Colonel Paul Kuhlo -
Commander of the Imperial German East Asian Marine Detachment and
Japanese Prisoner of War
The Japanese ship Europa Maru was a real sardine can. While the men were crowded deep into the ship, the officers had only a board partition with some straw on the deck to sleep. V. Kessinger [commander of the land front] and I shared a small cabin where movement was nearly impossible. We didn’t have a medical staff onboard and only a few thin slices of hard bread and some cans of meat as supplies. It was an ugly situation and not a matter to laugh about. I was called by the Japanese officers to their cabin and they asked me if I was comfortable with the situation. When I answered that if the Imperial German army might capture some Japanese, we would treat them with more comfort and respect, they laughed sheepishly. 
These are the unforgettable impressions of Colonel (Oberst) Paul Kuhlo, which he wrote in his diary on 14 November 1914 during transportation to Japan after the end of the battle of Tsingtao. He, and approximately 4,662 Germans and Austro-Hungarians, capitulated to Japanese and British troops in Tsingtao during the Nichi-Doku Sensô, or the ‘Japanese-German War’, as to how the Japanese would describe it. Paul Kuhlo (1866-1943) was the former commander of the Imperial German ‘East Asian Marine Detachment’ (Ostasiatisches Marine Detachment - OMD) at the so-called model colony Kiaochow, which played an important role within the context of German imperialistic ambitions and colonial policy in the 19th century to claim a German “place in the sun” on the Chinese mainland. As Japanese and British troops started their attack against the German possession in September 1914, the East Asian Marine Detachment was crucial to the defence of German interests within Tsingtao.
Prior to this, Kuhlo served in various capacities before he was ordered in 1905 to China as adjutant and chief interpreter of the ‘East Asian Occupation Brigade’ (Ostasiatische Besatzungsbrigade) in Peking. After serving three years in China, Kuhlo returned to Germany following which he returned to China and assumed command of the newly established East Asian Marine Detachment in 1912, stationed in Peking and Tientsin. After the German colony capitulated to British and Japanese troops in November 1914, Kuhlo became a Japanese Prisoner of War (POW) and was first interned at the Hongan-ji temple in the Tôkyô-Asakusa district. In September 1915 he was transferred to the POW camp at Narashino, where he was confined until December 1919.
I propose to evaluate the documentary evidence of Colonel Paul Kuhlo, who wrote an unpublished report based on his diary about his experiences as commander of the Marine Detachment and his five years of imprisonment in Japan. In this report he provided a concise overview of the living conditions and daily life in the Japanese camps with particular respect to the relationship with Japanese camp authorities.
POW and internee studies focusing on Japan are an often overlooked aspect of the First World War. The very few memoirs written by former POW’s and their wartime prison experiences have been overshadowed by novels, memoirs, and movies that deal with life battling in the various theatres of war. The presence of POW’s in Japan is a topic that is being researched in more detail by Japanese historians within the ‘Tsingtao War German Prisoners Research Society’, which publishes annual journals as well as the collecting and archiving of documents based on the prisoners’ incarceration. Furthermore, there are some scholarly publications, e.g. Ulrike Klein’s work on prisoners of war in Japan, which give a comprehensive overview about the existing camps and the legal aspect of prisoner treatment. Burdick and Moessner’s book on German prisoners in Japan has been the standard work in English on the topic, but now is quite dated. While existing research focuses mainly on the misleading ‘model camp’ at Bandô (Shikoku), Kuhlo’s report forms the basis of an analysis of the camp in Tôkyô-Asakusa at the temple building of Hongan-ji and later in the camp at Narashino from the perspective of a high ranking German officer and prisoner barracks leader.
Colonel Kuhlo: A short biography
Paul Kuhlo was the second-born child of the former teacher Karl Kuhlo (1831 - 1919) and his wife Adelheid (1841 - 1914). While Paul chose a military career, his elder brother Hermann (1862 – ca. 1933) became a professor at the music school in Berlin and his younger brother Wilhelm (1871 - 1959) became a Protestant pastor. Paul started his military career in 1884 when he entered the 2nd Nassau Infantry Regiment No. 88 in Mainz as an Ensign (Avantageur / Portepee-Fähnrich und Anwärter zum Berufsoffizier). During the first six months, Kuhlo was trained mainly in basic infantry tactics and participated in several manoeuvres. After he successfully graduated from Officer’s Candidate School in December 1885, completing subjects that included strategy and tactics, modern warfare, military administration (e.g. how to set up a war diary), etc., he returned to Mainz and stayed there until the end of 1904.
It is not clear as to why Paul chose a military career. As his grandniece remembered from talks with Kuhlo in the 1930’s, Kuhlo stated that “There are enough teachers, singers and clerics in our family”. Or, as she continued in an interview in 2009, “It might have been a mixture of adventurousness and itchy feet as to why Kuhlo decided for a military career”. Kuhlo, meanwhile promoted to Captain (Hauptman) in 1905, was sent to Berlin to participate in the Oriental Seminar from January to May 1905 to learn the English and Chinese languages. After he was examined for tropical service, he was ordered in June 1905 to China as adjutant and chief interpreter of the East Asian Occupation Brigade in Peking. Indeed, he enjoyed an easy life in China during these days after the Boxer Rebellion was defeated by the Eight-Nation Alliance in September 1901. His tasks were mainly limited to act as an observer and to provide weekly and monthly information reports about the Chinese domestic political situation and about any movement of the former allies, especially Japan, to the ‘German Imperial Naval Office’ (Reichsmarineamt), which was responsible for the German naval-base colony of Tsingtao. Beside this, he stayed in close contact to the remaining members of the Eight-Nation Alliance and to the up-coming Germanophile President of the Republic of China, Yuan Shikai (1859 – 1916) and his followers. After Kuhlo served the mandatory three years of service in China, he returned to Germany, following which he once again was posted to China where he assumed command of the newly established East Asian Marine Detachment in 1912. Here, he was responsible for the forming and training of the members of the detachment in the years before Japan declared war on Germany and its allies on 23 August 1914.
Japan’s entry into the war and relationship to Germany
The Japanese declaration of war Japan on Germany was not a surprise for Kuhlo, as he wrote in his diary on 4 August 1914:
Nobody was talking about the greatest possible enemy of Tsingtao, which I was reciting mechanically for almost 7 years – Japan! I remember well how everybody was laughing at me while I was saying ‘Japan will take Tsingtao immediately once they get the chance’. Now I could prove that I was right.
