An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids In SI

Units 3rd Edition Robert R. Archer download

https://ebookgate.com/product/an-introduction-to-the-mechanics-
of-solids-in-si-units-3rd-edition-robert-r-archer/

Get Instant Ebook Downloads – Browse at https://ebookgate.com

 Get Your Digital Files Instantly: PDF, ePub, MOBI and More
Quick Digital Downloads: PDF, ePub, MOBI and Other Formats

Mechanics of Solids 3rd Edition Carl Ross

https://ebookgate.com/product/mechanics-of-solids-3rd-edition-
carl-ross/

Introduction to Hida Distributions 1st Edition Si Si

https://ebookgate.com/product/introduction-to-hida-
distributions-1st-edition-si-si/

Strength of Materials Mechanics of Solids 4th Edition

R. K. Rajput

https://ebookgate.com/product/strength-of-materials-mechanics-of-
solids-4th-edition-r-k-rajput/

A Textbook of Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic Machines

9th Revised Edition SI Units Chp 1 11 R.K. Bansal

https://ebookgate.com/product/a-textbook-of-fluid-mechanics-and-
hydraulic-machines-9th-revised-edition-si-units-chp-1-11-r-k-
bansal/
The Administration of Justice An Introduction to the
Criminal Justice System in America 3rd Edition Robert
Aberle

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-administration-of-justice-an-
introduction-to-the-criminal-justice-system-in-america-3rd-
edition-robert-aberle/

Mechanics of Solids and Shells Gerald Wempner

https://ebookgate.com/product/mechanics-of-solids-and-shells-
gerald-wempner/

An introduction to programming with Mathematica 3rd ed

Edition Paul R Wellin

https://ebookgate.com/product/an-introduction-to-programming-
with-mathematica-3rd-ed-edition-paul-r-wellin/

Introduction to Biostatistics Second Edition Robert R.

Sokal

https://ebookgate.com/product/introduction-to-biostatistics-
second-edition-robert-r-sokal/

Experimental mechanics of solids and structures 1st

Edition Molimard

https://ebookgate.com/product/experimental-mechanics-of-solids-
and-structures-1st-edition-molimard/
An Introduction to the
Mechanics of Solids
(In SI Units)
Third Edition
 An Introduction to the
Mechanics of Solids
(In SI Units)
Third Edition

Robert R. Archer, Nathan H. Cook, Stephen H. Crandall

Norman C. Dahl, Thomas J. Lardner, Frank A. McClintock
Ernest Rabinowicz, George S. Reichenbach

First Edition Edited by

Stephen H. Crandall and Norman C. Dahl

Second Edition Edited by

Thomas J. Lardner

Second Edition with SI Units Edited by

Thomas J. Lardner

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Adapted by
M. S. Sivakumar
Professor
Department of Applied Mechanics
IIT Madras, Chennai

Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited

NEW DELHI
McGraw-Hill Offices
New Delhi New York St Louis San Francisco Auckland Bogotá Caracas
Kuala Lumpur Lisbon London Madrid Mexico City Milan Montreal
San Juan Santiago Singapore Sydney Tokyo Toronto
 Tata McGraw-Hill

Published by the Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited,

7 West Patel Nagar, New Delhi 110 008.

An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids, 3e

Copyright © 2012, 2008, by Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise or stored in a
database or retrieval system without the prior written permission of the publishers.
The program listing (if any) may be entered, stored and executed in a computer
system, but they may not be reproduced for publication.

ISBN (13): 978-0-07-107003-4

ISBN (10): 0-07-107003-6

Vice President and Managing Director—Ajay Shukla

Head—Higher Education Publishing and Marketing: Vibha Mahajan
Publishing Manager—SEM & Tech. Ed.: Shalini Jha
Editorial Researcher: Harsha Singh
Executive—Editorial Services: Sohini Mukherjee
Sr Manager—Production: Satinder S Baveja
Asst Manager—Production: Anjali Razdan
Marketing Manager—Higher Education: Vijay Sarathi
General Manager—Production: Rajender P Ghansela
Manager—Production: Reji Kumar

Information contained in this work has been obtained by Tata McGraw-Hill, from sources
believed to be reliable. However, neither Tata McGraw-Hill nor its authors guarantee the
accuracy or completeness of any information published herein, and neither Tata McGraw-
Hill nor its authors shall be responsible for any errors, omissions, or damages arising
out of use of this information. This work is published with the understanding that Tata
McGraw-Hill and its authors are supplying information but are not attempting to render
engineering or other professional services. If such services are required, the assistance of
an appropriate professional should be sought.

Typeset at Bukprint India, B-180A, Guru Nanak Pura, Laxmi Nagar-110 092 and printed at
India Binding House, A-98, Sector-65, Noida, U.P.

Cover Printer: India Binding House

RCZCRRLHDRQBC
Contents
Preface to the Third Edition ix
Preface to the Second Edition xi
Preface to the First Edition xiii
1. Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Generalized Procedure 2
1.3 The Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 3
1.4 The Concept of Force 4
1.5 The Moment of a Force 8
1.6 Conditions for Equilibrium 12
1.7 Engineering Applications 16
1.8 Friction 19
1.9 Examples 23
1.10 Hooke’s Joint 37
1.11 Final Remarks 43
Summary 44
Problems 44
2. Introduction to Mechanics of Deformable Bodies 64
2.1 Introduction 64
2.2 Analysis of Deformable Bodies 64
2.3 Uniaxial Loading and Deformation 75
2.4 Statically Determinate Situations 78
2.5 Statically Indeterminate Situations 92
2.6 Computer Analysis of Trusses 96
2.7 Elastic Energy; Castigliano’s Theorem 99
Summary 108
Problems 109
Additional Problems 129
3. Forces and Moments Transmitted by Slender Members 131
3.1 Introduction 131
3.2 General Method 132
3.3 Distributed Loads 137
3.4 Resultants of Distributed Loads 140
3.5 Differential Equilibrium Relationships 144
3.6 Singularity Functions 149
3.7 Fluid Forces 156
3.8 Three-dimensional Problems 158
Summary 165
Problems 167
vi Contents

4. Stress and Strain 183

4.1 Introduction 183
4.2 Stress 184
4.3 Plane Stress 190
4.4 Equilibrium of a Differential Element in Plane Stress 191
4.5 Stress Components Associated with Arbitrarily Oriented Faces in Plane
Stress 194
4.6 Mohr’s Circle Representation of Plane Stress 198
4.7 Mohr’s Circle Representation of a General State of Stress 203
4.8 Analysis of Deformation 207
4.9 Definition of Strain Components 209
4.10 Relation between Strain and Displacement in Plane Strain 211
4.11 Strain Components Associated with Arbitrary Sets of Axes 214
4.12 Mohr’s Circle Representation of Plane Strain 216
4.13 Mohr’s Circle Representation of a General State of Strain 219
4.14 Measurement of Strains 220
4.15 Indicial Notation 226
Summary 228
Problems 230
5. Stress-strain Temperature Relations 240
5.1 Introduction 240
5.2 The Tensile Test 243
5.3 Idealizations of Stress-strain Curves 248
5.4 Elastic Stress-strain Relations 254
5.5 Thermal Strain 260
5.6 Complete Equations of Elasticity 260
5.7 Complete Elastic Solution for a Thick-walled Cylinder 266
5.8 Strain Energy in an Elastic Body 271
5.9 Stress Concentration 273
5.10 Composite Materials and Anisotropic Elasticity 276
5.11 Criteria for Initial Yielding 282
5.12 Behavior beyond Initial Yielding in the Tensile Test 288
5.13 Fracture of Ductile Specimens and Structures 295
5.14 Fracture of Brittle Specimens and Structures 296
5.15 Fatigue 297
5.16 Criteria for Continued Yielding 304
5.17 Plastic Stress-strain Relations 308
5.18 Viscoelasticity 312
Summary 316
Problems 318
6. Torsion 331
6.1 Introduction 331
6.2 Geometry of Deformation of a Twisted Circular Shaft 333
 Contents vii

6.3 Stresses Obtained from Stress-strain Relations 337

6.4 Equilibrium Requirements 338
6.5 Stress and Deformation in a Twisted Elastic Circular Shaft 339
6.6 Torsion of Elastic Hollow Circular Shafts 343
6.7 Stress Analysis in Torsion; Combined Stresses 344
6.8 Strain Energy due to Torsion 347
6.9 The Onset of Yielding in Torsion 349
6.10 Plastic Deformations 350
6.11 Residual Stresses 353
6.12 Limit Analysis 354
6.13 Torsion of Rectangular Shafts 356
6.14 Torsion of Hollow, Thin-walled Shafts 358
Summary 361
Problems 363
7. Stresses due to Bending 378
7.1 Introduction 378
7.2 Geometry of Deformation of a Symmetrical Beam
Subjected to Pure Bending 379
7.3 Stresses Obtained from Stress-strain Relations 383
7.4 Equilibrium Requirements 383
7.5 Stress and Deformation in Symmetrical Elastic Beams Subjected to
Pure Bending 384
7.6 Stresses in Symmetrical Elastic Beams Transmitting both Shear Force
and Bending Moment 392
7.7 Stress Analysis in Bending; Combined Stresses 402
7.8 Strain Energy due to Bending 405
7.9 The Onset of Yielding in Bending 407
7.10 Plastic Deformations 410
7.11 Bending of Unsymmetrical Beams 418
7.12 Shear Flow in Thin-walled Open Sections; Shear Center 425
Summary 432
Problems 433
8. Deflections due to Bending 465
8.1 Introduction 465
8.2 The Moment-curvature Relation 465
8.3 Integration of the Moment-curvature Relation 468
8.4 Superposition 479
8.5 The Load-deflection Differential Equation 491
8.6 Energy Methods 495
8.7 Limit Analysis 500
Summary 504
Problems 505
viii Contents

