimates vary widely from 200 or 250, to as high as 1,000 or more.

Less than half of those murdered were actually SA officers. In one case, a man named Willi Schmidt was at home playing the cello. Four SS men rang the doorbell, entered and took him away, leaving his wife and three young children behind. They had mistaken Dr. Willi Schmidt, music critic for a Munich newspaper, for another Willi Schmidt on the list. Dr. Schmidt was assassinated and his body later returned to his family in a sealed coffin with orders from the Gestapo that it should not be opened. On July 13, Hitler gave a long speech to the Nazi controlled Reichstag (Parliament) in which he announced seventy four had been shot and justified the murders.

"If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this: In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the German people, and thereby I became the supreme judge of the German people." "It was no secret that this time the revolution would have to be bloody; when we spoke of it we called it 'The Night of the Long Knives.' Everyone must know for all future time that if he raises his hand to strike the State, then certain death is his lot." By proclaiming himself the supreme judge of the German people, Hitler in effect placed himself above the law, making his word the law, and thus instilled a permanent sense of fear in the German people. The German Army generals, by condoning the unprecedented events of the Night of the Long Knives, effectively cast their lot with Hitler and began the long journey with him that would eventually lead them to the brink of world conquest and later to the hanging docks at Nuremberg after the war. A few weeks after the purge, Hitler rewarded the SS for its role by raising the SS to independent status as an organization no longer part of the SA.

Leader of the SS, Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler now answered to Hitler and no one else. Reinhard Heydrich was promoted to SS Gruppenführer (Lieutenant-General). From this time on, the SA brownshirts would be diminished and all but disappear eventually as its members were inducted into the regular Army after Hitler re-introduced military conscription in 1935. The SS organization under Himmler and Heydrich would greatly expand and become Hitler's instrument of mass murder and terror throughout the remaining history of the Third Reich, another eleven years. Copyright © 1996 The History Place™ All Rights Reserved (Photo credit: Courtesy of USHMM Photo Archives) Night of the Long Knives (June 30 – July 2, 1934) Summary & Facts World History Night of the Long Knives Many students and scholars labor under the assumption that once Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, he immediately assumed full dictatorial control of the country. However, this is not an accurate assessment. There were quite a number of steps that Hitler employed to consolidate his power, many of which were devious and violent.

Of all the steps he had taken, the events during the Night of the Long Knives were among the most brutal. The Night of the Long Knives The Night of the Long Knives involved the violent purge of certain members of the Nazi Party from June 30th to July 2nd in 1934. Called the Nacht der langen Messer in Germany, this event occurred over a series of days and entailed the Nazi regime’s murder of those Hitler considered to be political enemies. In particular, those targeted belonged to the Strasserist, a left wing faction of the Nazi Party that Hitler distrusted. Those killed during these events included leaders and major figures in the Strasserist such as Kurt von Schleicher (a former Chancellor), Gustav Ritter von Kahr, and Gregor Strasser. Also targeted and killed were the main leaders of the Sturmabteilung (SA), a paramilitary organization of the Strasserist which operated in a manner similar to the Brownshirts of Mussolini’s fascist regime in Italy. After the Night of the Long Knives, Hitler had eliminated both real and perceived opposition in the Nazi Party.

He was able to put his main loyalists in charge of various operations in the German government and further expand his ability to control the government and the populace. The Enabling Act Was Not Enough Prior to the Night of the Long Knives, Hitler had gained a massive amount of power thanks to the Enabling Act . This act, for all intents and purposes, nullified any checks and balances on Hitler. He was able to pass laws without any input from parliament and Judicial review of Hitler’s actions was nonexistent. All of these actions were achieved through convincing the populace an existential threat was present in the form of communist subversives. The Enabling Act, however, was not enough for Hitler. He still felt threatened by left wing factions within his own party. This led Hitler to order the purge of the Nazi Party of those he felt would be a dire threat to him. Fear of the SA Fear of the SA also contributed to Hitler’s desire to purge their ranks. The SA was a notoriously violent Nazi faction which, at points, even terrorized innocent citizens of Germany. The actions of this organization helped keep the populace of Germany in line. The ranks of the SA were huge, including over 2 million men.

While no plans existed to overthrow or even mildly oppose Hitler, fears and concerns did exist regarding what might happen if the SA became disloyal to the German leader. Hitler also had great concerns over the loyalty of the German Army. The Army was comprised of massive numbers of men and not very many in the Army held Hitler in high regard since he was only a corporal when he served in World War I. Hitler knew he needed a loyalty oath from the Army or else his control over it would always be in question. This would make his plans in Germany and outside of its domestic borders very difficult. Hitler needed to take steps to deal with these issues. From this, the Night of the Long Knives was born. The Stage is Set for the Purge Ernst Röhm Eric Schnaubelt on the US Media and the Roehm Putsch Research Paper ( back to top ) In the last days of June, 1934, Hitler was faced with making a monumental decision that would shake the foundation of his regime. Hitler had to choose between the SA and the SS.

His brown shirted Storm Troopers (SA) were a key component in his ascension to power, and many were present and some arrested with Hitler during his Beer Hall Putsch. Hitler was under pressure from Goebbels, the Minister of Propaganda, Goring, commander of the Luftwaffe, and Himmler, the head of the SS, to cut back the SAï¿½s power and put them under the authority of the SS. In the end, Himmler won out, and the SA was purged. Among this purgeï¿½s victims was the SAï¿½s chief of staff, and Hitlerï¿½s close friend, Ernst Rï¿½hm. Ernst Rï¿½hm was a widely known Nazi in the early years of the party. He controlled the thuggish brown shirts who walked the streets and ensured Nazi victories in elections. On June 30, 1934 the purge of his organization was covered in the international press. The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and The Los Angeles Times all covered the story, as did Time magazine.