As Kuhlo followed the developments in Japan, he was well informed about the political situation in Asia and especially Japan’s hunger for acceptance as an equal nation on the international political stage after their humiliation by Germany, France and Russia following the Treaty of Shimonoseki (17 April 1895). Jiaozhou Bay, with its capital of Tsingtao, was taken by the German Empire in 1897 in retaliation for the murder of German missionaries from the Steyler Mission in Shantung, an act which provided the German government an excuse to occupy this territory and to gain a naval base in the Pacific for its East Asia Squadron. The occupation of the possession happened in a time when sinophobic feelings (not only) in Germany were common and Kaiser Wilhelm II, mindful of the “yellow peril”, already had emphasised during his Hunnenrede (‘Hun speech’) on 27 July 1900 that the German East Asian Expedition Corps (Ostasiatisches Expeditionskorps) should have no mercy on the Chinese Boxer nor capture any prisoners (Pardon wird nicht gegeben! Gefangene werden nicht gemacht!) Later, after Japan declared war on Germany, Kaiser Wilhelm II remarked to the Governor of Tsingtao, Alfred Meyer-Waldeck (1864 - 1928), that losing Tsingtao to the Japanese would shame Germany more than losing Berlin to the Russians.  The German Empire, a colonial latecomer, had completely upgraded Tsingtao from a former fishing village to a port with an enviable reputation in Europe, often called the ‘Pearl of the East’. The Japanese government, under the influence of the pro-British Foreign Minister Takaaki Katô (1860 - 1926) who was also afraid of losing a slice of the Chinese pie, watched the German development on the Chinese bay suspiciously as it saw Japan’s ambitions to obtain a foothold on the Chinese mainland thwarted.
Japan’s entrance into the war was not only a way to behave and act as an equal to Western powers, but also to reverse the unequal Kanagawa Treaty of 31 March 1854. It was
[…] as significant for domestic politics as it was for foreign policy. If the war sparked universal enthusiasm for continental expansion, Japanese policymakers scrambled, as well, to promote their particular conception of domestic politics. The fundamental debate over who was to rule the nation had, after all, intensified as Japan’s rising political parties chipped away at the political hegemony of the architects of the Meiji state.
It was one of the reasons that Japan looked to a strong ally in Great Britain in order to not be denied it’s just rewards for a third time even if no British or Japanese possessions were under immediate threat from Germany. Germany, meanwhile, had already contacted the United States to check on the possibility of leaving Jiaohzou bay, giving back the possession to China. Japanese Foreign Minister Katô realized that immediate Japanese combat participation in the war was imperative and that the seizure of the German colony at Tsingtao represented a once in a century opportunity for the Japanese to gain political influence in China. Katô, by these actions, almost single-handedly brought Japan into the conflict.
From friend to foe?
Comrade and prisoner
[…] Our General Meckel did a real great job; the former pupils now fight against their teachers – point to point figures and straight out of the textbook! We fought against the same Japanese comrades with whom we used to share a pint of wine after our intense training. The same Japanese who presented us this wonderful samurai amour to express their gratefulness and respect, the same Japanese with whom we fought side to side against the Boxer in China! Oh what a strange destiny! If we had known of this development, we wouldn’t have agreed to train these dishonest guys, I promise!
Kuhlo already had contact with Japanese members of the Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) during his basic military education with the 2nd Nassau Infantry Regiment No. 88 in Mainz in the 1890’s. During that time, several Japanese high-ranking military leaders were sent to Germany for military studies and education. This was based on the fact that Germany had a prominent cultural influence on Japan before the First World War in several fields. After the German victory over France in the Franco-Prussian War (1870/1871), Japan turned away from the French model and looked to the German military as the blueprint for the construction of the Imperial Japanese Army. Although, Major General Jacob Meckel (1842-1905) had spent only three years (1885-1888) as an oyatoi gaikoku jin (‘foreign government advisor’) in Meiji Japan to reform the Japanese Army, he had a strong influence on Japanese military strategic and tactical development, mainly based on his personal experience and on the theories of von Clausewitz’ book ‘On War’, successfully realized during the Sino-Japanese war (1894-1895) and Russo-Japanese war (1904-1905). After Meckel returned to Germany, several Japanese officers were dispatched from Japan to Germany to train under his command. In addition to the hiring of oyatoi gaikoku jin, the Japanese government sent Japanese students for overseas internship – ryûgakusei – to Europe in order to gain foreign knowledge from the Western powers. Kuhlo, who sometimes took care of IJA members while joining them for dinner, concerts and other events, might have developed a suspicious picture of Japanese ambitions in China even at this early date. With the development of Jiaohzou bay and the subsequent capitulation of the German colony he was proven right in the end as he and more than 4,600 other Germans and Austro-Hungarians were shipped to Japan and became POW’s in November 1914. The capture of some Germans in October 1914 and the full surrender of the German and Austro-Hungarian forces in November came unexpectedly early for Japan. In defence of the Japanese, this might be partially or totally cultural since this same problem plagued them to a lesser degree in the Russo-Japanese War and a much greater degree in World War Two. In other words, they simply did not plan for large numbers of prisoners since they did not expect their own soldiers to surrender in any numbers, if at all. The lack of adequate prisoner accommodations resulted in Japan using public buildings such as schools, barracks and temple structures as makeshift camps. This was accomplished by several Japanese committees and the Japanese Red Cross society under the direction of the new established furyo jôhôkyoku (‘Information Office for the POW’). One of these seven (provisional) camps was the temple Higashi Hongan-ji at Tôkyô-Asakusa, where Kuhlo was first imprisoned.
From foe to friend?
Imprisonment and the camp at Tôkyô-Asakusa, Higashi Hongan-ji
On Sunday, 22 November 1914, Kuhlo, his detachment and navy reservists, in total approximately 313 members, arrived at the Hongan-ji temple at Tôkyô-Asakusa, where they were greeted by a ‘Banzai’-screaming and shouting crowd.
We felt like cattle as we were driven through the crowded streets, surrounded by this crowd of people. It looked like an opera. An opera that must be organised by Kato [Japanese Prime Minister] to incite the Japanese to shout at us, to demoralise us! But several Japanese guards apologised for the inconvenience and a Japanese lady - I guess it was Ms. Aki Hayama - accompanied by her daughter, gave all of us a single Chrysanthemum blossom with a small letter, ‘thankfully given to you, returning the favour and kindness, which I received from a German couple’.