9. Stability of Equilibrium: Buckling 526

9.1 Introduction 526
9.2 Elastic Stability 527
9.3 Examples of Instability 530
9.4 Elastic Stability of Flexible Columns 531
9.5 Elastic Postbuckling Behavior 537
9.6 Instability as a Mode of Failure 541
9.7 Necking of Tension Members 542
9.8 Plastic Buckling 545
Summary 551
Problems 552
Answers to Selected Problems 559
Index 565
Preface to the Third Edition
The original book was a textbook for the first course in mechanics, written for the
students of Mechanical Engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The
reader is advised to read the preface of the original edition of the book.
This book will be useful for an undergraduate course in mechanics of solids,
which is a next-level course to rigid body mechanics. It also provides sufficient
insight for seniors and graduate-level students of mechanical, civil and aerospace
engineering. The concise theory will be a helpful tool to strengthen and refresh the
understanding of fundamental concepts for the industry-level practitioners too.
The book lucidly presents the application of basic principles of mechanics of
solids to engineering problems. There is considerable emphasis on the conceptual
understanding of the core principles of mechanics, translation of an engineering
problem into a form on which those principles can be applied directly and getting
an insight into the physical nature of engineering problems.
It is assumed that the reader is familiar with a basic course in physics dealing
with mechanics, basic vector algebra and differential and integral calculus.
In this edition, almost all of the original material has been retained. The entire
content has now been completely changed to SI units. Apart from this, revisions
in chapters include more explanations and reorganization for more clarity. Every
solved example, now carries a note at the beginning of the solution that lists the
key concepts used in the example and what to pay attention to while solving that
particular problem. A large number of new solved examples and end-of-chapter
unsolved examples have been added, that include a variety of situations in which
the principles learnt have to be applied. A summary has now been added at the end
of each chapter to give the reader an overview of the concepts learnt in the chapter.
In addition, Section 2.5 that deals with computer analysis of trusses has been
modified to give students access to the analysis software. This software can be used
to test out analysis of various kinds of trusses on an interactive mode. This should
give the students an idea of the role of computers in the analysis of structures.
To summarize, some of the salient features of this text are given below:
∑ The book begins with all crude approximations and goes on to remove them
one by one leading to a more realistic picture of the concepts
∑ Every topic linked to the fundamental principles of strength of materials
∑ Introduction of tensor concept at the initial level is unique to the book
∑ Topical Inclusions like Theories of Failure; Columns and Struts: Euler’s
theorem and its Limitations; Rankine-Gordon Formula; Empirical Formula;
Principle of Virtual Work; Stresses in T, Angle and Channel Sections
∑ Completely SI metricated
∑ Solved Examples and Numerical Problems contain a variety of situations
ranging from biology to the design of nuclear-reactor containment vessels in
order to depict the application of theoretical concepts to real-world problems
∑ Strong pedagogy including
x Preface to the Third Edition

626 Figures
75 Solved Examples
456 Problems
Please visit the book website at http://www.mhhe.com/crandall/mos 3e
The website contains the following:
∑ For Instructors
Solution Manual (for the newly added problems)
Software for computer analysis of trusses
∑ For Students
Sample chapter on “Stress and Strain”
150 Multiple Choice Questions
Software for computer analysis of trusses

I wish to thank all those who helped with the revised edition, particularly
Mr C K Muthukumaran and Mr Arjun Ravichandran. A note of thanks is also due
to the reviewers of this book who took out time to send in useful comments and
suggestions. Their names are given below.

Raman Bedi
National Institute of Technology (NIT) Jalandhar, Punjab
S P Harsha
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Roorkee, Uttarakhand
M S Dasgupta
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras, Chennai
R K Srivastava
Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology (MNNIT) Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
Biswajit Halder
National Institute of Technology (NIT) Durgapur, West Bengal
D Chakraborty
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Guwahati, Assam
V G Ukadgaonkar
Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, Maharashtra
Pravin Singru
Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS) Pilani, Goa Campus
K Palanichamy
National Institute of Technology (NIT) Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu
S Ramanathan
Maturi Venkata Subba Rao (MVSR) Engineering College, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
S Adiseshu
College of Engineering, Andhra University, Andhra Pradesh
I am also grateful to the staff at Tata McGraw-Hill for their support and
cooperation at every stage of the book.
M S Sivakumar
Preface to the Second Edition
The reader is advised to read the preface to the first edition. The aim and emphasis
of the book have not changed: the principles underlying the mechanics of rigid and
deformable solids in equilibrium have not changed.
We have resisted the temptation to increase by a great amount the material
covered, or to emphasize formalism and rigor in place of the emphasis on
constructing idealized models to represent actual physical situations. We believe
that the reader must appreciate that engineering is the finding of solutions, i.e., the
determination of answers to physical problems. The second edition has maintained
the spirit and tradition of the first in this regard. We hope, too, that the book has
maintaiend the tradition of engineering thinking, a tradition which M.A. Biot1 refers
to as the “… tradition of clarity, simplicity, intuitive understanding, unpretentious
depth, and a shunning of the irrelevant.”
Changes have been made; these changes, however, are more in the spirit
of reform than of revolution. New material dealing with energy, hydrostatics,
postbuckling behaviour, and indical notation has been introduced. There is also a
discussion of the role of computers in structural analysis. In this regard we have
tried to emphasize that the computer can be used as a tool in the solution of
problems. The physical understanding and formulation of a problem, however, are
the most important parts of the solution, and the basic principles still reside in the
three steps of Eq. (2.1). Many sections have been revised and a number of chapters
reorganized to improve previous expositions.
A number of new problems have been added, and an effort has been made to
show the variety of situations to which the principles contained in this book may be
applied, from biology to the design of nuclear-reactor containment vessels.
We wish to thank the many readers who have submitted lists of misprints and
comments and our many colleagues who have found the book useful during the last
twelve years. Professor W.M. Murray is owed thanks for his contribution to Sec. 4.14.
THOMAS J. LARDNER

Preface to the Second Edition with SI Units

We have changed over sixty percent of the numerial examples and problems to the
SI units. The SI system of units will take a few years to be adopted fully in the
United States. For this reason, we have retained some examples and problems in
the conventional English System.
THOMAS J. LARDNER
Department of Theoretical
and Applied Mechanics
University of Illinois

1 M. A. Biot, Science and the Engineer, Appl. Mech. Rev., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 89–90, February 1963.
Preface to the First Edition
This book is concerned with the mechanics of rigid and deformable solids in
equilibrium. It has been prepared by members of the Mechanical Engineering
Department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for use as a text in the first
course in applied mechanics.
The central aim has been to treat this subject as an engineering science. To this
end we have clearly identified three fundamental physical considerations which
govern the mechanics of solids in equilibrium, and we have explicitly related all
discussion and theoretical development to these three basic considerations. We
have focused on these fundamentals in an effort to bring unity to an elementary
presentation of our subject.
A further aspect upon which we have put considerable emphasis is the process of
constructing idealized models to represent actual physical situations. This is one of
the central problems of engineering, and throughout the book we have attempted to
give it attention commensurate with its importance.
We have assumed that the reader has already studied mechanics as part of a
program in physics and that he is familiar with the differential and integral calculus.
We further assume that the reader is acquainted with vector notation and with the
algebraic operations of addition and multiplication of vectors.
The first chapter is devoted to a discussion of the fundamental principles of
mechanics and to an exposition of the requirements of equilibrium. In the second
chapter the basic principles are stated explicitly in Eq. (2.1) in the form of three
steps and are illustrated by application to lumped parameter models and one-
dimensional continua. The next three chapters are devoted to extending the depth of
meaning contained in the basic principles. An important facet of this development is
the extension of the fundamental concepts to three-dimensional continuous media.
In the final four chapters, simple but important problems involving these concepts
are solved. There are problems for the reader at the end of each chapter. Some of
these include extensions of the text material. Answers to approximately one-third of
the problems are given at the rear of the book.
In endeavoring to emphasize the basic principles, we have, of necessity,
had to omit many interesting applications. We have not attempted to provide
a compendium of useful results, but rather we have selected a limited number of
particular applications and have examined these with more than usual care. It is our
opinion that a course based on this text will provide an appropriate introduction
to the more advanced disciplines of elasticity and plasticity. With equal conviction
we believe that a course based on this text will provide a firm foundation for
subsequent design courses in this field.
Many people have participated directly and indirectly in the preparation of
this book. In addition to the authors, many present and former members of our
staff have contributed ideas concerning methods of presentation and problems
from examinations. We wish to acknowledge, in particular, the cooperation of
xiv Preface to the First Edition