These newspapers covered the first days of the purge and changes throughout July, providing different insights and ideas about the death of Ernst Rï¿½hm and the SA. The U.S. news reportsï¿½ tone and perception of the German reaction changed over the weeks after the purge. Hitlerï¿½s statement and his speeches were covered in the press. The U.S. mediaï¿½s perception of Hitlerï¿½s action changed over time. The early reports expressed shock while also giving Hitler praise, but after the killings stopped, the press took a more critical stance and looked beyond the information the Nazi government was giving. The media took some time to understand the significance of the event but through their reporting they discovered Hitlerï¿½s motivations while disregarding his justifications.ï¿½ Hitlerï¿½s speech on July 13 is when the U.S. cemented the idea in their minds that the purge was for securing Nazi power, not for stomping out a revolt by the SA. When following the events of the Blood Purge, it is important to understand the Purgeï¿½s main target, the SAï¿½s Chief of Staff, Ernst Rï¿½hm.

The Blood Purge of 1934 was cemented in U.S.-American minds when Hitler referred to the event as ï¿½the Night of Long Knives.ï¿½ [1] The purge marks the assassination of Ernst Rï¿½hm and the end of the revolutionary phase of Nazism. Rï¿½hm had built up the Storm Trooper organization, which by 1934 had over 2.5 million members. [2] The size of the organization created problems for Hitlerï¿½s government because it ï¿½alarmed foreign powers,ï¿½ and focused unwanted attention on Germany while rearmament was still in its secret stages. The Treaty of Versailles forbid Germany from rearming and the foreign powers saw the SA as a possible threat to that clause. The Nazi government feared an attack by a foreign power when their army was still unprepared to fight. This prompted Hitler to publicly make offers to these foreign governments to reduce the size of the SA.

[3] The German army and the SA argued over training methods, and the rift was made wider because many of the older Army officials considered the SA to be ï¿½disreputable thugs who disrupted public order.ï¿½ [4] To compound the problem for the SA, the SS had grown very strong and wished to be dominant over its rival. On June 30, 1934, Hitler ordered the purge and the SS killed Rï¿½hm and other people they thought might cause problems. The event consolidated power for Himmler and subordinated the ranks of the SA to the extremely powerful SS. ï¿½The bloody purge was used to rid the country of dissenters and rivals of Nazi power, like Gregor Strasser who was the leader of the Nazi party from 1925 until the 1930s and personal rival of Hitler. The event centralized power and normalized coercion at the expense of some of its most loyal servants.

As Eleanor Hancock writes, ï¿½the revolution devoured its own children.ï¿½ [5] The Blood Purge of 1934 occurred in the heart of Germany, and many justifications were given by the Nazi government, but the truth emerged over time through the international press that was monitoring the rise of a new dictator. Literature Review Ernst Rï¿½hm was head of the SA, an organization that was central to the Nazi party's growth in Germany during the Weimar Republic and also in Bavaria after World War I. A couple of books, like Otis C. Mitchellï¿½s Hitlerï¿½s Storm Troopers and the Attack on the German Republic: 1919-1933, cover the role of the SA in building the Nazi party. Mitchellï¿½s book covers the SA generally and focuses on the contribution of the young brown shirt members but covers Rï¿½hm only briefly. The main work that covers the life of Rï¿½hm is Eleanor Hancockï¿½s Ernst Rï¿½hm: Hitlerï¿½s SA Chief of Staff.

Hancockï¿½s biography was published in 2008 and focuses on Rï¿½hmï¿½s life from when he was a young officer in 1887 to his death in 1934. This book is the first academic biography of Rï¿½hm, the only other biography, Rohm lï¿½homme qui inventa Hitler, by Jean Mabire, does not list any of its sources. [6] Hancock used personal papers written by Rï¿½hm that had not been destroyed, personal accounts, and memoirs by Rï¿½hmï¿½s close friends to accurately portray Rï¿½hmï¿½s life. Hancock also used archival sources and international government reports to cover the perception that foreign countries had of Rï¿½hm. Rï¿½hm was also a well known homosexual and is mentioned in almost every major work concerning homosexuality and the Nazi government.

Hancock writes that, ï¿½academic audiences seem to be more interested in this aspect of his life[ï¿½the Nazi homosexualï¿½] than in his role as a Germanor Nazi political figure.ï¿½ [7] Rï¿½hm is mentioned in works like Sex and Society in Nazi Germany, and the History of Homosexuality in Europe: 1919-1939. Ernst Rï¿½hm is most commonly associated with the Night of Long Knives. In many textbooks and historical works, Rï¿½hm and the purging of the SA are given at most a page or two. The purge killed Rï¿½hm and consolidated power for Hitler and Himmlerï¿½s SS. It also gave Hitler an opportunity to kill many dissenters and people that knew his past. The Knight of Long Knives is chronicled in a book by Paul R. Maracin, but it only draws on secondary sources. The main text on the purge is Max Galloï¿½s The Night of Long Knives that was originally published in the U.S. in 1972.