After the prisoners, shielded by Japanese guards, arrived at the great hall of the temple, Lieutenant Colonel Marquis Toratarô Saigô (1866–1919) welcomed them with short and formal greetings. Kuhlo described Saigô as a “gallant and warm character, but who was weak when it came to negotiation with the garrison headquarters.” Saigô was one of the ryûgakusei, who graduated in the 1890s at the Prussian Military Academy and served with Prussian Infantry Regiment No. 32. Kuhlo remembered that the German speaking Saigô felt sorry for his prisoners and wasn’t happy about his posting as camp commander, ‘I am sorry that myself - as a former pupil - needs to guard my former teacher’.
The Hongan-ji temple, built during the Edo period in the 16th century, was rebuilt on 12 November 1914 and the rooms of the adjoining buildings were re-designed to house all the POW’s. The camp condition were unacceptable; in comparison to the total numbers of prisoners and the space, they had only 1 1/3 tatami (approximately 2.07 square meters apiece). Except for the officers, the NCO’s and men shared several big temple halls which included a locker for each prisoner, tables and chairs. Everybody slept on tatami mat covered floors and received six woollen blankets and two blanket sheets. The rooms had a hibachi (traditional Japanese oven), which could not heat the big halls during winter period and the cold wind easily entered the halls. During summertime, the POW’s suffered from high humidity, closeness and vermin, e.g. rats, mosquitoes and fleas. Due to space limitations, the more than 300 prisoners could only use 70 square meters of temple place for exercise – everybody was allowed to go outside for one hour in the morning and in the afternoon.
Shortly after their arrival, Saigô explained several rules to Kuhlo, based on a list of ten rules “Instruktion für die Kriegsgefangenen”, which the POW’s needed to follow. He promised Kuhlo that the POW’s were allowed to send several letters and postcards (two each per month) to Germany, and that they were allowed to walk outside the camp twice a week and be able to welcome visitors once a week. However, until late March 1915, none of these discussed promises were kept, which might also have been a matter of foreign pressure. As the Japanese censor was overstrained with the flood of letters and postcards, most of the correspondence wasn’t delivered to Germany or was not handed-over to the POW’s, at times a kind of punishment by the Japanese if the POW’s didn’t follow their rules. While communication by mail was an important bridge between the prisoners and their families, visitors were another important point. Since not only military personnel, but also salesmen, merchants and other “non-military” civilians lived in China before the war, when Tsingtao surrendered they were taken as POW’s as well. Since many of these civilians were reservists and fought against the Japanese troops, it is understandable why the Japanese considered them all legitimate prisoners without much effort in trying to establish which were strictly civilians, which were reservists, and which were full time soldiers.
However, this contributed to the overcrowded situation at Hogan-ji temple and also resulted in another unforeseen problem for the Japanese authorities, namely, the wives and families of those men, who if they were able, moved into apartments close to the prison to be near their husbands. Since the POW’s were not allowed to welcome their wives and relatives at the camp, the feeling of demoralisation increased.
The camp followed a day-to-day routine: the POW’s rose every morning at 6 a.m., breakfast, announcements by the Japanese authorities (6:30 a.m. to 7 a.m.) and duties between 7:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., which included sports and cleaning of the facilities. After leisure time and lunch they resumed duties from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., during which the POW’s took care of their personal belongings. After dinner at 5 p.m., the Japanese guards called for evening silence at 8 p.m. Even Kuhlo’s efforts, who was afraid of the Stacheldrahtkrankheit (‘barbed wire psychosis’) of his subordinates and who arranged lessons, lectures and other activities, could only minimise the boredom of the POW’s. As can be seen by the schedule above, there was only two hours of work during the official day to occupy the men. The uncertainty and the monotony of life as a prisoner under limited space, was one of the most problematic issues Kuhlo faced, which could only be partially solved by occupying the men through such activities as the soccer team and a choir equipped with prisoner made instruments. Outside contacts were very limited. A few Japanese newspapermen came and asked Kuhlo for an interview, but this was the exception. Beside this, Kuhlo and his men had some direct contact to the local kindergarten, where they presented handmade wooden toys during Christmas 1914 for the children and in return received a letter of appreciation and fruits, which he shared with the prisoners. Shortly after the arrival of the POW’s, a hotel kitchen supplied food to the camp. Later, the local army kitchens delivered the food (mainly rice, vegetables and fish), which was too little and unappetizing for the German taste. Once again, the Japanese could hardly be faulted since in accordance to The Hague Land Warfare Convention, which was signed by Japan, the POW’s were fed with the same rations received by members of the IJA. After several complaints though, the POW’s were allowed to establish a canteen (23 November 1914) and built a self-run kitchen (December 1914/January 1915). The Japanese camp authorities obtained some ingredients and everybody was allowed to enrich their food by buying items from the local canteen. While Kuhlo received the same salary as a Japanese officer of the same rank, the NCO’s and men didn’t receive any pay or allowances in cash. Any allowance was offset by their daily rations and from time to time they received implements for washing, writing paper and some clothes. Kuhlo established a fund and during special events (e.g. Kaiser’s birthday, Christmas, Easter), he divided the money with his comrades. In addition to this, the so-called Liebesgaben (‘charitable donations’) were provided by German residents in Japan, pro-German Japanese, several clubs and organisations like the Red Cross, Japanese YMCA, and Siemens Tôkyô under the patronage of Hans Drenckhahn. Drenchkhahn, with close contacts to the Japanese Foreign and War ministries, established and coordinated donation to the POW’s. He was one of the rare camp visitors, talked to Kuhlo and prepared a report to the German government on 20 March 1915. Drenckhahn listed his observations, where he highlighted the good relationship between Saigô and the POW’s under the barrack leader Kuhlo, but also described the bad conditions. The austere temple camp was well run by Saigô and as Kuhlo mentioned, Saigô tried to ease their daily life, even if he had little influence with the garrison headquarters. Generally though, the relationship between the prisoners and their Japanese guards can be described as good, since the prisoners mostly abided by the rules. Nonetheless, apart from some exceptions, the overall conditions remained poor even though the prisoners tried to improve their situation by themselves as much as possible and to the extent allowed by the Japanese. A chance for a real improvement was given in September 1915 as the Japanese, well aware of the difficult situation and with the background of the continuing war in Europe, decided to close the provisional POW camp at Higashi Hongan-ji and started relocating the prisoners to the newly established camp of Narashino.