R.J. Fitzgerald in working out problem solutions and the help of Miss Pauline
Harris in typing the manuscript.
There was a preliminary edition in 1957 (with a supplement in 1958); it enabled
us to experiment with presenting this material in semipermanent book form. We
wish to thank those members of the M.I.T. classes of 1960 and 1961 who used the
preliminary editions and who by their comments and criticisms helped to make this
book better than it otherwise would have been.
STEPHEN H. CRANDALL
NORMAN C. DAHL
U.S. Customary Units and Their SI Equivalents*
Quantity U.S. Customary Unit SI Equivalent
Acceleration ft/s2 0.3048 m/s2
2
in./s 0.0254 m/s2
Area ft2 0.0929 m2
in2 645.2 mm2
Energy ft ◊ lb 1.356 J
Force ki p 4.448 kN
lb 4.448 N
oz 0.2780 N
Impulse lb ◊ s 4.448 N ◊ s
Length ft 0.3048 m
in. 25.40 mm
mi 1.609 km
Mass oz mass 28.35 g
lb mass 0.4536 kg
slug 14.59 kg
ton 907.2 kg
Moment of a force lb ◊ ft 1.356 N ◊ m
lb ◊ in. 0.1130 N ◊ m
Moment of inertia:
of an area in4 0.4162 ¥ 106 mm4
of a mass lb ◊ ft ◊ s2 1.356 kg ◊ m2
Momentum lb ◊ s 4.448 kg ◊ m/s
Power ft ◊ lb/s 1.356 W
hp 745.7 W
Pressure or stress lb/ft2 47.88 Pa
lb/in2 (psi) 6.895 k Pa
Velocity ft/s 0.3048 m/s
in./s 0.0254 m/s
mi/h (mph) 0.4470 m/s
mi/h (mph) 1.609 km/h
Volume, solids ft3 0.02832 m3
in3 16.39 cm3
Liquids gal 3.785 l
qt 0.9464 l
Work ft ◊ lb 1.356 J

* From F.P. Beer and E.R. Johnson, VECTOR MECHANICS FOR ENGINEERS: DYNAMICS,
3rd ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York 1976.
SI Prefixes *
Multiplication Factor Prefix † Symbol
12
1 000 000 000 000 = 10 tera T
1 000 000 000 = 109 giga G
1 000 000 = 106 mega M
1 000 = 103 kilo k
100 = 102 hecto ‡ h
10 = 101 deka ‡ da
0.1 = 10–1 deci ‡ d
0.01 = 10–2 centi ‡ c
0.001 = 10–3 milli m
0.000 001 = 10–6 micro m
0. 000 000 001 = 10–9 nano n
0. 000 000 000 001 = 10–12 pico p
0. 000 000 000 000 001 = 10–15 femto f
0. 000 000 000 000 000 001 = 10–18 atto a
† The first syllable of every prefix is accented so that the prefix will retain its identity. Thus, the
preferred pronunciation of kilometer places the accent on the first syllable, not the second.
‡ The use of these prefixes should be avoided, except for the measurement of areas and volumes and
for the nontechnical use of centimeter, as for body and clothing measurements.

Principal SI Units Used in Mechanics*

Quantity Unit Symbol Formula
Acceleration Meter per second squared … m/s2
Angle Radiation rad †
Angular acceleration Radiation per second squared … rad/s2
Angular velocity Radian per second … rad/s
Area Square meter … m2
Density Kilogram per cubic meter … kg/m3
Energy Joule J N◊m
Force Newton N kg ◊ m/s2
Frequency Hertz Hz s–1
Impulse Newton-second … kg ◊ m/s
Length Meter m ‡
Mass Kilogram kg ‡
Moment of a force Newton-meter … N◊m
Power Watt W J/s
Pressure Pascal Pa N/m2
Stress Pascal Pa N/m2
Time Second s ‡
Velocity Meter per second … m/s
Volume, solids Cubic meter … m3
Liquids Liter l 10–3 m3
Work Joule J N◊m

‡ Supplementary unit (1 revolution = 2p rad = 360°)

‡ Base unit.
 1 Fundamental
Principles of
Mechanics

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Mechanics is the science of It continues to be a fascinating

forces and motions. It involves a subject by continually expanding
relatively small number of basic its areas of application. The
concepts such as force, mass, reader interested in the history
length, and time. From a few of mechanics will find easily a
experimentally based postulates number of interesting books on
and assumptions regarding the this topic.
connections between these con- Applied mechanics is the science
cepts, logical deduction leads of applying the principles of mec-
to quite detailed predictions of hanics to systems of practical
the consequences. Mechanics interest in order (1) to understand
is one of the oldest physical their behavior and (2) to develop
sciences, dating back to the time rational rules for their design.
of Archimedes (287–212 B.C.). This book is an introduction to
A delightful account of the use applied mechanics of solids. The
of mechanics by Archimedes logical structure of the principles
in the defense of Syracuse of mechanics will be briefly
against the Romans may be developed as needed, but the
found in Plutarch’s Lives.1 As a main emphasis here is on the
science, mechanics has intrigued rational applications of these
almost all of the great scientists, principles. It is assumed that the
e.g., Stevin, Galileo, Newton, reader is familiar with the broad
d’Alembert, Lagrange, Laplace, outline of newtonian mechanics
Euler, Einstein, to name only a from his studies in physics.
few whose names are familiar.

1 Plutarch, “The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans,” Marcellus, pp. 376–380,
Modern Library, Inc., New York.
2 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

1.2 GENERALIZED PROCEDURE

The general method of attack in solving problems in applied mechanics is similar to

that in any scientific investigation. The steps may be outlined as follows:
1. Select system of interest.
2. Postulate characteristics of system. This usually involves idealization and
simplification of the real situation.
3. Apply principles of mechanics to the idealized model. Deduce the
consequences.
4. Compare these predictions with the behavior of the actual system. This
usually involves recourse to tests and experiments.
5. If satisfactory agreement is not achieved, the foregoing steps must be
reconsidered. Very often progress is made by altering the assumptions
regarding characteristics of the system, i.e., by constructing a different
idealized model of the system.
This generalized approach applies to the problems treated in this book and
equally well to problems on the frontiers of research. The design engineer who
must deal with mechanics follows a similar sequence but with a somewhat different
motive in that it is his job to accomplish a certain desired function. He must first
create a possible design, either by invention or by adaptation of prior designs,
before he can analyze its behavior as in steps 1, 2, and 3. If this behavior is not
compatible with the desired function, he must modify or redesign the system and
repeat the analysis until an acceptable result is obtained. The criteria of accept-
ability include not only satisfactory technical operation but such factors as
economy, minimum weight, or ease of fabrication. Acceptability may also require
consideration of pollution and/or ecological factors.
Since this is an introductory text, we have devoted most of our space to the first
three of the above steps. We have, however, made occasional reference to the other
steps. Examples of cases where there is not at present satisfactory agreement between
theory and experiment have been given to illustrate the tentative nature of scientific
reasoning and also to acquaint the reader with the fact that, despite its fundamental
importance in the scientific development of the last 300 years, mechanics is still a
vigorous, growing field with many frontiers being actively extended.
Let us consider further the first two steps in the above outline: the selection of
a system and the idealization of its characteristics. In research investigations these
are usually the most difficult steps. The trick is to set up a model which is simple
enough to analyze and yet still exhibits the phenomena under consideration. The
more we learn, the more detailed become our models of reality.
For example, the reader will observe in the following pages the increasing
sophistication with which we select and isolate systems for intensive analysis. In
the simplest situations an entire structure can be treated as a whole. We later find
it necessary to consider subassemblies (e.g., a single member or joint, or half of an
original structure) as isolated systems. Later we obtain more detailed information by
selecting infinitesimal elements inside structural members as systems for analysis.
The reader will also observe the increasing sophistication we employ in
idealizing the characteristics of a system. For example, a large part of our work
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 3

deals with ordinary engineering structural members: rods, beams, shafts, etc. These
members are ordinarily relatively rigid, so we begin by using the idealized concept
of a perfectly rigid body. A certain plateau of understanding is reached on this basis.
Then to answer further questions it is necessary to consider the deformation of a
member under load. By assuming the deformations to be elastic we reach another
plateau of understanding. Then further enlightenment comes when we include
assumptions regarding plastic behavior.