Galloï¿½s work is a historical narrative of the event that deals generally with the causes while also focusing on the players, attitudes, and political mechanisms involved. The main sources for the book are archival documents and the memoirs of high ranking Nazis. None of the literature dealing with the Night of Long Knives looked at how the U.S. reacted to the Blood Purge of 1934. Ernst Rï¿½hm: Perceptions Before the Purge Hitler and Rï¿½hm in August 1933 in Nï¿½rnberg, Reichsparteitag (German Federal Archive) Ernst Rï¿½hm was widely known in the United States before his name was ever associated with the Night of Long Knives. Most of the major newspapers had run stories that had mentioned Rï¿½hm and associated him with Hitler as a close ally and friend. ï¿½Although it was reported that Rï¿½hm was in charge of the SA, reports in the United States did not portray Rï¿½hm in a positive light.

Many media reports referred to Rï¿½hm as ï¿½queer,ï¿½ but Hitler remained loyal to his sub-commander and took the stance that Rï¿½hmï¿½s ï¿½notorious and self-admitted unnatural conduct had no bearing upon politics.ï¿½ [8] In a letter made public by the press in December 1933, Hitler expressed his gratitude to Rï¿½hm: It is above all thanks to you and your help that this political instrument [SA] became, within a few years, the force which allowed me to wage the final battle for powerï¿½.I must thank you, Ernst Roehm, for the inestimable services you have rendered to nationalism and the German people. You must know that I am grateful to destiny, which has allowed me to call such a man as you my friend and brother-in-arms. With all my friendship and gratitude, Yours, Adolf Hitler [9] Rï¿½hm was the only one allowed to address Hitler with the affectione ï¿½thouï¿½ and it was partly because of these public expressions of loyalty and faith that the press reacted with shock when the purge occurred.

Rï¿½hm was able to maintain loyal friends in Germany even with his openly gay sexuality and negative portrayal in other countries. [10] Rï¿½hmï¿½s open sexuality made him an interesting character to report on in the United States media and information was readily found on the SA Chief of Staff. Letters to the July 16, 1934 issue of Time magazine make clear that many people were able to get information on the people and events occurring in Germany. One US citizen commented on the fact that the situation in Germany had been reported on for up to two years prior to the purge. [11] Outside of Germany, Rï¿½hm was seen as perverted and unattractive but still loyal to the politics of Hitlerï¿½s Nazism. Rï¿½hm was not a bleak character cast into the spotlight through his death, but was an important Nazi at the top of Foreign Embassyï¿½s Nazi leadership lists. [12] Rï¿½hm was seen in many countries as having a corrupt moral sense. The United States assaulted his appearance, greed and sexuality but never questioned Rï¿½hmï¿½s unflinching loyalty to Hitler.

The New York Times reported, Rï¿½hm ï¿½was one of the original Hitler men and one of the Nazi leaderï¿½s most faithful disciples.ï¿½ [13] The reports on Rï¿½hm after the Night of Long Knives changed little of this perception. Rï¿½hmï¿½s open sexuality and reputation as a perverted character might have helped Hitler make the decision to consolidate the power of the SS and SA in Himmlerï¿½s hands, but even with Rï¿½hmï¿½s character flaws the U.S. was shocked to hear reports that he was killed. The Situation in Germany Escalates: June 30ï¿½July 2, 1934 During the evening of June 29 and the early hours of June 30, 1934 Hitler met with Nazi Propaganda leader Goebbels. At the Hotel Dreesen, Goebbels spoke with Hitler and presented to him ï¿½evidenceï¿½ of a coup planned by top officials and lead by the SAï¿½s head, Ernst Rï¿½hm.

[14] The conversation between the men continued and Hitler then met with Goring, who provided him with more evidence. Soon after the meeting, Hitler had to choose whether or not to act. On June 30, Hitler ordered ï¿½this plague ruthlessly stomped out.ï¿½ [15] The night ended with the execution of many dissenters and political opponents along with the arrest of many SA members. Hitler consolidated Himmlerï¿½s power, and sentenced one of his closest friends, Ernst Rï¿½hm, to his death. On July 1, news of the purge reached the U.S. and the perception of Hitler changed greatly. Time reported, ï¿½Compared to the refined abruptness of Benito Mussolini or the violence of Josef Stalin in disposing of defective political tools, Adolf Hitler was, until last week, the Gentle Dictator.ï¿½ [16] Up until that point, the media had seen Hitler use patience and then capitalize on opportunities, like the Reichstag Fire and passing the Enabling Act. The New York Times and the L.A. Times were quick to cover the developments in Germany.

The New York Times reported on the first of July that ï¿½Roehm commit[ed] suicideï¿½ after being arrested for a plot to kidnap Hitler and force him to give power to the SA for three days. Rï¿½hm and seven other SA leaders were killed in Munich. [17] The reporters were shocked at the abruptness and violence, but also because Rï¿½hm was such a loyal servant to Hitler. The article in the Times expresses the shock and confusion. The headline claims a suicide but reports a murder. The press was only receiving and passing on information at this point, but given time they began to analyze the purge and draw conclusions. The next day the Times reported a much more somber story. Overnight, photographs and books by Rï¿½hm and other party leaders disappeared from streets and shop windows. The United States media, at these early days of the purge, saw the event as tragic and heavy hitting. It was clear to them that Hitler had suddenly become a ruthless dictator looking to secure his power.