“[…] felt like we were in paradise” - The camp at Narashino
On 7 September 1915, Kuhlo and the other POW’s arrived at the camp in Narashino. Compared to the small and sticky temple complex at the Higashi Hongan-ji, it was a real improvement. “On 7 September we happily marched into the newly established camp of Narashino. I need to repeatedly emphasise ‘happily’ since the change means a great improvement in every way and we felt, compared to the temple, like we were in paradise!”, as Kuhlo mentioned in his letter to the editor of the Tageblatt für Nord-China on 23 September 1915. He also informed his parents about the changed conditions in a letter:
Our camp is newly built, so it has no bugs, rats or mosquitoes under which we suffered so much in Tokyo […]. Since only a wire fence surrounds us, we can finally see something of the world, forests and hills all around, villages, streets and working farmers and so much else of interest. But the biggest advantage is the wonderful, fresh air, which we missed so much in the narrow temple during summer time. Another big win is our room to move around. On approx. 50,000 square meters, we have our own kitchen for officers and the accommodation of the men has become much better.
The former barracks and drill ground of the Japanese cavalry at Narashino had been in use as POW camp for Russian prisoners who were captured during the Russo-Japanese War. The camp was continuously built out up to 95,000 square meters during the years 1915 to 1919 and was the biggest camp by area. The spacious grounds provided more elbow-room and allowed the POW’s to establish an athletic field, an exercise area, a tennis court, a bakery and a slaughterhouse, etc. Beside this, some prisoners cultivated a garden and raised animals. Under the command of Saigô Toratarô, prisoners from different (provisional) camps were brought together in the Narashino camp and by June 1919 the number of prisoners rose to more than 900. Many former German comrades happily met each other again since they were separated after their capture in Tsingtao. The rising numbers of POW’s had an influence on the daily camp life. The POW’s established a theatre and an orchestra, built a bandstand and played concerts each Sunday, high days and holidays. Beside this, several officers held lectures, opened classes and offered courses in scientific subjects (math, physics, chemistry, biology), language (Chinese, English, French, Japanese), engineering, etc. In June 1916 the POW’s organised a handicraft exhibition and in October 1916 some sports games with Japanese athletes and guards. But while camp life improved, the situation was also made worse in some ways due to the increasing numbers of prisoners. For example, more hungry mouths needed to be fed, and the Japanese guards were more watchful and strict. Small offences were punished at once as the Japanese beat the prisoners. The board of censors was overloaded with checking outgoing mail and therefore the authorities limited the number of letters and postcards the POW’s were allowed to send. In addition, different occurrences demoralised the POW’s beside their homesickness: several earthquakes hit Narashino in 1915 and in October 1917 a heavy typhoon destroyed several buildings and the vegetable garden at the POW camp. Japanese inflation, generally higher prices and lower allowances compounded the situation and the POW’s were not able to stock up on vegetables, meat or coal for the oven. Therefore Kuhlo relieved the distress by obtaining vegetables, boiled meat, beans and lentils, all paid by himself or with funds provided by the several relief organisations (Hilfsorganisationen). Everybody used their best endeavours to improve camp life; however, while anything might help distract the prisoners a little and take their minds off things, it could not help them to get rid of their homesickness and their wish to return back to Germany, something they emphasised repeatedly to camp visitors. At the request of the German Foreign Office in Berlin, the American embassy inspected the camps and the American ambassador in Tôkyô, George W. Guthrie (1848–1917), assigned Sumner Welles (1892-1961) to undertake an inspection of all the camps. The German speaking Welles accompanied by the Japanese speaking J. W. Ballantine started his tour on 29 February 1916 and provided a detailed report about the camp conditions, the conditions of the POW’s and their demands. Welles reported to the German government and pointed out that, compared to the situation at Hongan-ji temple, the camp in Narashino was an advancement from every point of view. After the United States entered the war against Germany, the International Red Cross, under the patronage of the Swiss Government, took care of the camp inspections and organised several of them. The Swiss physician Dr. Paravicini, who lived in Yokohama, started his tour on 30 June 1918 and he provided in his reports on the POW’s more detail with respect to the health of the prisoners. This was especially important since in 1918/1919 the Spanish flu epidemic had spread worldwide and within a short time, more than 700 POW’s were infected, some of whom died. The most prominent victim was the camp commander Saigô himself who died in January 1919 after he rode his horse while taking the salute and wishing the POW’s good luck and early homecoming.
The prisoners’ health had become a major concern for Paravicini and he noted that at this point very little could help to relieve barbed wire psychosis. The POW’s also felt abandoned and forgotten by their government, but as the war in Europe came to an end and after the German delegation signed the Treaty of Versailles (28 June 1919), new hope for a quick return to Germany raised morale with the prisoners, now in Japan for the fifth year.
Back home – aftermath and conclusion:
Although the German government had established on 27 December 1918 a ‘Central Office for War- and Civil Prisoners’ (Reichszentrale für Kriegs- und Zivilgefangene), it took another year to start the repatriation of the POW’s from Japan to Europe. The Treaty of Versailles included several paragraphs regarding repatriation (Part 4, Prisoner of War, 1st section, §§ 214-224) of the prisoners of war, and Germany was responsible to take care of the repatriation as soon as possible (§ 214), in accordance with the allied powers (§ 215) and at their own cost (§ 217). Based on the agreement of the ‘Repatriation of the German Prisoner of war in Japan’, which was ratified on 14 November 1919, Germany tried to organise the necessary steps. Defeated Germany naturally faced financial problems and struggled to obtain ships as the victorious powers were not willing to provide any vessels, however in the end, Germany was able to acquire six ships in Japan. The German company C. Illies & Co Hamburg signed a contract with Japan, clarifying the modalities of the repatriates. Meanwhile, German officers in all Japanese camps established committees which reported to the headquarters at the Narashino camp which was in turn tasked with organizing the evacuation to Germany of the prisoners. Kuhlo remembered:
It was a foggy day on Christmas, 1919. All POW’s reported in rank and file on the football ground waiting for Colonel Yamazaki’s speech. He was visibly relieved as he said, ‘finally, after five years, the gates of the prison camps open and you can go back home’. He underlined the good discipline and honour of the POW’s and mentioned that he tried hard to unburden everybody’s daily life. Colonel Yamazaki took the salute while saying, ‘have a safe trip back home and say that Japan treated you well during your involuntary stay in Japan’. Then, we grabbed our belongings and marched to Tsudanuma station, took the train and reached Tôkyô and continued to Kôbe. On 28 December , we embarked on the Kifuku Maru, received a postcard and started our journey back to Germany. We arrived on 28 February in Wilhelmshaven. Now, my war has come to an end…!