1.3 THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF MECHANICS

Having selected a system and set up a conceptual model of its behavior, we next
ask, what are the principles of mechanics and how are they applied? In broad
outline they are very simple. Mechanics deals with forces and motions. We must
therefore study the forces, and we must study the motions. Finally, we connect the
forces with the motions by using hypotheses concerning the dependence of motion
on force.
One of the most important of our basic concepts is force. In the next section we
begin a review of the properties of force.
The study of motion involves geometry and, in general, time. It is possible to
distinguish two different types of movement which are important in the mechanics
of solids. The first type involves gross overall changes in position with time, while
the second type involves local distortions of shape. For example, an automotive-
engine connecting rod has a complicated overall motion in which one end moves
up and down while the other end travels in a circle. Simultaneous with this overall
motion is a very small change in the shape of the rod; the rod alternately elongates
and shortens as it first pulls the piston and then is pushed by the piston. This second
type of movement, involving change in shape, we call deformation. In this book we
shall consider situations in which there is deformation, but we shall not usually be
concerned with gross overall motions. Detailed examination of overall motion may
be found in texts on dynamics, kinetics, and kinematics.
Both types of movement are influenced by forces. The hypotheses connecting
force and motion that we employ are those of newtonian mechanics. While
this theory must be extended to cope with very large velocities, there is ample
experimental evidence for the validity of the newtonian postulates in the realm
of ordinary engineering where all velocities are small compared with the speed
of light. A basic tenet of newtonian mechanics is the proportionality of force and
acceleration for a particle. Actually, in this book we deal only with a degenerate
case of this: the case of no acceleration which occurs when there is no unbalanced
force.
The hypotheses relating force and deformation within solids are considerably
more varied. Several aspects of this question will be surveyed in Chapter 5 and
exploited in the following chapters.
Application of these hypotheses to a particular system permits us to predict the
motion and deformation if the forces are known or, conversely, to determine the
forces if the motions and deformations are known. At the design stage of a structure
4 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

or machine this gives us information on which to base a judgment as to whether the

system will perform in a safe and efficient manner.
Every analysis of a mechanical system involves the three steps described above,
which we list again for emphasis:
1. Study of forces
2. Study of motion and deformation
3. Application of laws relating the forces to the motion and deformation
In most situations all three of the above steps require careful analysis. In special
cases one or more of the steps become trivial. For example, when we assume a
member to be perfectly rigid, we automatically rule out considerations concerning
the deformation of the member. If in addition the member is constrained to remain
at rest, no considerations regarding the motion are necessary.
The problems treated in this book generally will not involve overall motion. As a
consequence, the basic steps in the analysis may be simplified as follows:
1. Study of forces
2. Study of deformations
3. Application of laws relating the forces to the deformations
In considering the forces we will have to take into account the requirement that
there should be a state of balance. In considering the deformations we will have
to take into account the requirement that the deformations of the individual parts
of a structure should be consistent with the overall deformation. In relating the
forces to the deformation we will have to take into account the special properties
of the particular materials involved. These three fundamental steps underlie the
development of the remainder of this book. They form the central core.

1.4 THE CONCEPT OF FORCE

It is assumed that the reader already has an intuitive notion of force, and what a
force can do. The development of the idea of force in mechanics has provided us
with an effective means for describing a very complex physical interaction between
“bodies” in terms of a simple, convenient concept.
Force is a directed interaction; i.e., it is a vector interaction. (The reader may
find it convenient to recall some of the properties of a vector by considering Probs.
1.1 to 1.5 at the end of the chapter.)
For example, in Fig. 1.l(a) there is an
attraction between the airplane and
the center of the earth indicated by
the pair of vectors F1, and F2. In Fig.
1.1(b) there is a force between the
spring and the weight indicated by
the pair of vectors F1 and F2. Newton,
in his third law, postulated equal and
opposite effectiveness of force on the
two interacting systems; that is, F1 and
F2 are equal and opposite vectors along
the same line of action in Fig. 1.1. Fig. 1.1 Force interactions (a) at a distance
and (b) by direct connection
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 5

It has become customary to apply the term force indiscriminately to either the
pair F1, F2 or to the single vectors separately. When we analyze an isolated system
such as the airplane in Fig. 1.1(a), we represent the interaction with the earth by
the vector F1, calling it the force exerted by the earth upon the airplane. Simi-
larly, in isolating the spring in Fig. 1.1(b) the interaction with the weight would be
represented by F1, the force which the weight exerts on the spring.
Force interactions may occur when there is direct contact between systems, as
illustrated by Fig. 1.1(b). Force interactions may also occur between systems which
are physically separated, as in Fig. 1.1(a). Electric, magnetic, and gravitational
forces are of this type. The force of the earth on an object at or near the surface is
called the weight of the object.
Force interactions have two principal effects: they tend to alter the motion of
the systems involved, and they tend to deform or distort the shape of the systems
involved. In Fig. 1.2(a) the attraction of the earth has a tendency to alter the motion
of the airplane from a level flight to a vertical dive. The application of a force to
the deformable spring in Fig. 1.2(b) tends to stretch it. Either of these effects can
be used as the basis for a quantitative measure of the magnitude of force. The
definitions of most units of force are based on the alteration of motions of standard
systems. In the International System of Units, officially abbreviated SI system,
the unit of force is the newton. A newton is defined as that force which gives an
acceleration of 1 m/s2 to a mass of 1 kg. In the English system which is being
replaced by the SI system the unit of force is the pound force. The pound force is
defined as that force which gives an acceleration of 32.1740 ft/s2 to a mass which
is 1/2.2046 part of a certain piece of platinum (in possession of the International
Committee for Weights and Measures) known as the standard kilogram.

Fig. 1.2 Forces tend to alter motion or distort shape

The International System of Units which is slowly being adopted is a modern-

ized version of the metric system. It was established by international agreement to
provide a logical and interconnected framework for all measurements in science,
industry, and commerce. In this system the basic quantities are length, mass, and
time—meter, kilogram, and second.
The SI system is replacing the English system of units which has been used
by engineers in the United States. The English system is based on a gravitational
system in which length, force, and time—foot, pound, and second—are considered
6 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

the fundamental quantities. The unit of mass in this system has the dimensions of
lb-s2/ft, which is occasionally called a slug.
In the SI system the acceleration due to gravity near the earth’s surface is
approximately 9.81 m/s2. A mass of one kilogram on the earth’s surface will
experience a gravitational force of 9.81 N. Therefore we say that a mass of
1 kilogram has because of the gravitational force of the earth, a weight of 9.81 N. It
is likely that both these systems of units will continue to be used over the next few
years and one will need to be able to switch from one system to the other. We will
use both systems of units in this book.
Table 1.1 contains a listing of the common systems of units and some conversion
factors between systems. It should be mentioned that one’s so-called intuitive grasp
of the order of magnitude of physical quantities depends on one’s system of units.
Let us now leave the discussion of units and return to our discussion of force.
A very important property of force is that the superposition of forces satisfies
the laws of vector addition. This is a fundamental postulate based on experimental
observation. Thus, if force is defined in terms of the rate of change of momentum of
a standard body, it is found that when two bodies interact with the standard body, the
rate of change of momentum is the vector sum of the individual rates of change of
momentum resulting when each body separately interacts with the standard body.
Table 1.1 Systems of units and some conversion factors
Units
SI United States
Length: meter (m) foot
Force: newton (N) pound force
Time: second (s) second
Mass: kilogram (kg) pound mass, slug

Prefixes for SI system

Factor by which Prefix
unit is multiplied Name Symbol
109 giga G
106 mega M
103 kilo k
10–3 milli m
10–6 micro m
10–9 nano n

Conversion factors
Length: 1 in. = 25.40 mm 1 m = 39.37 in.
1 ft = 0.3048 m 1 m = 3.281 ft
Force: 1 lbf = 4.448 N 1 N = 0.2248 lb
Pressure: 1 psi = 6.895 kN/m2 1 MN/m2 = 145.0 psi
1 psf = 47.88 N/m2 1 kN/m2 = 20.88 psf
Distributed load: 1 lb/ft = 14.59 N/m 1 kN/m = 68.53 lb/ft
Moment of force: 1 ft-lb = 1.356 N.m 1 N.m = 0.7376 ft-lb
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 7

This implies that if two forces F1 and F2 have the same point of application P in
Fig. 1.3(a), then we may replace them by their vector sum F1 + F2 with no observ-
able effect on the system. It also means that any force F in Fig. 1.3(b) can be replaced
by its components along any three mutually perpendicular axes through the point of
application P. It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the algebra of vectors and
their representation in terms of unit vectors i, j, and k along coordinate axes.
Summarizing the above discussion on forces, we can say that:
1. Force is a vector interaction which can be characterized by a pair of equal
and opposite vectors having the same line of action.
2. The magnitude of a force can be established in terms of a standardized
experiment.
3. When two or more forces act simultaneously, at one point, the effect is the
same as if a single force equal to the vector sum of the individual forces were
acting.

Fig. 1.3 Vector properties of force

If we isolate a system S, as shown in Fig. 1.4, the interactions with external

systems can be indicated by vectors F1, F2,..., which show the forces exerted by the
external agencies that interact with S. This set of forces is often referred to simply
as the external forces acting on the system S. Each individual force is characterized
by a magnitude and a vector direction.
Furthermore, in dealing with an extended
system it is necessary to specify the point
of application of each force. Throughout
this book we shall be continually focusing
our attention on systems of forces like that
shown in Fig. 1.4 in which we isolate the
Fig. 1.4 Isolated system with
system from its environment, and replace external forces
the effect of the environment with a system
of external forces. In the mechanics of solids, the system which we isolate is a
specific physical part or a group of parts. In the mechanics of fluids, it is often more
useful to isolate a particular control volume in space rather than isolating particular
particles which are flowing through a volume.
At this point it is appropriate to consider the “scale” or absolute size of the
system under study, and how scale affects the nature of force interactions.
8 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

In Fig. 1.1(b) we showed force interaction by direct connection between a

spring and a weight. On a finer (atomic) scale, we would see that there is no “direct
connection,” but rather, interaction between the electron fields of neighboring
atoms, more like the “at a distance” interaction of Fig. 1.1(a). On this fine scale,
we would see that the contact force is the vector sum of all the atomic interaction
forces, each of which varies continually due to atomic thermal motion.
In Fig. 1.3, we considered forces acting “at a point.” While mathematically
acceptable, this concept is physically only approximate in that all interactions
involve a finite area. The point approximation grows poorer as the size of the
interaction area approaches the size of the system under study.
In later sections we shall consider the matter within a solid to be continuously
distributed. This is an approximation which is valid only when the solid is large
compared to atomic dimensions. By the same reasoning, although we see our
universe as composed of discrete stars, etc., studies on a cosmic scale may well
consider the matter of the universe to be uniformly distributed.
Whenever we model a physical system for study, we must select a “scale” which
is fine enough to provide critical results, yet as coarse as possible to minimize
analytical effort.