The Nazi censoring machine was in full gear with many people in Germany not even knowing of the events of the previous night or refusing to talk about it unless they were sure no government agents were around. Hitlerï¿½s rise to Chancellor lost its previous claims of no bloodshed and misery, as the ï¿½absence of the singing, colorful columns was one of the most striking signs of what had taken place.ï¿½ [18] The tone of the New York Times in the early stages of the Blood Purge demonstrates how shocked the U.S. was at the open violence in Germany. Many had seen Hitler rise in popularity and power using less violent tactics and the blood that flowed from the SA purging made them reassess their views of Hitler and Ernst Rï¿½hm. The Los Angeles Times also reported that after being forced from his position, Ernst Rï¿½hm committed suicide. The Nazi Storm Troopers were forced to take a one month vacation. The LA Times suggested that Hitlerï¿½s actions were forced by the action of Rï¿½hm.

There were reports that Rï¿½hm had planned a mutiny, but the driving force behind Hitler having to act were the ï¿½orgies participated in by Roehm.ï¿½ [19] The United States saw the moral issue of Rï¿½hmï¿½s character coming into play during the purge, but they also saw the purge as an indicator that marked the end of the revolutionary phase of Nazism, reporting that, ï¿½Power in [the] Nazi Regime has been shifted to the right by crushing revolt.ï¿½ [20] The reports talked about the closeness of Hitler and Rï¿½hm, but also said that Hitlerï¿½s decisive actions and ï¿½ruthlessnessï¿½ helped him to gain popularity in Germany. The bloody action of Hitler secured his power and weakened leftist Nazis and extremist Storm Troopers. [21] The Los Angeles Times concluded that Hitlerï¿½s purge was successful in securing his Nazi vision of Germany. The United States was confronted immediately with news of the arrests and deaths of many Nazis and high-ranking Nazi officials.

The early newspaper reports were only able to report the information that was given to them by the Nazi government and to reflect on the mood of the German people. As the events unfolded and hours passed, the US press was able analyze the news coming out of Germany and develop a better understanding of the actions of Hitler. After the initial events of the purge, other newspapers, like the Wall Street Journal, were also able to gather information and report on the purge and its justifications by top Nazi officials. More Reports Flood In: July 3ï¿½July 12 The early news reports concerning the Night of Long Knives mostly described the event itselfï¿½Hitlerï¿½s decision to purge the SA, and force the death of a friend, Ernst Rï¿½hm, who he once described as the only man he could ï¿½trust absolutely.ï¿½ [22] The U.S. media was still trying to gather and sift through all the information that was coming from Germany. The purge did not officially end until it was called off by the Nazi government on July 2, 1934.

When the purge was finally ended, US newspaper reports began to take a very different and critical tone, questioning the justifications of Hitler and other top Nazi officials gave. Headlines shifted from ï¿½Roehm Commits Suicideï¿½ and ï¿½Warning Leads Hitler to Act,ï¿½ to ï¿½Resentment at Executions Spreads Alarm in Germanyï¿½ and ï¿½Executions Set Higher: More than Sixty Shot Dead.ï¿½ [23] The tone of articles in the US media shifted from informative to dark during the days that followed the Blood Purge. Just days before, the U.S. press was applauding Hitlerï¿½s decisive action.

On July 2, Webb Miller wrote, ï¿½Adolf Hitler emerged today from his first internal crisis with hisï¿½ prestige heightened and his political position strengthened.ï¿½ The New York Times article even called Hitlerï¿½s purge ï¿½swiftï¿½ and praised his ï¿½decisiveness.ï¿½ [24] Just a day later, on July 2, words like ï¿½doomï¿½ and phrases like ï¿½firing squad justiceï¿½ were being used to describe the same action. [25] The reports also state that Rï¿½hm did not actually commit suicide but was shot and killed by a firing squad. Numbers about how many people were dead begin to be reported with no official word from the Nazi government and numbers today still range from just a hundred to over a thousand. [26] U.S. - Americans and Germans alike were shocked by the ruthless style of the killings. Eyewitnesses in the slaying of former Chancellor Schleicher described the death as a gangster like drive-by where even his wife was mortally wounded.

[27] United States citizens were used to certain rights that allowed them to have a trial where proof of a crime had to be presented and analyzed by a jury. The Los Angeles Times reported that in Berlin, at least sixty SA men were given a three minute trial by two SS officials and one Army official, then sentenced to death and shot immediately. An eyewitness recalled that these people were ï¿½executed with unbandaged eyesï¿½ after being ï¿½condemned in three minutes.ï¿½ [28] The newspapers in the United States expressed fear at such a strong dictatorship. The ruthlessness of the executions and unfair trials were reportted in the U.S. press with a tone of fright and awe. The United States had a strong justice system and held deep principles regarding fair treatment and proper execution of laws. The disregard for fair treatment was one of the main reasons the press began to reassess the purge and Hitlerï¿½s ï¿½decisiveï¿½ action.

When one reporter cabled his report about the death toll he wrote that the high estimates are ï¿½symbolical of the terror that makes fear a prompter of the imagination.ï¿½ [29] Hitler was able to pass an emergency law legalizing all of his actions in order to suppress the rebellious traitors of the state. It was reported that many were shot while resisting arrest or simply shot by a firing squad with or without a trial. No proofs were offered to the German people or the foreign media and the legality of the courtsï¿½ sentencing men to death became an issue. Frederickt T. Birchall, the NYT Berlin correspondent, summarized the problem in an article, writing: There is without a doubt a deep growing resentment over these pitiless executions of their leaders, not so much because of the executions as of the refusal of any hearing or opportunity to defend themselves or prove their innocence, which some of them asserted to the last.