The imperialism and colonial warfare of Imperial Germany, with the goal of saving a ‘place under the sun’, finally ended with the return of the last of the former prisoners.
It is difficult to give an overall picture, since the situation of the POW’s and their treatment by the camp administrators varied from place to place. At some camps, it was to the benefit of the prisoners if their camp leader had some contact with Germany before the Nichi-Doku Sensô, e.g. during their overseas studies or during the education and training of high ranking officers by Major General Meckel in the 1880s in Tôkyô. But not every Japanese guard had experience with Germans or spent time in Germany and not all of the guards treated the POW’s well; especially those guards who were stationed at Fukuoka prefecture who had suffered high losses during the battle of Tsingtao. Even though the guards were obliged to obey the rules of treatment for the POW’s, they still harassed them and used this opportunity for ‘pay-back’ for European racism. Keeping in mind that Japan entered the war quickly on the side of the Allies and the early surrender of the German forces in China, plus the continuing war in Europe, adequate housing for the POW’s presented an administrative challenge for Japan. While initial housing was improvised, as the imprisonment continued, the Japanese authorities tried to improve the situation. Japan attempted to follow the recommendations of camp inspectors like Welles or Dr. Paravicini and established new camps or made changes to the existing ones. The pre-war relationship between Japan and Germany had not only a generally positive effect on the treatment of the prisoners, but improved their daily life as time went on. Especially at the Tôkyô-Asakusa Hongan-ji temple and later in Narashino, Kuhlo and the other POW’s profited by the Germanophile camp commanders Saigô and Yamazaki, who had pre-war experience in Germany. Beside this, companies, relief organisations, private institutions and individuals, like the Siemens Schuckert Company, supported the POW’s with clothes, food, books and other useful items with which to make life in the camps – under these circumstances – as comfortable as possible. Nonetheless, the German soldiers paid the price of colonial ambitions after they were captured and imprisoned. Kuhlo wrote down in his report:
Most of us probably forgot the fact that we stayed in Japan as prisoners of war, not as visitors. Everybody tried hard to unburden our daily life at the camps. And thanks to our positive relationship to commanders Saigô and Yamazaki, to my friend Drenckhahn [Siemens Schuckert, Tôkyô], and all the others, we were able to survive as they always listened to our wishes.
In 1920, Kuhlo was promoted to Colonel and formally incorporated into the Reichswehr but did not assume any responsibilities. During the sunset of his life, he lived alone, collected Chinese and Japanese stamps, Asian antiques and transcribed parts of his hand-written diary. Somehow though, Kuhlo’s war didn’t end. He could not seem to rest nor could he forget his experiences in Asia. Suffering from the long-term consequences of the imprisonment, myocardial insufficiency and cardiac degeneration, exacerbated by overindulgence with alcohol and cigars, Kuhlo was admitted from 3 September until 14 December 1942 at the Bethel Institution in Bielefeld/Germany. On 20 April 1943, shortly before his 77th birthday, Colonel Kuhlo, the former commander of the East Asian Marine Detachment, died at home as a “lonely and neglected bachelor”.
BURDICK, Charles und Ursula MOESSNER (1984): The German prisoners-of-war in Japan, 1914-1920. Lanham, New York, London: University Press of America.
CHECKLAND, Olive (1994): Humanitarianism and the Emperor’s Japan, 1877-1977. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
CHINTAO SEN DOITSU HEI FURYO SHÛJÔJO KENKYÛKAI (edit.): Chintao sen doitsu hei furyo shûjôjo ken-kyûshi [Journal about German POW’s from Tsingtao in Japanese detention centre].
DICKINSON, Frederick R. (1999): War and National Reinvention: Japan in the Great War, 1914-1919. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ELLEMAN, Bruce A (2002): Wilson and China- A Revised History of the Shandong Question. Armonk and London: M.E. Sharpe
FELBER, Roland and Horst ROSTEK (1987): Der Hunnenkrieg Kaiser Wilhelm II. Imperialistische Interventionen in China 1900/01. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaft.
HARTMANN, Rudolf (2007): Japanische Offiziere im Deutschen Kaiserreich 1870-1914, in: Japonica Humboldtiana, 11, pp. 93-158.
HAYASHIMA, Akira (1978): Die deutsche Japanpolitik im August 1914, in: Kwansei Gakuin Univ. Annual Studies, 27, pp. 107-134.
KAWAMURA, Chizuko (2006): Otôsan, sono toki nani ga attano? Yamazaki Takashi no o-raru hisutori-. Yomigaeru kioku to tabunka no kaori. [Father, what did you during that time?Yamazaki Takashi’s oral history. Re-remembering the memories and the odour of multiculturalism.]. Nagano: Self-published.
KAWAMURA, Noriko (2000): Turbulence in the Pacific. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
KERST, Georg (1970): Jacob Meckel. Sein Leben und sein Wirken in Deutschland und Japan. Göttingen: Musterschmidt.
KLEIN, Ulrike (1993): Deutsche Kriegsgefangene in japanische Gewahrsam 1914-1920, Ein Sonderfall. Freiburg: Inaugural Dissertation zu Erlangung der Dokterwürde der Philosophischen Fakultät der Albert Ludwigs Universität Freiburg.
KREBS, Gerhard (1998): Der Chor der Gefangenen: Die Verteidiger von Tsingtau in japanischen Lagern, in: HINZ, Hans-Martin und Christoph LIND (edit.): Tsingtau. Ein Kapitel deutscher Kolonialgeschichte in China 1897-1914. Eurasburg: Edition Minerva, pp. 196-202.
KREBS, Gerhard (1999): Die etwas andere Kriegsgefangenschaft. Die Kämpfer von Tsingtau in japanischen Langern 1914-1920, in: OVERMANS, Rüdiger (edit.): In der Hand des Feindes. Kriegsgefangenschaft von der Antike bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg. Köln, Weimar, Wien: Böhlau Verlag. pp. 323-337.
MARTIN, Bernd (2006): Japan and Germany in the modern world. New York: Berghahn Books.
KUHN, Adalbert Freiherr von (1931): Kriegsgefangen in Japan. Ernstes und Heiteres aus meiner ‘Furionenzeit‘, in: WEILAND, Hans; KERN, Leopold (edit.): In Feindeshand. Die Gefangenschaft im Weltkriege in Einzeldarstellungen. Wien: Bundesvereinigung der ehem. österr. Kriegsgefangenen, pp. 76-82.