1.5 THE MOMENT OF A FORCE

In Fig. 1.5 let F be a force vector applied at P and let O be a fixed point in space.
The moment or torque of F about the point O is defined as the vector cross product
r ¥ F, where r is the displacement vector from O to P.

Fig. 1.5 The moment of a force F about a point O is r ¥ F

The moment itself is a vector quantity. Its direction is perpendicular to the

plane determined by OP and F. The sense is fixed by the right-hand rule: When
the fingers of the right hand curl in the direction that F tends to turn about O, the
right thumb points in the direction of the moment vector. An alternate method of
fixing the sense is to imagine a right-handed screw at O pointing perpendicular to
the plane AOB. The direction in which this screw advances when turned by F is the
direction of the moment r ¥ F.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 9

Recall from calculus that the magnitude of the cross product r ¥ F is given by
Fr sin f
where F and r are the magnitudes of the vectors F and r and f is the angle
between r and F shown in Fig. 1.6. The magnitude of the moment is therefore
the area of the parallelogram having r and F as sides. Note that the magnitude is
independent of the position of P along AB; that is, the moment of a force about
a given point is invariant under the operation of sliding the force along its line
of action. In simplest form the magnitude of the moment is h|F|, where h is the
length of the perpendicular dropped from O to AB and |F| is the magnitude of the
force vector F. Commonly used units for moments are the meter-newton and foot-
pound.

Fig. 1.6 Magnitude of cross product r ¥ F is the area of parallelogram

If we consider an idealized two-dimensional structure shown in Fig. 1.7, the

moment of the force F about the point O is
M = r ¥ F = kh|F|
where k is the unit vector in the z direction perpendicular to the plane of x and y.
Alternatively, if we write out the vectors r and F in component form, we have
M = (xi + yj) ¥ (Fxi + Fy j)
= k(xFy – yFx)

Fig. 1.7 Moment about O

10 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

We see that the magnitude of the moment is given by the algebraic sum of the
magnitudes of the moments of the components about O. Very often it is convenient,
especially in two-dimensional problems, to work with the moments of components.
It should be emphasized that what we have just defined is the moment of a force
about a point. The direction of the axis of the moment is perpendicular to the plane
containing the force and the point. If another line OQ in Fig. 1.5 passes through O,
the component of r ¥ F along OQ is called the moment of F about the line or axis
OQ. The magnitude of this component along the line OQ is the projection of the
vector M along OQ. This is given by the dot product of M and a unit vector in the
direction of OQ. The magnitude of this component is |r ¥ F| cos a or h|F| cos a.

Example 1.1 As an example of the determination of the moment about a line,

let us consider Fig. 1.8 and determine the moment M about the
shaft axis OO¢ due to the force P applied to the crank handle as shown.
∑ Remember that moment is usually about a point. Here that point could be A.
Find the moment of P about A using: rAB ¥ P where B is the point on which
the force is applied.
∑ Then, in order to get the moment about an axis, find the component of the
moment vector parallel to the axis. Thus, (rAB ¥ P) . I gives the required
component.

Fig. 1.8 Example 1.1

To find the moment about OO¢ we need first the moment about the point A and
then its component in the direction of OO¢. For the set of coordinate axes shown
this component is in the x direction. The component of the moment about the line
OO¢ is therefore
M = i • [r ¥ F]
= i • [(50i – 200k) ¥ P (cos 50° cos 45° i + cos 50° sin 45° j + sin 50° k)]
= 200P cos 50° sin 45° (a)
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 11

The result (a) is equal to the “lever arm” between OO¢ and the point of
application of P multiplied by the component of P normal to the plane passing
through OO¢ and the point of application of P.
When several forces F1, F2,..., Fn, act, their total moment or torque about a fixed
point O is defined as the sum
r1 ¥ F1 + r2 ¥ F2 + ... + rn ¥ Fn = Â rj ¥ Fj (1.1)
j
where the rj are displacement vectors from O to points on the lines of action of
the Fj. A particularly interesting case occurs when there are two equal and
parallel forces F1 and F2 which have opposite sense, as shown in Fig. 1.9. Such
a configuration of forces is called a couple. Let us determine the sum of the
moments of F1 and F2 about O. The operation is indicated schematically in Fig. 1.9.
Denoting the total moment by M, we have
M = r1 ¥ F1 + r2 ¥ F2
= (r2 + a) ¥ F1 + r2 ¥ F2
= r2 ¥ (F1 + F2) + a ¥ F1 (1.2)
where r1 and r2 are vectors to arbitrary points on the lines of action of F1 and F2.

Fig. 1.9 The moment of a couple about the point O

Now F1 and F2 are of equal magnitude and opposite sense and therefore cancel
when added at the same point. The result of (1.2) is then simply
M = a ¥ F1 (1.3)
where a is a displacement vector going from an arbitrary point on F2 to an arbitrary
point on F1. The important thing about this result is that it is independent of the
location of O: The moment of a couple is the same about all points in space. A
couple may be characterized by a moment vector without specification of the
moment center O as indicated in Fig. 1.10. The magnitude of the moment is most
simply computed as h|F|, where h is the perpendicular distance between the vectors
F and –F. It is often convenient to distinguish between vectors representing the
moments of couples and vectors representing forces by using some notational
device. We shall use the encircling arrow shown in Fig. 1.10 to indicate the moment
of a couple. When sketching a plane figure acted on by a couple whose axis is
perpendicular to that plane, the notation of Fig. 1.11 is commonly used.
12 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Fig. 1.10 A couple is represented by a moment vector

Fig. 1.11 Representation of a couple in a plane sketch

1.6 CONDITIONS FOR EQUILIBRIUM

According to Newton’s law of motion, a particle has no acceleration if the resultant

force acting on it is zero. We say that such a particle is in equilibrium. Although
zero acceleration implies only constant velocity, the case that we deal with most
frequently is that of zero velocity. The study of forces in systems at rest is called
statics. If several forces F1, F2,..., Fn act on a particle, the necessary and sufficient
condition for the particle to be in equilibrium is
F1 + F2 + ... + Fn = Â Fj = 0 (1.4)
j
Under these circumstances we say that the forces are balanced or are in equilibrium.

One of the striking features of newtonian mechanics is that the postulates are
made in terms of the simplest bodies, namely, particles, and then logical deduction
is used to extend the theory to collections of particles and to solids and fluids. As an
example of this extension process we next outline how the concept of equilibrium
is extended from a single particle to a general collection of particles.
Consider an isolated system of particles as indicated in Fig. 1.12. We say
that such a system is in equilibrium if every one of its constituent particles is in
equilibrium. Now the forces acting on each particle are of two kinds, external
and internal. The internal forces represent interactions with other particles in the
system. Because of our fundamental postulate about the nature of force interactions,
we can represent these internal interactions by equal and opposite vectors having
the same line of action.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 13

If each particle in Fig. 1.12 is in

equilibrium, the resultant force on it
is zero. Now let us consider all the
forces in Fig. 1.12 as a single set of
vectors. The vector sum of all the
forces is clearly zero since the vector
sum of each cluster around a particle
must separately be zero. In the process
of adding all vectors, however, we find
that the internal forces occur in self-
canceling pairs, and thus we are left
with the result that if a set of particles Fig. 1.12 An isolated system of particles
showing external and internal forces
is in equilibrium the vector sum of the
external forces must be zero i.e.,
F + F + ... + F = Â F = 0
1 2 n j (1.5)
j
Let us further consider the total moment of all the forces in Fig. 1.12 about an
arbitrary point O. The total moment must be zero since the vector sum of forces
acting on each particle is separately zero. In the process of forming the total moment
of all the vectors, however, we find that the internal forces occur in self-canceling
pairs having the same line of action and hence give no contribution to the total
moment. We are left with the result that if a set of particles is in equilibrium the total
moment of all the external forces about an arbitrary point O must be zero, i.e.,
r1 ¥ F1 + r2 ¥ F2 + ... + rn ¥ Fn = Â rj ¥ Fj = 0 (1.6)
j
where rj stands for a position vector extending from O to an arbitrary point on the
line of action of the external force Fj.
The conditions (1.5) and (1.6) are necessary conditions for equilibrium; i.e., if
the system is in equilibrium, then (1.5) and (1.6) must be satisfied. This is the way
in which we shall employ these conditions in this book. We shall know that our
system is in equilibrium (usually from the fact that the system is at rest), and we
shall use (1.5) and (1.6) to obtain information about the forces.
It is interesting, however, to consider
the converse problem. Suppose we know
that the external forces acting on a system
of particles satisfy both (1.5) and (1.6).
Can we then conclude that every one of
the constituent particles is in equilibrium?
The answer is, in general, no.
For example, in Fig. 1.13 a system of
two particles is shown acted upon by an
equilibrium set of external forces F and
–F. The internal forces Fi and –Fi are Fig. 1.13 Illustration of a system which
also an equilibrium set, but the particles is not in equilibrium even
will be in equilibrium only when F = Fi. though the external forces
If, instead of two particles, we consider balance
14 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