[30] Hitler personally ordered executions and many ï¿½were executed after condemnation without trial by a drumhead court-martial without legal status.ï¿½ [31] Although U.S.-Americans and some Germans saw the negatives in the ï¿½bloody housecleaning,ï¿½ (Wall Street Journal, July 3) some leading Nazis expressed their relief and gratitude for Hitlerï¿½s actions. President Hindenburgï¿½s wires to Hitler and Goebbels were published in domestic and foreign newspapers praising the Chancellor for ï¿½saving the German people.ï¿½ [32] The United Statesï¿½ perception of how the German people would react was far different from how Nazi officials believed the German people would react. In The Wall Street Journal, Doctor Edward J. Ping wrote on July 3, ï¿½the shots that put an end to the life of Hitlerï¿½s rivals also killed ï¿½der Fuehrerï¿½sï¿½ chances of further support by the massesï¿½.ï¿½ [33] The purge targeted many lower to middle class people and destroyed the partyï¿½s most loyal socialists.

Hitler secured his position and power within the government, but sacrificed his socialist party ideals and slogans. This paper is published on a UCSB website. Ping believed that a strong majority in Germany considered him to be loyal to business ideas and a ï¿½reactionary to landowners.ï¿½ In order to secure his power and the masses, Ping speculated that Hitler might become more ruthless. The United States now saw the danger and threat of fascism in Germany. ï¿½ On July 7 the German government released a semi-official statement that gave a list of the men killed in the purge. The statement attacked the foreign press for ï¿½spreading ï¿½atrocity storiesï¿½ about Germany in connection with the coupï¿½.ï¿½ [34] After the statement was given, Germany focused its attention on publicizing Hitlerï¿½s upcoming address about the coup and his justifications for ordering the mass arrests and deaths. The last article to cover the purge in depth from the U.S. perspective was published by Time magazine on July 9. The article covered the death of Rï¿½hm and the happenings of the purge.

Time reported that the German reaction to applaud Hitlerï¿½s strength for ordering his purge was a result of the public only hearing Hitlerï¿½s side of the story. The rest of the world was reported to be shocked by the violence and ï¿½gangster methods.ï¿½ [35] Time was able to summarize the event and put its final touches on the United States coverage of the actual purge and then switched its focus to the upcoming Hitler address. All three major U.S. newspapers reported stories that the German people and foreign press were strongly urged to listen to Hitlerï¿½s address.

U.S.-American headlines stated, ï¿½All Germany Urged to Hear Hitlerï¿½s Speech,ï¿½ and ï¿½Germans Admonished to Tune in on Hitler.ï¿½ [36] Elaborate setups in public areas were created to ensure the German Public would hear the Fuhrerï¿½s words and the Ministry of Propaganda for Public Enlightenment (MPPE) was quoted saying, ï¿½Every German must hear this speech!ï¿½ [37] ï¿½ ï¿½ Hitlerï¿½s Address to the Reichstag and Reactions: July 13ï¿½July 30 The Reichstag meeting at the Kroll Opera House moments after Hitler gave his July 13, 1934 speech.ï¿½ (Sï¿½ddeutscher Verlag) [38] The German government made sure their citizens and citizens of the world heard or read Hitlerï¿½s Reichstag address on July 13, 1934. The address was Hitlerï¿½s attempt to defend his execution of the Storm Troop leaders.

Most of the major world newspapers and magazines covered the address and gave their analysis of the speech and Hitlerï¿½s justifications. Hitler claimed that the ï¿½burden of care is severely felt by him,ï¿½ and that he battled against falling into the decay and chaos of the Weimar era. [39] Hitler linked the political cleansing of the nation to its economic cleansing and cited the accomplishments of the Nazi government as ï¿½pioneersï¿½ in making Germany prosper for the people. [40] Hitler also cited the attitudes of the German people as proof of Nazi political and economic correctness, but also addressed the opposition in Germany. Hitler used a diary as proof of a plot against the government and claimed there were countless other documents that supported the idea that there was going to be a coup attempt. Hitlerï¿½s speech drew attention to the abuses that Rï¿½hm committed and asserted that the Nazi government did all it could to try and remedy the situation between the SA and the government leadership.

Hitler continued, saying that Rï¿½hmï¿½s plans were known since May, and that action had to be taken because Rï¿½hmï¿½s indecency was spreading outward. [41] Hitlerï¿½s address claimed that warnings were given and the speech continually attacked the character of Rï¿½hm and his ï¿½criminalï¿½ activities and partners. Hitler wrote the speech himself, ï¿½shutting himself off from friends and advisers,ï¿½ and delivered it well after the actual purging took place. [42] The timing of the speech allowed U.S. correspondents the chance to reassess the purge and to critique the justifications that were given by Hitler. Many people in the US media understood Rï¿½hmï¿½s moral flaws, but they also believed in his unflinching loyalty to the Nazi party. In the days and weeks following the address, the United States covered the Night of Long Knives with a new vigor.