NISH, Ian (1974): Alliance in Decline A Study of Anglo-Japanese Relations 1908-1923. London: Athlone Press.
PARAVICINI, Jakob August Friedolin (1919): Dokumente herausgegeben während des Krieges 1914-1918. Bericht des Herrn Dr. F. Paravicini, in Yokohama, über seinen Besuch der Gefangenenlager in Japan (30. Juni bis 16. Juli 1918). Basel, Genf: Verlag Georg & Cie.
RÄCKER-WELLNITZ, Ulrich: Nach fünf Jahren Kriegsgefangenschaft: Rückkehr der Tsingtau-Kämpfer 1920, in: Wilhelmshavener Zeitung vom 30. Januar 2010, pp. 9-11.
RÖHDER, Mareike (Hg.) (2005): ‘Alle Menschen werden Brüder…‘ Deutsche Kriegsgefangene in Japan 1914-1920. Begleitheft zur Ausstellung der OAG, Herbst 2005. Tôkyô: PrintX Kabushikigaisha.
SETO, Takehiko (2006): Chintao kara kita heishi tachi [Soldiers from Tsingtao]. Tôkyô: Dogakusha.
TAJIMA, Nobuo (2009): Japanese-German Relations in East Asia 1890-1945, in: KÛDO, Akira, TAJIMA Nobuo and Erich PAUER (edit.): Japan and Germany. Two Latecomers to the world stage, 1890-1945. Folkestone: Global Oriental. pp. 1-45.
VOLLERTHUN, Waldemar Konteradmiral a.D. (1920): Der Kampf um Tsingtau. Eine Episode aus dem Weltkrieg 1914/1918 nach Tagebuchblättern. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, p. XI
WIPPICH, Rolf-Harald (1986): Deutschland und Japan am Scheideweg – Eine Skizze des deutsch-japanischen Verhältnisses in den 1890er Jahren, in: KREINER, Josef (edit.): Japan und die Mittelmächte im Ersten Weltkrieg und in den zwanziger Jahren. Bonn: Bouvier, pp. 15-57.
ZACHMANN, Urs Matthias (2005): Imperialism in a nutshell: Conflict and the ‘concert of powers’ in the tripartite intervention, 1895, in: SCHAD-SEIFFERT, Annette (edit.): Deutschland in Japan. München: Iudicium Verlag. (Japanstudien. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Instituts für Japanstudien, Band 17), pp. 57-82.
Briefe aus dem bisherigen Gefangenenheim Tokyo, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 23 September 1915, p. 3.
Mitteilung, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 23 September 1915, p. 3.
Brief aus Tokyo, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 9 May 1915, p. 2.
Dank aus dem Gefangenenlager Narashino, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 9 January 1916, pp. 3–4.
Tôkyô Asahi, several issues from November 1914 to December 1919
Unpublished and Archive material
Bundesarchiv Berlin Lichterfelde, Berlin
File-no. R/901/84614, 2. Jahresbericht ueber die Verwendung der Deutschen Spende II fuer die Kriegsgefangenen aus Tsingtau.
File-no. R/901/84614, Bericht von Mr. Sumner Welles ueber seinen Besuch in Narashino am 15. Maerz..
File-no. R/901/84615, Kurzer Bericht über die Eindrücke der 6. Lagerreise im Oktober 1917, verfasst von Pfarrer Hunziker an die Schweizerische Gesandtschaft.
File-no. R/901/84616, Bericht über den Besuch der Gefangenenlager in Japan 30. Juni bis 16. Juli 1918, zu Händen des Internationalen Comites des Roten Kreuzes von Dr. F. Paravicini in Yokohama. Delegierten des Internationalen Comites.
File-no. R/901/84811, Dritter Bericht über die Deutschen Kriegsgefangene aus Tsingtau.
File-no. R/901/84815, Kriegsgefangene und verwundete deutsche Militärpersonen in Japan im Krieg 1914.
Bundesarchiv / Militärarchiv Freiburg
File-no. RM 3/6863, Bericht ueber die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen aus Tsingtau. Tokyo, den 20. Maerz 1915.
File-no. RM 3 /6868, vol. 10, Kriegsgefangenenbehandlung in Japan.
Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes
File-no. R 48 / 355.
v. Bodelschwinghsche Stiftung Bethel, Hauptarchiv
File-no. PartMorija1, 61, Krankenakte Paul Kuhlo.
Class schedule, Narashino 1916/1917.
KUHLO, Paul, unpublished diary, 1914-1920.
Letter Colonel Kuhlo to his parents from 23 November 1914.
Letter Colonel Kuhlo to his parents from 12 September 1915.
Telephone interview with Elisabeth Seeger, Cologne, March 2009.
‘Instruktion für die Kriegsgefangenen’, in:
http://homepage3.nifty.com/akagaki/8-takalancelle1.html, checked on 8 July 2011.
‘Vertrag von Versailles’, in: http://www.versailler-vertrag.de/vv-i.htm, checked on 8 July 2011.
‘Hunnenrede’, in: http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/dokumente/wilhelm00/index.html., checked on 8 July 2011.
 KUHLO, Paul (1914-1920): Unpublished diary. 14 November 1914, pp. 303-304 [translated by the author].
 Bundesarchiv / Berlin Lichterfelde, file-no. R/901/84815, Kriegsgefangene und Verwundete deutsche Militärpersonen in Japan im Krieg 1914.
 From 1912 to 1914, one garrison each stationed in
 E.g. CHINTAO SEN DOITSU
HEI FURYO SHÛJÔJO KENKYÛKAI (edit.): Chintao sen doitsu hei furyo shûjôjo
kenkyûshi [Journal about German POW’s from
 KLEIN, Ulrike (1993): Deutsche Kriegsgefangene in japanische Gewahrsam 1914-1920, Ein Sonderfall. Freiburg: Inaugural Dissertation zu Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Philosophischen Fakultät der Albert Ludwigs Universität Freiburg.
 BURDICK, Charles und
Ursula MOESSNER (1984): The German prisoners-of-war in
 Mahon Murphy, The
London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), who finished his MA
with his thesis “German Prisoners of War in
 Telephone interview with Elisabeth Seeger, Cologne, March 2009.
 The Eight-Nation Alliance included
approx. 45,000 soldiers from the nations of
 KUHLO, 4 August 1914, p. 24 [translated by the author].