a rubber band as our system in Fig. 1.13, we can easily perform the indicated
experiment. If equal and opposite forces are applied to the ends of an unstretched
rubber band, it does not remain in equilibrium. The ends of the band begin to
accelerate away from one another, and the band begins to stretch.
This example suggests that if the system of particles was perfectly rigid so that
no pair of particles could separate, the internal forces might automatically adjust
themselves so as to provide internal equilibrium whenever the external forces make
up an equilibrium set. This can in fact be proved.2 A rigorous proof requires a careful
analysis of the possible motions of a rigid body. We shall not go into the details here
but shall simply state the final result: The necessary and sufficient conditions for a
perfectly rigid body to be in equilibrium are that the vector sum of all the external
forces should be zero and that the sum of the moments of all the external forces
about an arbitrary point together with any external applied moments should be zero.
A necessary and sufficient condition for the equilibrium of a deformable system
is that the sets of external forces which act on the system and on every possible
subsystem isolated out of the original system should all be sets of forces which
satisfy both (1.5) and (1.6).
It is important to emphasize that our two previous statements of equilibrium
for perfectly rigid bodies and deformable systems are the essence of the theory
of equilibrium. We will be using the concepts embodied in these statements con-
tinually throughout this book. As we mentioned in the introduction, our emphasis
will be on the rational applications of the concepts. We will first treat systems of
particles or engineering structural members which are relatively rigid so that if our
system is in equilibrium, Eqs (1.5) and (1.6) are valid. Later, in discussing deform-
able systems we will find that the equations of equilibrium for infinitesimal sub-
systems will be differential equations. Of course, on a sufficiently fine scale, the
microscopic particles which constitute a system are generally not in equilibrium,
even though the assembly of particles is in a state of macroscopic equilibrium.
This is the case in any “static” piece of metal, liquid, gas, etc. The study of effects
produced by the nonequilibrium particles is found in texts on statistical mechanics.
The two vector equations (1.5) and (1.6) are equivalent to six scalar equations so
that in general we can solve for six scalar unknowns in each set of external forces.
There are several simple special cases which deserve explicit mention.
Two-force Member In Fig. 1.14 a system is in equilibrium under the action of only two
external forces applied at A and B. The two forces cannot have random orientation,
as shown in Fig. 1.14(a), but must be directed along AB. This is proved by using
(1.6) and taking moments about A and B. In order for the moment about A to vanish,
the line of action of FB must pass through A. Similarly, the line of action of FA must
pass through B. We must also have FA = –FB in order for (1.5) to be satisfied.

Three-force Member In Fig. 1.15 a system is in equilibrium under the action of only
three external forces applied at A, B, and C. The three forces cannot have random
orientation, as shown in Fig. 1.15(a). They must all lie in the plane ABC if the total

2 See, for example, J.L. Synge and B.A. Griffith, “Principles of Mechanics,” 3rd ed., p. 60,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1959.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 15

moment about each of the points A, B, and C is to vanish. Furthermore, they must
all intersect at a common point O, otherwise the total moment about the intersection
of any two of the lines of action could not vanish. This result that the three forces
must intersect at a common point is a useful one to keep in mind. An interesting
exercise in vector analysis is to prove the above statements. A limiting case occurs
when point O moves off at great distance from A, B, and C, in which case the forces
FA, FB, and FC become parallel coplanar forces.

Fig. 1.14 The forces FA and FB must be equal and opposite and directed along AB if the
system is in equilibrium

Fig. 1.15 The forces FA, FB and FC must be coplanar and intersect at a common point O if
the system is in equilibrium

General Coplanar Force System In Fig. 1.16 the external forces acting on a system in
equilibrium all lie in the plane of the sketch. In this case three of the six general
scalar equations of equilibrium are immediately satisfied: there are no force
components perpendicular to the plane, and if moments are taken about a point
O lying in the plane, the only moment components will be perpendicular to the
plane. This leaves only three independent scalar conditions of equilibrium for two-
dimensional problems. Taking an arbitrary point O in the plane and an arbitrary
orientation of the xy axes in the plane, the condition for the vector sum of the
external forces to vanish is simply
 Fj =  (Fjxi + Fjyj) = 0
j j
or each component of the resultant force vector must vanish:
 Fjx = 0
j
(1.7)
 Fjy = 0
j
16 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Fig. 1.16 Equilibrium conditions for a coplanar force system

The condition that the total moment about O should vanish may be written
 rj ¥ Fj =  (xji + yjj) ×(Fjxi + Fjy j)
j j
(1.8)
= k  (xjFjy – yjFjx) = 0
j

where xj and yj are the coordinates of a point on the line of action of Fj, and Fjx and
Fjy are the x and y components of Fj. See Prob. 1.7 for alternate formulations of the
conditions for equilibrium for coplanar forces.

1.7 ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS

Many practical engineering problems involve structures or machines in equilibrium.
Certain forces, usually loads, are specified, and it is necessary to determine the
reactions which come into play to balance the loads.
The general method of analysis that is followed throughout this book involves
the preliminary steps:
1. Selection of system
2. Idealization of system characteristics
These are followed by an analysis based on the principles of mechanics, which
includes the following steps:
1. Study of forces and equilibrium requirements
2. Study of deformation and conditions of geometric fit
3. Applications of force-deformation relations
In some systems it is possible to determine all the forces involved by using only
the equilibrium requirements without regard to the deformations. Such systems
are called statically determinate. In this chapter we restrict ourselves to statically
determinate systems. Our method of analysis then involves selection of appropriate
systems, idealization of their characteristics, study of the forces, and the use of
the equilibrium conditions to solve for the unknown forces in terms of the known
forces.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 17

The conditions of equilibrium (1.5) and (1.6) provide us with relations that must
be satisfied by the external forces acting on an isolated system in equilibrium. The
difficulty in applying these to practical cases usually centers around the process
of isolation itself. This is the key step upon which everything else depends. There
is the difficulty of deciding what system or subsystem to isolate, and there is the
difficulty of ensuring that a true isolation has been accomplished and that all
external forces have been accounted for.
In simple cases it is obvious what system should be isolated; usually a single
isolation suffices to solve the problem. In complex analyses many different isola-
tions may be required, and an intricate pattern of partial results may have to be
assembled before the problem can be completely solved.
The best way to perform an isolation is to draw a reasonably careful sketch of
the periphery of the isolated subsystem and then to show all external forces acting.
A systematic way of doing this is to recall that forces either (1) act from a distance
or (2) act through direct contact and to account first for any possible forces, such
as gravity, which can act from afar. Then go carefully around the entire periphery,
indicating all forces which make direct contact with the system. The sketch of the
isolated system and all the external forces acting on it is often called a free-body
diagram. The reader is strongly urged to adopt the habit of attempting to draw clear
and complete free-body diagrams for every mechanics problem which he undertakes
to solve. We use the word “attempt” because we recognize that this is indeed the
most difficult and most important step!
In constructing a free-body diagram for part of an engineering system, it is often
useful to make simplifying assumptions or idealizations concerning the nature
of the forces which act. For example, if a relatively light column carries a large
load, we can obtain a useful engineering estimate of the forces in the column by
neglecting the weight of the column. In this case the idealization is convenient but
not absolutely necessary, because we can, if required, include the weight in our
analysis. In other cases, our ignorance of the actual forces is such that we cannot
obtain quantitative estimates without making idealizing assumptions.
Common idealizations include the perfectly rigid body and the inextensible but
perfectly flexible string or cable. In Table 1.2 the force-transmitting properties of
several mechanical elements are shown.
We will discuss the case of friction which is shown in case (b) of Table 1.2 in the
next section.
In case (f) of Table 1.2 we have shown an ideal clamped support which might,
for example, occur at the end of a cantilever beam shown in Fig. 1.17.
If we draw a free-body diagram of the beam as shown in Fig. 1.17(b), the effect
of the wall support on the beam is idealized as a net force acting at the beam end
passing through a point O. From the force equilibrium requirement this force is
equal to F; further, for moment equilibrium there must be a moment acting at the
support. Figure 1.17(b) is equivalent to case (f) in Table 1.2. As can be seen, we
have considerably idealized the actual support conditions at the wall as far as the
details of the interaction between the wall and the beam are concerned. However,
for many purposes this simplification is sufficiently correct.
18 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Table 1.2 Force-transmitting properties of some idealized mechanical elements

(a) A frictionless surface can exert only a

normal contact force N.

(b) When there is friction the surface can

exert a tangential force F as well as a
normal force N. The force F assumes any
value necessary to prevent motion up to a
maximum value Fs = fs N, where fs, is the
coefficient of friction.

(c) A frictionless pinned joint transmits a force

F which passes through the pin. No torque
about the pin is transmitted.

(d) A frictionless bearing exerts a force F on

the shaft, which passes through the center
of the shaft. No torque about the shaft is
transmitted.

(e) A weightless flexible string or cable

transmits force along its length. Each
element is subjected to equal and
opposite tensile forces F along the string.
Compressive forces cannot be sustained.
If the string passes over a frictionless peg
or pulley, the direction of the force in the
string is altered but its magnitude remains
constant.