ï¿½The US media moved away from calling Hitlerï¿½s purge a necessary step in securing his government to a selfish act purely for securing his strength, and after Hitlerï¿½s speech, this idea was cemented in their minds. Time called Hitlerï¿½s evidence ï¿½flimsyï¿½ and reported that it agreed with the London Times that the speech, ï¿½carried no conviction at allï¿½if any real proof were available, then the conspirators would not have been shot out of hand, but given a public trial in which their guilt would have been made manifest.ï¿½ [43] There was no real evidence of a coup and the only evidence against Rï¿½hmï¿½ that historians can find to today is his willingness to openly criticize Hitler and call for a ï¿½second revolutionï¿½ and more radical Germany. [44] The United States prided itself on its democracy and the rights its citizens held. A majority of the U.S.

papers covered the German reaction as a positive one where, ï¿½all praise [was] for the Chancellor,ï¿½ and the execution of Rï¿½hm and the violent deaths of many were, ï¿½lauded to the sky.ï¿½ [45] ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ The Los Angeles Times even reported that ï¿½special correspondents of German papers in London, Paris, Warsaw, Rome, and other world citiesï¿½were at least impressedï¿½of the Chancellorï¿½s words.ï¿½ [46] Although the article gives some acknowledgement to the oratorical ability of Hitler and his presence as a leader, it also suggests that, ï¿½nobody knows the exact extent of the killings, there having been a number of cases of private revenge beside official executions.ï¿½ [47] The U.S. recognized that Hitler acted decisively, but the unsanctioned killings of other German citizens, especially non-SA members, made U.S.-Americans question Hitlerï¿½s justifications.

Theï¿½ United States moved away from Hitlerï¿½s stance that, ï¿½it was better that possibly 100 mutineers and conspirators should be annihilated than 10,000 gutless in the storm troops should attack an equally guiltless 10,000 or more comrades.ï¿½ [48] The purge did not foil some far-fetched plot, but secretly ï¿½removed of men whose politics and personal lives do not measure up to the rules laid down after the suppression of the ï¿½Roehm Revolt.ï¿½ï¿½ [49] Anne Oï¿½Hare McCormick reported for the New York Times on July 15, that ï¿½Through all the record runs the same strain of hysteria, of emotional exaggeration, of which Adolf Hitler is the final symptom and National Socialism a complex of all the symptoms.ï¿½ [50] The purgeï¿½s justifications by Hitler have no real meaning or relevance because the German people were so caught up by the power of Hitler and the ï¿½strait-jacket clamped on at Versailles,ï¿½ that a

 violent phase of the revolution was inevitable and almost necessary.

[51] One German official even said in the summer prior to the purge: The violent phase is still to come. Given the mind of the German people, plus the catch-all character of this movement, more trouble is inevitable. And when it comes, maybe after a years lull, it will be long and nasty. [52] ï¿½ The German state of mind during this time was an important factor in allowing Hitler to perform such a ruthless act. Praise came because the German people were faced with a barrage of political, economic, and moral issues brought on by the first war, and Hitler was their savior. Otto D.

Tolischus echoed the idea of the German masses writing, ï¿½if the Nazi masses pressed hard all the non-Nazi elements, they ï¿½believed that they had come into their own and were now masters of the land,ï¿½ but the truth of what an actual purge created was an ï¿½autocracy of the few,ï¿½ and a rule of an ï¿½iron hand wielding the weapon of armed force.ï¿½ [53] Tolischus completely disregarded any of Hitlerï¿½s justifications, comparing this purge to that of the French Revolution, except that unlike Louis XVI, ï¿½Roehm did not even have the benefit of a mock trial.ï¿½ [54] The U.S. was now completely focused on the situation in Germany. Hitler had secured his power and won the support of his people through his speech and action, but the underlying meaning caught by the press was that there was a new ruthless leader set to expand his power and devour those who stood in his way, even close friends.

Blood Purge: Legacies in the Press 1935-1937 The SA was subjugated to the SS as a result of the purge and the continual monitoring of the SA was on the minds of many top Nazi officials as a result of the Blood Purge. Himmler declared in November 1935 that his SS organization was watching the Strom Troopers, ï¿½lest those creations want to become bigger than their creators,ï¿½ a direct reference to one of the reasons there was a rift between the SA and the Nazi government. [55] The purge also created the question of who should control the police force. On June 17, 1936 Hitler settled this question, appointing Himmler to Chief of the German Police in the Ministry of the Interior, giving him control over all the different forces including the Gestapo and criminal police. [56] These reports demonstrate how the U.S. saw the purge as an act that secured Hitlerï¿½s power and helped further centralize his power in the years that followed. The Blood Purge, as a legacy for the U.S.

media, was not a clear indicator of Hitlerï¿½s ability to lead a struggling nation, but a ï¿½drastic reorganization of the German police force into a purely National Socialist force designed to protect the Nazi regime and propagate its philosophy.ï¿½ [57] The purge was also a precursor to the SS absorbing all of the police forces that were at work in Germany. Himmlerï¿½s appointment to head the police signified to the United States that he had finally won completely, in his efforts to control all the German police forces, a victory only achieved through killing Rï¿½hm. [58] The Blood Purge: Conclusions The US press covered the Night of Long Knives in depth. The covering of the events led people to understand the purge and its purpose. The Blood Purge was a violent slaughtering of SA men and other ï¿½enemiesï¿½ that centralized power and secured Hitler and his Nazi governmentï¿½s place in the state. The event marked the end of the revolutionary phase of Nazism at the cost of some of its most devoted followers.