 For further information see e.g. WIPPICH,
Rolf-Harald (1986): Deutschland und Japan am Scheideweg – Eine Skizze des
deutsch-japanischen Verhältnisses in den 1890er Jahren, in: KREINER, Josef (edit.): Japan und
die Mittelmächte im Ersten Weltkrieg und in den zwanziger Jahren.
 See for the Hunnenrede http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/dokumente/wilhelm00/index.html. Further comments on the German behaviour in China, their treatment of the Chinese and how the Hun speech ‘affected’ the Germans can be found at FELBER, Roland and Horst ROSTEK (1987): Der Hunnenkrieg Kaiser Wilhelm II. Imperialistische Interventionen in China 1900/01. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaft.
 Paradoxically the German Imperial Naval Office did not possess the necessary manpower to prevent this. NISH, Ian (1974): Alliance in Decline A Study of Anglo-Japanese Relations 1908-1923. London: Athlone Press, p. 135.
 DICKINSON, Frederick R. (1999): War and National Reinvention: Japan in the Great War, 1914-1919. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 4, 81.
 DICKINSON, p. 81.
 HAYASHIMA, Akira (1978): Die deutsche Japanpolitik im August 1914, in: Kwansei Gakuin Univ. Annual Studies, 27, pp. 107-134. Further information about the Japanese-German relations can be found in TAJIMA, Nobuo (2009): Japanese-German Relations in East Asia 1890-1945, in: KÛDO, Akira, TAJIMA Nobuo and Erich PAUER (edit.): Japan and Germany. Two Latecomers to the world stage, 1890-1945. Folkestone: Global Oriental, pp. 1-45. For further information regarding Anglo-Japanese relations see e.g. NISH, Ian (1974): Alliance in Decline A Study of Anglo-Japanese Relations 1908-1923. London: Athlone Press, p. 139, for relations between US and Japan, ELLEMAN, Bruce A (2002): Wilson and China- A Revised History of the Shandong Question. Armonk and London: M.E. Sharpe and KAWAMURA, Noriko (2000): Turbulence in the Pacific. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
 Letter from Colonel Kuhlo to his parents from 23 November 1914 [translated by the author].
 See also MARTIN, Bernd (2006): Japan and Germany in the modern world. New York: Berghahn Books, p. 31. KERST, Georg (1970): Jacob Meckel. Sein Leben und sein Wirken in Deutschland und Japan. Göttingen: Musterschmidt; pp. 54–55. MARTIN pointed out, “[…] Meckel stayed in Japan for only three years, it was probably he, of all the foreign experts, who left the deepest and longest-lasting impression on the modernization of Japan. […] Unlike the French instructors, Meckel not only taught theoretical knowledge, but had his students practice their skills in manoeuvres that he himself supervised”, pp. 39-40.
 Hartmann pointed out parallels at the Japanese tactics and strategy during the Russo-Japanese War 1904/1905: “Japanese leaders mentioned, that their victim against the Russian forces is a result of the tremendous teaching from Germany, and Japan strongly hopes to continue the good relationship between both nations” [translated by the author], HARTMANN, Rudolf (2007): Japanische Offiziere im Deutschen Kaiserreich 1870-1914, in: Japonica Humboldtiana, 11, pp. 93-158, p. 96.
 See KERST, pp. 76–79.
 KREBS, Gerhard (1999): Die etwas andere Kriegsgefangenschaft. Die Kämpfer von Tsingtau in japanischen Lagern 1914-1920, in: OVERMANS, Rüdiger (edit.): In der Hand des Feindes. Kriegsgefangenschaft von der Antike bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg. Köln, Weimar, Wien: Böhlau Verlag. pp. 323-337, here: pp. 324-326.
 The other temple camps were located in Himeji, Kurume, Kumamoto, Marugame, Matsuyama and Nagoya. KLEIN, pp. 50-51.
 According to KLEIN, by September 1915, 396 NCO’s and men and 14 officers were imprisoned in Higashi Hongan-ji. According to the third report about German POW’s from Tsingtau as of 13th December 1914, 313 persons (15 officer and 298 NCO’s and private) were entitled at Tôkyô (e.g. Bundesarchiv Lichterfelde, R/901/84811, Dritter Bericht über die Deutschen Kriegsgefangene aus Tsingtau).
 KUHLO, 22 November 1914, pp. 316-318 [translated by the author], as well SETO, Takehiko (2006): Chintao kara kita heishi tachi [Soldiers from Tsingtao]. Tôkyo: Dogakusha, p.95.
 KUHLO, 22 November 1914, pp. 319ff.
 KUHLO, no date, p. 310 [translated by the author].
 KUHLO, no date, p. 310 [translated by the author].
 The prisoner barracks leader Kuhlo had a clean but cold single room, approx. 5 square meters big, with a (Japanese sized) camp bed, one table, three old chairs and a hallstand. A gas furnace didn’t only heat the room, but was helpful to prepare some coffee or tea.
 See Bundesarchiv / Militärarchiv Freiburg, file-no. RM 3 /6868, vol. 10 Kriegsgefangenenbehandlung in Japan.
 See: Bundesarchiv / Militärarchiv Freiburg, file-no. RM 3 / 6863, Bericht ueber die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen aus Tsingtau. Tokyo, den 20. Maerz 1915.
 The Japanese government announced several (general) behavioural rules, but the realization depended on each camp and each camp leader. For a copy of the Instruktion für die Kriegsgefangenen see e.g. http://homepage3.nifty.com/akagaki/8-takalancelle1.html.
 VOLLERTHUN, Waldemar Konteradmiral a.D. (1920): Der Kampf um Tsingtau. Eine Episode aus dem Weltkrieg 1914/1918 nach Tagebuchblättern. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, p. XI.
 KLEIN, p. 129.
 Brief aus Tokyo, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 9 May 1915, p. 2.
 See for example several issues of the Tôkyô Asahi, between November 1914 and December 1919.
 Kuhlo’s action and behaviour enhanced the prestige of the POW as shown by several Japanese newspapers or private letters, Kuhlo received (KUHLO, 22 November, pp. 333-336). Beside this, General Kamio itself, Commander of the Japanese force in Tsingtao, regretted the circumstance to fight against Germany, as Kuhlo mentioned in his diary on 22 November 1914 (p. 316).
 KLEIN, p. 90.
 Since March 1915, private donators like Krupp-Bohlen, Siemens Schuckert, several banks, etc., collected money for the use of the POW. Beside this, the committee organised and collected clothes, shoes, groceries, toiletries, cigarettes and cigars, books, newspapers, board games and musical instruments. In December 1914, the Japanese YMCA donated 50 Christmas trees and sweets (candies and cakes). See Berlin-Lichterfeld, file-no. R/901/84614, 2. Jahresbericht ueber die Verwendung der ‘Deutschen Spende II‘ fuer die Kriegsgefangenen aus Tsingtau.