(f) An ideal clamped support provides

complete restraint against longitudinal or
transverse motion and against rotation. It
can supply force reactions H and V and a
moment reaction M.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 19

Fig. 1.17 The forces at an ideal clamped support are equivalent to a force and moment

1.8 FRICTION

One of the important forces in mechanics is that due to friction. Friction forces are
set up whenever a tangential force is applied to a body pressed normally against the
surface of another. Thus, in Fig. 1.18(a), if a normal force P presses body A against
the surface of B, and a tangential force T is also applied to body A, then a friction
force F will be generated at the interface tending to prevent movement under the
action of T. This is indicated in the free-body diagrams in Fig. 1.18(b) and (c).

Fig. 1.18 (a) Body A pressed against B; (b) free-body diagram of body A; (c) free-body diagram
of body B

The friction force arises from the interaction of the surface layers of bodies A and
B. This interaction will, in general, be made up of a number of processes, including,
in particular, the adhesion of surface atoms. A detailed description of friction
phenomena is very complicated, and attempts to obtain a complete understanding
of friction is a very active area of research in physics and applied mechanics.3 The
3
See, for example, “Friction, Selected Reprints,” American Institute of Physics, New
York, 1964, and J. J. O’Connor and J. Boyd (eds.), “Standard Handbook of Lubrication
Engineering,” Chaps. 1, 2, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1968.
20 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

outline given below is only an approximate description of the behavior of the total
friction force between two surfaces.
The main properties of the friction force F acting on A in Fig. 1.18(b) are:
1. If there is no relative motion between A and B, then the friction force F is
exactly equal and opposite to the applied tangential force T. This condition
can be maintained for any magnitude of T between zero and a certain limiting
value Fs, called the static friction force. If T is greater than Fs, sliding will
occur.
2. If body A slides on body B, then the friction force F acting on body A will
have a direction opposite to the velocity of A relative to B, and its magnitude
will be Fk, called the kinetic friction force.
It has been found that for a given pair of surfaces the forces Fs and Fk are
proportional to the normal force N. We can thus introduce two constants of
proportionality fs and fk, which are called the static and kinetic coefficients of
friction, according to the equations
Fs = fs N
(1.9)
Fk = fk N
These coefficients are intrinsic properties of the interface between the materials A
and B, being determined by the materials A and B and by the state of lubrication or
contamination at the interface. Further, it has been found that:
1. Both coefficients of friction are nearly independent of the area of the
interface. In particular, if body A in Fig. 1.18 were tipped up so that
only an edge or a corner was in contact with B, we should still find
approximately the same coefficients of friction. Note that under these
circumstances the tangential and normal directions are determined only
by the surface of B.
2. Both coefficients are nearly independent of the roughnesses of the two
surfaces, although this is a conclusion which many people find hard to
accept.
3. The static coefficient fs is nearly independent of the time of contact of the
surfaces at rest. Similarly, the kinetic coefficient fk is nearly independent
of the relative velocity of the two surfaces. Figure 1.19 shows a schematic
representation of typical static-friction—time and kinetic-friction—velocity
plots.

Fig. 1.19 Schematic representation of the variation of friction coefficients

 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 21

The effect of lubrication and sliding velocity on the friction coefficient for steel
on steel surfaces is shown in Fig. 1.20. The top curve is for unlubricated surfaces
and the bottom curve is for surfaces well lubricated by a fatty soap. The curves
in between represent steel surfaces which are imperfectly lubricated. In all cases,
changing the sliding velocity by a factor of 10 changes the friction by no more than
about 10 percent.

Fig. 1.20 Variation of kinetic friction coefficient with sliding velocity

Figure 1.20 also shows that in the case of unlubricated or poorly lubricated
surfaces, the friction goes down as the sliding speed goes up (a negative charac-
teristic). This can lead to frictional oscillations, often called stick-slip, and this
phenomenon is responsible for many of the noises of our environment, including
the creaking of doors, the squeaking of brakes, and the music of violins.
Since the difference between static and kinetic friction values is not great, and
the effects of the time of stick and sliding velocity are relatively small, it has
proved possible to give friction-coefficient values which are applicable to almost
all sliding conditions. A schematic representation of typical friction coefficients
is given in Fig. 1.21 for nonmetal on nonmetal or nonmetal on metal, such as
leather on wood, or nylon on steel. The extent of the shading shows the probable
range of values.
It can be seen that for any state of lubrication, there is a range of about a factor
of 2 between the maximum and minimum friction values that might be encountered.
In most mechanics calculations, this uncertainty in friction is the factor which limits
the overall accuracy of the calculation, since other parameters are generally known
within a few percent.
Similar curves can be drawn for similar and dissimilar metals in contact.4
Some further typical values of friction coefficients are shown in Table 1.3 in
practical applications care must be taken in determining or estimating the friction
coefficient.
4 E. Rabinowicz, Surface Energy Approach to Friction and Wear, Prod. Eng., March 15,
1965, p. 95.
22 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Fig. 1.21 General-purpose fric on chart

Table 1.3 Coefficients of friction

Materials Surface conditions fs fk
Metals on metals (e.g., Carefully cleaned 0.4–1.0 0.3–1.0
steel on steel, copper Unlubricated, but not
on aluminum) cleaned 0.2–0.4 0.15–0.3
Well lubricated 0.05–0.12 0.05–0.12
Nonmetals on Unlubricated 0.4–0.9 0.3–0.8
nonmetals (e.g., Well lubricated 0.1–0.2 0.1–0.15
leather on wood,
rubber on concrete)
Metals on nonmetals Unlubricated 0.4–0.6 0.3–0.5
Well lubricated 0.05–0.12 0.05–0.12
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 23

1.9 EXAMPLES

To illustrate the concepts of analysis discussed above, we now consider several

examples. In these examples we shall focus attention on the problem of selecting a
system and idealizing its characteristics, as well as on the method of analyzing the
idealized system.

Example 1.2 Let us first consider a highly idealized problem shown

in Fig. 1.22(a) to illustrate the construction of free-
body diagrams and the concept of impending motion for frictional forces.
We are asked to find the range of values of W which will hold the block of
weight Wo = 500 N in equilibrium on the inclined plane if the coefficient of
static friction is fs = 0.5. We will assume that the cable is weightless, that
the pulley is frictionless, and that the blocks can be considered as particles.
∑ There are three parts to the system that we need to analyze for force relationships,
namely, the weight on the incline, the cable and the hanging weight.
∑ Draw the free-body diagram of each of these parts. There are two ways by
which motion could be impending—down the incline and up the incline. The
direction of the frictional force that corresponds to the impending motion
should be properly represented.
∑ Each of these cases will give a value for W. These are the two limiting cases
and, therefore, the value of W must lie between these two values.
In Fig. 1.22(b) we show a free-body diagram of the block with motion impending
down the plane so that the frictional force F is shown opposite to the direction of
motion (see Fig. 1.18(b)). In Fig. 1.22(c) and (d) are shown the free-body diagrams
of the weight W and the flexible weightless cable.

Fig. 1.22 Example 1.2

24 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

If we use the force-equilibrium equations (1.7) and the orientation of the

coordinate axes as shown in Fig. 1.22(b), we have
SFx = 0 W + F – W0 sin a = 0 (a)
SFy = 0 N – W0 cos a = 0 (b)
For motion about to start down the plane we have
F = fsN (c)
If we now solve for the unknown value of W from (a), (b), and (c), we find
W
= sin a – fs cos a (d)
W0
From (d), therefore, we find, upon substituting for the numerical values,
È3 Ê 1ˆ Ê 4ˆ ˘
W = 500 Í - Á ˜ Á ˜ ˙ = 100 N (e)
Î5 Ë 2¯ Ë 5¯ ˚
For values of W less than 100 N, the weight Wo will no longer be in equilibrium
and will slide down the inclined plane.
For values of W greater than 100 N, the weight Wo will be in equilibrium until
the value of W is reached such that the weight is about to move up the plane. For
this situation, the free-body diagram of Fig. 1.22(b) again holds except that now the
frictional force F is pointed in the opposite direction. The weight W for motion of
the block up the plane is then given by (d) with the sign of fs reversed
W
= sin a + fs cos a (f)
W0
Evaluation of W from ( f ) gives
W = 500 N
For values of W greater than 500 N, the block will no longer be in equilibrium
and will move up the inclined plane.
Therefore the range of values of W for equilibrium of the block is 100 N W
500 N.

