RECENT HISTORICAL RESEARCH HAS PLACED considerable emphasis on the redefinition of masculinity around 1800. Scholars have rightly pointed to the French Revolution as a major event in the transformation of masculinity, an event that left its mark not only on France but also on other parts of Continental Europe.1 In the German countries, changes began to emerge during the 1780s, especially in the field of education; yet, it is only after the devastating Prussian defeat of 1806 that the question of masculinity receives official attention. For the Prussian reformers, the debacle of the Prussian army at Jena and Auerstedt represented much more than a simple military failure; rather, it signaled fundamental deficiencies within army and society that the state must confront.2The reformers felt that a fundamental reorganization of the Prussian army was necessary in order to confront Napoleon's forces. At the heart of this question was the creation of a new type of soldier who would be an equal to the revolutionary spirit of the French soldiers. He was supposed to be both a warrior and a citizen, motivated to fight for his fatherland without regard for his life.The glorious Prussian army had been defeated, the reformers realized, because it consisted of soldiers who had been pressed to fight and had no reason to identify with the cause of the war. A new kind of virility was needed, not only within the army, but also at the base of the social structure from which the state draws its soldiers. Eighteenth-century masculinity came under close scrutiny and was considered deficient.The negative verdict pertained to the aristocrat, who serves as the lord, as well as the scholar (der Gelehrte), who primarily reads and writes, and also the merchants, who focus their energies on profit making. They were equally culpable because of their lack of manliness in a situation of political and social crisis. In short, a new type of manly subject was needed that was strongly motivated to act, but also demonstrated responsibility and self-restraint in his decision making. When one looks at the writings of the leading educators and intellectuals of the time it is hard to overlook the urgency of the quest. These authors make clear that they are responding to a serious crisis that is eroding the existing social order. Most of them do not defend the old regime They understand themselves as reformers who envision a better and stronger social order that results from rethinking the concepts of man and manliness and improves civil society. They wanted to overcome the slow disintegration of the older family order, which had legitimized the domination of the patriarch-either in the context of the old Ganzes Haus or in that of the more recent, smaller family controlled by the father. The diffusion of established social roles, especially the weakening of the father's role, necessitated a new conceptualization of masculinity to address the growing social and political pressures. While the military reformers in Prussia after 1806 responded primarily to the revolutionary French army and attempted to adapt its principles to the needs of the Prussian state, the general discourse on the new man had already emerged in the 1790s, although it did not initially address the military aspect.The question directing the discourse did not consider the creation of a better soldier; rather, it concerned the needs of civil society for responsible and effective participants. The new definition or definitions of masculinity were to assist with the transformation of the older Standegesellschaft, although these broader issues were not always explicitly discussed. The authors who participated in the debate typically had more limited goals. They wanted to improve their communities through new cultural norms. For them, the central questions were ethical ones that needed to be resolved by a fundamental redefinition of masculinity. Yet this redefinition is not strictly limited to moral issues. …