 KLEIN, pp. 247ff.
 Drenckhahn dared the limited space, the feed with meals and the lack of walking outside the temple. See Bundes-archiv / Militärarchiv Freiburg, RM 3/ 6863, Bericht ueber die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen aus Tsingtau. Tokyo, den 20. Maerz 1915.
 Briefe aus dem bisherigen Gefangenenheim Tokyo, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan (1915), 23 September 1915, p. 3.
 Letter from Paul Kuhlo to his parents from 12 September 1915 [translated by the author]. The transfer was officially announced in Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 23. September 1915, p. 3.
 PARAVICINI, Jakob August Friedolin (1919): Dokumente herausgegeben während des Krieges 1914-1918. Bericht des Herrn Dr. F. Paravicini, in Yokohama, über seinen Besuch der Gefangenenlager in Japan (30. Juni bis 16. Juli 1918). Basel, Genf: Verlag Georg & Cie, pp. 25-27; KLEIN, pp. 57-58.
 KLEIN, p. 58; PARAVICINI, pp. 26-27.
 15 September 1915, 97 POW’s from Fukuoka; 22 October 1916, 63 POW’s from Fukuoka; 22 March 1918, 81 POW’s from Fukuoka; 6 August 1918, 50 POW’s from Kurume; 25 August 1918, 106 POW’s from Shizuoka; 25 August 1918, 215 POW’s from Oita and on 2 June 1919, 28 POW’s from Kurume.
RÖHDER, Mareike (Hg.) (2005): ‘Alle Menschen werden Brüder…‘ Deutsche Kriegsgefangene in Japan 1914-1920. Begleitheft zur Ausstellung der OAG, Herbst 2005. Tôkyô: PrintX Kabushikigaisha, p. 26.
 Class schedule, Narashino 1916/1917.
 This kind of penalization or corporal punishment was not unusual inside the IJA, as it was a common practice. But the prisoners felt maltreatment and raised a complaint against the camp authorization. See Kuhlo, January 1916 (without page-number) or KREBS, p 327.
 KUHLO, October 1917, p. 1. Berlin-Lichterfeld, file-no. R/901/84615, Kurzer Bericht über die Eindrücke der 6. Lagerreise im Oktober 1917, verfasst von Pfarrer Hunziker an die Schweizerische Gesandtschaft.
 Kuhlo underlined in a letter to the editor of the Tageblatt für Tsingtau that the POW’s were grateful about the Christmas trees and food, which they received through different relief organisations. See: Dank aus dem Gefangenenlager Narashino, in: Auszug aus dem Tageblatt für Nord-China Tientsin. Zusammengestellt für die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in Japan, 9 January 1916, pp. 3–4.
 See for example Berlin-Lichterfeld, file-no. R/901/84614, Bericht von Mr. Sumner Welles ueber seinen Besuch in Narashino am 15. Maerz or Berlin-Lichterfeld, file-no. R/901/84616, Bericht über den Besuch der Gefangenenlager in Japan 30. Juni bis 16. Juli 1918, zu Händen des Internationalen Comites des Roten Kreuzes von Dr. F. Paravicini in Yokohama. Delegierten des Internationalen Comites.
 KREBS, p. 330-331.
 Saigô was replaced by the later Major General Tomozô Yamazaki (1873-1926), who stayed in Germany from 1906 to 1908, studying engineering at the Technical University of Berlin. See KAWAMURA, Chizuko (2006): Otôsan, sono toki nani ga attano? Yamazaki Takashi no o-raru hisutori-. Yomigaeru kioku to tabunka no kaori. [Father, what did you during that time?Yamazaki Takashi’s oral history. Re-remembering the memories and the odour of multiculturalism.]. Nagano: Self-published.
 “The prisoners of war did complain of many things to the representative of the International Red Cross; Particular distress was, they said, caused by the length of their imprisonment especially as some of them were family men of over 50 years of age, they wished that prisoners could be exchanged, but this was not possible because the Germans held few Japanese. They felt forgotten, even if the food situation is better here (in Japan) they would prefer to starve in Germany”, CHECKLAND, Olive (1994): Humanitarianism and the Emperor’s Japan, 1877-1977. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd., pp. 73-74.
 KLEIN, p. 276.
 KLEIN, p. 281; Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes, file no. R 48 / 355.
 Kifuku Maru (departure in December 1919 from Yokohama sea port), Hofuku Maru (departure on December 1919 from Kobe sea port), Himalaya Maru (departure on January 1920 from Moji sea port), Hudson Maru (departure on January 1912 from Kobe sea port), Ume Maru (departure on February 1920 form Kobe sea port), Nankai Maru (departure in March 1920 from Tsingtao sea port).
 KLEIN, p. 280.
 KUHN, Adalbert Freiherr von (1931): Kriegsgefangen in Japan. Ernstes und Heiteres aus meiner ‘Furionenzeit‘, in: WEILAND, Hans; KERN, Leopold (edit.): In Feindeshand. Die Gefangenschaft im Weltkriege in Einzeldarstellungen. Wien: Bundesvereinigung der ehem. österr. Kriegsgefangenen, pp. 76-82, p. 82.
 KUHLO, March 1920, (no page-no.) [translated by the author] and RÄCKER-WELLNITZ, Ulrich: Nach fünf Jahren Kriegsgefangenschaft: Rückkehr der Tsingtau-Kämpfer 1920, in: Wilhelmshavener Zeitung, 30. January 2010, pp. 9-11.
 KREBS, Gerhard (1998): Der Chor der Gefangenen: Die Verteidiger von Tsingtau in japanischen Lagern, in: HINZ, Hans-Martin und Christoph LIND (edit.): Tsingtau. Ein Kapitel deutscher Kolonialgeschichte in China 1897-1914. Eurasburg: Edition Minerva, pp. 196-202, p. 197.
 KREBS (1998), p. 202.
 KUHLO, March 1920 (no page-no.) [translated by the author].
 Nowadays the Bethel Institution (‘v. Bodelschwinghsche Stiftungen Bethel’) is a diaconal hospital for the mentally ill in Bielefeld.
 v. Bodelschwinghsche Stiftung Bethel, Hauptarchiv, file no. PartMorija1, 61 Krankenakte Paul Kuhlo [translated by the author].