The SA, headed by Rï¿½hm, made crucial contributions to the Nazi consolidation of power by: providing the force that backed Hitler and destroyed its opponents, coordinating non-Nazi organizations like the police, and contributed to the Nazification of German society through its size. [59] The purge dismantled and severely hindered a loyal organization and German reactions to the event were different from every level. The U.S. and international media covered the events of June 30, 1934 and the weeks that followed. Their perceptions of the event changed over time, in a way that allowed people to see the real causes and reasons for such a bloody occurrence. Hitler was a skillful orator and politician, but his justifications for the purge were closely scrutinized and critiqued by the U.S. media. Ernst Rï¿½hm was a close friend and true National Socialist who suffered at the hands of his own party. The international press questioned Rï¿½hmï¿½s moral character, but never his belief in the Nazi cause. Over a short period of time, the U.S.

media changed its perception of the purge eventually doubting Hitlerï¿½s justifications, and giving insights into his real motivations that are still accepted today. The purge brought Hitler into the mainstream of U.S. press as a ruthless dictator, and his ruthlessness made him a man to be observed by the main powers of the world. The Night of the Long Knives The Night of the Long Knives A cartoon depicting the events of 1934 By mid-1934, Hitler seemed to be master of all Germany. He had banned opposition parties, taken control of the press, outlawed troublesome unions and thrown communists and other political dissidents into concentration camps. The Nazi grip on government extended across national, state and local levels. The only significant elements of Germany not subject to Nazi control or infiltration were the Reichswehr (military), wealthy industrialists and some higher levels of the bureaucracy. Hitler now attended to problems and potential threats within the Nazi movement, especially the Sturmabteilung (SA). The SA had played an important role in Hitler’s elevation to power, particularly during the three Reichstag elections of 1932-33.

Around 50,000 SA members participated in these elections as polling booth attendants and sheriffs, which raised doubts about the validity of election results. SA storm-troopers also intimidated political opponents, broke up left-wing meetings and marches, threatened individuals, distributed party propaganda and tore down anti-Nazi material. Their activities led to a sharp rise in street violence which alarmed many Germans; some had voted for Hitler in the hope he would rein in the drunks and thugs of the SA. But Hitler’s ascension to power neither quietened the rank and file of the SA or brought an end to street violence. This was in part because the SA grew rapidly after Hitler’s appointment as chancellor. In January 1933 the SA numbered around 500,000 men. Within just eight months its membership had blown out to 2.5 million; by January 1934 it was closer to 3 million. Some of this growth flowed from Hitler’s own political success: many joined the SA to be part of the rising Nazi movement. But SA leader Ernst Rohm was also responsible for the SA’s skyrocketing membership. Without endorsement from Hitler, Rohm worked to promote the SA, employing propaganda and recruiting aggressively.

At Rohm’s order the SA also swallowed up other militant right-wing groups, such as the Stahlhelm (‘Steel Helmet’), and acquired their members. By mid-1934 numbers in the Nazi paramilitary branch had reached a staggering 4.5 million. As the SA grew it had to continually reorganise, putting in place new command structures and hierarchies. But the bulging SA was perpetually short of effective organisers and street-level commanders, which meant many local branches suffered from a lack of leadership and poor discipline in the ranks. Without elections to disrupt, unionists to beat up or communist meetings to gatecrash, some SA stormtroopers became bored and listless. They succumbed to drunkenness, carried out destruction of private property and launched sporadic attacks on ordinary Germans. A few foreign diplomats were even assaulted by SA troopers, which drew protests from abroad. With SA membership now rivalling the membership of the NSDAP itself, Hitler now faced an internal crisis. Some branches of the SA were almost out of control in German cities; their actions discredited the party, costing it local support and inviting negative press reports. Just as concerning to Hitler was the rhetoric of Ernst Rohm.

The two veterans of the Munich putsch had been close friends (so much so that Rohm was probably the only Nazi who still addressed Hitler as “Adolf”, rather than “Mein Fuhrer” or “Herr Hitler”). But Hitler had appointed Rohm to lead the SA specifically to restore discipline and loyalty – a mission he had largely ignored. Now Rohm was sounding like one of the SA demagogues he was hired to eliminate. “Adolf is a swine. He will give us all away. Getting matey with the East Prussian generals. We’ve got to produce something new, don’t you see? A new discipline. A new principle of organisation. The generals are a lot of old fogeys. They never had a new idea… I’m the nucleus of the new army, don’t you see that? Don’t you understand that what’s coming must be new, fresh and unused? The basis must be revolutionary. But Hitler puts me off with fair words.” Ernst Rohm, 1934 By early 1934 Rohm’s personal popularity within the SA rivaled that of Hitler.

The SA leader began to openly predict the end of the Reichswehr; he even went as far as questioning the fuhrer’s orders. Hitler forced Rohm to sign a document acknowledging the Reichswehr as the nation’s supreme military force; in response, Rohm later described Hitler as a “ridiculous corporal”. By the spring of 1934 rumours had broken out in the NSDAP that Rohm and the SA might launch a revolution to supplant Hitler. Several Nazi leaders, pro-Nazi industrialists and Reichswehr generals urged Hitler to replace Rohm and do something about the SA. Deputy SS leader Reinhard Heydrich assembled a dossier on Rohm, much of it concerned with Rohm’s homosexuality (an attempt to disgust Hitler, who was vehemently homophobic). Heydrich also concocted evidence that Rohm agreed to accept a 12 million mark bribe from France, in return for plotting Hitler’s removal from power. For weeks Hitler equivocated about what to do. A message from president Hindenburg, suggesting the old man was considering imposing martial law to deal with the SA, hustled Hitler into action.

On June 30th 1934 he called on the fiercely loyal Schutzstaffel (SS), ordering them to arrest Rohm and dozens of other prominent SA leaders. Those arrested were either executed, shot resisting arrest or forced to commit suicide; the death toll was listed as 85 people, though it may have been much higher. The Nazis called this three-day wave of raids, arrests and deaths the ‘Rohm-putsch’, painting it as an operation to cleanse the party of corruption, decadence and homosexuality. Outside the party it became known as the ‘Night of the Long Knives’ – evidence of Hitler’s ruthless determination to cling to power, using violence to remove any perceived threat, even if it meant killing his closest friends. Ernst Rohm was held in a prison cell for two days, while Hitler considered what to do with his former friend. In the end, Hitler gave the order for Rohm’s execution. SS officers presented Rohm with a pistol and invited him to commit suicide. When he refused, they shot him themselves. But it was not just the SA leadership who suffered during the ‘Night of the Long Knives’. Hitler also used it to eliminate political opponents and settle some old scores.

Former chancellor Kurt von Schleicher, who was plotting the return of the Hohenzollern monarchy, was shot dead, along with his wife. Also gunned down was Erich Klausener, a decorated war veteran and Catholic politician, who had been strongly critical of Nazi violence. Gustav Ritter von Kahr, who refused to back Hitler in Munich in 1923 and later ordered his arrest, was another victim. The man who had engineered Hitler’s rise to power, vice-chancellor Franz von Papen, was arrested and removed from office. In the aftermath of the July 1934 purges, Hitler weakened the SA so that it could never again break free from party control or threaten his leadership. Victor Lutze, a minor official with no political ambitions, was put in charge. Lutze organised the downsizing of the SA, disbanding scores of units and re-deploying talented men to the SS. By 1938 SA numbers had dropped to 1.2 million members – one quarter of the numbers from four years before. The main beneficiary of this transformation was the Himmler-led SS, which replaced the SA as the NSDAP’s premier paramilitary branch.

The SS was an elite organisation with strict entry requirements, so its numbers never reached those of the SA in 1933-34. Nevertheless by the start of 1939, SS membership still exceeded 300,000 men. 1. Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 and the leadership of Ernst Rohm fuelled dramatic growth in SA membership. 2. The rapid growth and a shortage of street-level organisers made the SA hard to control, so street violence continued. 3. Against Hitler’s wishes, Rohm began to speak of the SA as a revolutionary army that may challenge the Reichswehr. 4. Faced with the prospect of martial law, in mid-1934 Hitler authorised the SS to move against Rohm and other SA leaders. 5. This purge claimed the lives of around 85 people. The SA was later downsized and weakened, while the SS became the party’s strongest paramilitary group. © Alpha History 2014. Content on this page may not be republished or distributed without permission. For more information please refer to our Terms of Use . This page was written by Jennifer Llewellyn, Jim Southey and Steve Thompson.

To reference this page, use the following citation: J. Llewellyn et al, “The Night of the Long Knives”, Alpha History, accessed [today’s date], BBC - GCSE Bitesize - How Hitler consolidated power 1933-1934 How Hitler consolidated power 1933-1934 Page: In January 1933 Hitler became chancellor of Germany and by August 1934, he had declared himself Führer - the leader of Germany. What happened during this time that allowed Hitler to take the ultimate position of authority? Summary Event 27 Feb 1933 Reichstag Fire - the Reichstag [Reichstag: German parliament in Berlin. ] building is set on fire. A Dutch Communist, van der Lubbe, is caught red-handed in the burning building. 5 Mar 1933 General Election - only 44 per cent of the population vote for the Nazis, who win 288 seats in the Reichstag. 23 Mar 1933 Enabling Act - the SA [SA : Also known as Storm Troopers or Brownshirts.

A military style organisation of the Nazi party formed in 1921 under Hitler. ] intimidates all the remaining non-Nazi deputies. The Reichstag votes to give Hitler the right to make his own laws. 26 April 1933 Local government is reorganised - the country is carved up into 42 Gaus, which are run by a Gauleiter. These Gaus are separated into areas, localities and blocks of flats run by a Blockleiter. Hitler sets up the Gestapo. 2 May 1933 Trade unions are abolished and their leaders arrested. 20 June 1933 Concordat - Hitler makes an agreement with the Pope who sees him as someone who can destroy communism. This agreement allows Hitler to take over political power in Germany as long as he leaves the Catholic Church alone. 14 July 1933 Political parties are banned - only the Nazi party is allowed to exist. 24 April 1934 People's Courts - Hitler sets up the Nazi people's courts where judges have to swear an oath of loyalty to the Nazis.

30 June 1934 Night of the Long Knives - some SA leaders are demanding that the Nazi party carry out its socialist agenda, and that the SA take over the army. Hitler cannot afford to annoy the businessmen or the army, so the SS [SS: Also known as the Blackshirts. A German police/ military style organisation created to serve as the personal bodyguards of Adolf Hitler. In Hitler's Germany they eventually controlled the intelligence, security and police forces, and extermination of those they considered undesirable. ] murders perhaps 400 of the SA members, including its leader Röhm, along with a number of Hitler's other opponents. 19 Aug 1934

Question: The Night of the Long Knives is associated with which political figure?
Answer: Adolf Hitler