Example 1.3 The simple triangular frame shown in Fig. 1.23(a) is used to
support a small chain hoist. We are asked to predict the forces
acting on the wall at B and C when the chain hoist is supporting its rated capacity
of 20 kN. The rod BD is pinned at its ends. The member CD is pinned at D and
secured with four bolts at C.
∑ Please note that a free body need not be rigid!!! First isolate the frame from
the wall support and represent appropriate wall reactions.
∑ If a member is a pinned straight member with forces acting only at the ends,
then the member is an axial member and the forces at the pin are along the
axis of the member and opposite in direction. Use this fact to reduce the
number of reactions at the support B.
∑ Even with this reduction, the number of unknowns are 4, with two support
forces at C and a moment C apart from the support force at B. So, cannot be
determined from equilibrium of the system alone.
In Fig. 1.23(b) a first attack is made by drawing an isolated free-body diagram
of the frame. Note carefully that the system we have isolated is not, by itself, rigid;
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 25

i.e., by itself it will collapse. This isolation is perfectly proper because, in fact, the
external forces (FB, FC, and MC) are just sufficient to prevent collapse. We have
at this stage neglected the weight of the frame and of the chain hoist. With this
idealization the only force and moment interactions occur at B, C, and D. At D we
show the vertical load of 20 kN. At B there is a pinned joint. The force interaction
there could be a force vector in all three dimensions plus an equally general moment
vector. In this case, however, since the frame lies in a single plane and the load also
is in this plane, it is reasonable to expect that all forces of any consequence will also
lie in this plane. We have accordingly shown FB as lying in the plane of the frame.

Fig. 1.23 Example 1.3

The orientation within the plane is unknown. A couple with moment vector
perpendicular to this plane could be transmitted if there were friction forces around
the pin. We have, however, made the idealization that this moment can be neglected
on the basis of the following consideration: if there are frictional forces acting at the
periphery of the pin, they will produce a frictional moment equal to the frictional
force (fN) times the pin radius. When a force and a moment act at the same point
in this manner, their effect is equal to that due to a single force, displaced sideways
(Prob. 1.10). For this system the necessary sideways displacement is simply the
friction coefficient times the pin radius. Therefore, for a typical friction coefficient
26 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

1
of 3 , the greatest effect of friction at pin B would be to displace FB sideways 13 of
the pin radius. In this example, such a small displacement appears insignificant to
the general geometry, and is neglected.
Coming next to point C, where bar CD is joined to the wall by four bolts,
a similar argument leads us to the conclusion that a force FC and a moment
component MC in the plane of the frame could be acting on the frame. Here we
are not willing to neglect the moment since a bolted joint could possibly transmit
moments of considerable size in comparison with a pinned joint.
Our free-body diagram in Fig. 1.23(b) then contains two unknown force vectors
(each with two components) and one unknown moment component, due to forces
all lying in one plane. According to (1.7) and (1.8), three independent equilibrium
conditions are available for a coplanar system. Since we have five unknown
components, we cannot obtain a complete solution from Fig. 1.23(b) alone.
In an attempt to get additional relations we must isolate subsystems. We show in
Fig. 1.23(c) a free-body diagram of bar BD. Since both ends are pinned and we are
neglecting the weight of the bar itself, we can say that BD is a two-force member,
and hence, as shown in Fig. 1.14, the forces FB and FD must be equal and opposite
vectors along BD.
Next, in Fig. 1.23(d) we show a free-body diagram of bar CD. At D we now can
show the orientation of the interaction with BD since it must be equal and opposite
to the force FD in Fig. 1.23(c). The direction of FC still remains unknown. Counting
unknowns in Fig. 1.23(d), we have the two components of FC and the magnitudes of
MC and FD, or a total of four scalar unknowns. Again we cannot obtain a complete
solution from the three independent conditions of equilibrium. This time we are up
against a stone wall. Having isolated each bar separately as well as the combination
of both bars together, we have exhausted all possibilities. We must conclude that
the conditions of equilibrium alone are insufficient to analyze our model. This is, in
fact, the case. The frame model of Fig. 1.23(b) is statically indeterminate.
We then have two courses open to us (besides giving up in despair). We can
consider a more highly idealized model which is statically determinate, or we can
develop a theory for handling statically indeterminate structures. In this book we
shall actually do both. In the following paragraphs we shall discuss a simplified
model. In subsequent chapters we shall develop a theory which will permit us to
return to this problem again in Chapter 8 and to estimate the errors committed in
employing the simpler model.
The most ambiguous part of the model of Fig. 1.23 was the moment MC at the
bolted joint. This moment may be quite small if the bolts are loosely fitted and are
not tightened up. This consideration leads us to adopt the simplified model of Fig.
1.24(a) where we have idealized the bolted joint into a pinned joint. In the free-body
diagram of Fig. 1.24(b) there will be forces FB and FC at the wall-support points,
but no moments. The directions of FB and FC are unknown in Fig. 1.24(b). Taking
advantage of our previous experience with Fig. 1.23, we show a free-body diagram
of bar BD in Fig. 1.24(c). Since this is a two-force member, FB must be along the
line BD. Returning to the entire frame in Fig. 1.24(d) with this information, we con-
clude that since there are only three forces acting on the isolated free body and since
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 27

FB and the load intersect at D, then FC must also be collinear with D as shown. We
could draw the same conclusion by noting that bar CD is a three-force member. It

Fig. 1.24 Idealized model of system of Fig. 1.23

now remains only to find the magnitudes of FB and FC. These can be determined
in several ways by applying the equilibrium requirements of (1.7) and (1.8). For
example, if we require that the total moment about B should be zero, we have
SMB = –3j ¥ FC + 3i ¥ (–20j) = 0 (a)
where i and j are unit vectors in the x and y directions. Expressing FC as FCi, where
FC is the scalar magnitude of FC, we easily find from (a)
FC = 20 kN (b)
Summing vertical force components yields
SFy = 0 = FB sin 45º – 20 (c)
or
FB = 28.28 kN (d)
Thus we have determined the forces acting on the isolated frame in Fig. 1.24(b).
The forces acting on the wall supports from the frame are equal and oppositely
directed.
28 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Our analysis has been based on several assumptions and idealizations. We

have neglected the weight of the frame and the hoist. We have neglected frictional
moments at pinned joints, and we have made the additional idealization, in going
from Fig. 1.23(a) to Fig. 1.24(a), that the bolted joint could be treated as a pinned
joint. It will take us until Chapter 8 before we can fully assess the significance of
these simplifying assumptions. There we shall see that the results obtained above
do actually constitute a very useful engineering approximation.

Example 1.4 A pinned truss is shown in equilibrium in Fig. 1.25. It is

a plane structure consisting of relatively rigid links connected by
pinned joints. It carries loads at E and F as shown; it is pinned to a rigid foundation
at A and is supported on a roller support at B. The primary problem is to determine
the forces at A and B due to the loads at E and F. A secondary problem is to
determine the forces in the individual links of the truss.
∑ The orientation of the hinged support at A does not matter in the number of
support forces at A to be considered while drawing the free body of the truss
system as a whole.
∑ Three external support reactions, three equilibrium equations for the planar
truss system and the support reactions are determinable.
∑ For each link, if cut as shown in Fig. 1.27, internal forces along the axis of
the member. There are 6 pins A, B, ..., F for which we can draw the free-body
diagram and write the equilibrium equations to solve for the link forces.
∑ It is better to start the above with a pin in which least number of unknowns
have to be found out. For example, A and B.

Fig. 1.25 Example 1.4

To obtain the reactions at A and B we isolate the entire truss in the free-body
diagram of Fig. 1.26. We have made the idealization that the weight of the truss can
be neglected. Tracing the periphery of the isolated system, we have included the loads
at E and F. At B we have idealized the roller support by showing a vertical reaction
FB. Our rationalization is that if the support has been designed to permit horizontal
motion it should not provide much horizontal resisting force. At the pinned joint of A
we have shown a reaction FA which passes through the pin. Again we have made an
idealization by neglecting the possibility of a frictional moment around the pin. Our
rationalization is that even if there is some friction the smallness of the pin implies
that the effect of the friction moment about the center of the pin will remain small.
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 29

Fig. 1.26 Free-body diagram of truss of Fig. 1.25

Since the truss is a planar system in equilibrium, the external forces shown in
Fig. 1.26 must satisfy (1.7) and (1.8). We note that FA (magnitude and direction
unknown) and FB (magnitude unknown) represent three unknown scalar quantities,
and thus the three independent conditions for equilibrium of coplanar forces
are sufficient to determine FA and FB. Taking A as our moment center, we have,
according to (1.8),
SMA = 4FB – 3(50) – 2(75) = 0 (a)
fi FB = 75 kN
Letting FA = iAx + jAy , where i and j are unit vectors in the x and y directions,
we next apply (1.7) to get
SFx = Ax = 0
SFy = Ay+ 75 – 75 – 50 = 0 (b)
Ay = 50 kN
Thus the reactions at A and B are both vertically upward, with magnitude of 50
and 75 kN, respectively.
This solution for the reactions makes no use of the particular design of the truss
within the isolated system of Fig. 1.26. All that is required is that the truss be in
equilibrium. The designer of the truss, however, is interested in how the loads
are transmitted by the various members so that he can be sure that each member
is strong enough. To obtain this kind of information we must consider free-body
diagrams of subassemblies within the truss. As an illustration we show in Fig. 1.27
how the forces in members AC and AD can be determined. In Fig. 1.27(a) and (b)
free-body diagrams of the bars AC and AD show that (if the weights of the bars
and the frictional moments around the pin joints are neglected) they are two-force
members, and hence that FAC and FAD must be directed along the links. In Fig. 1.27(c)
a free-body diagram of the joint at A shows these same forces acting on the pin.
Note that the force on the pin by the bar is equal and opposite to the force on the
bar by the pin according to Newton’s third law. Since the pin is in equilibrium, we
have, according to (1.7),
1
FAD – FAC = 0
2
30 An Introduction to the Mechanics of Solids

Fig. 1.27 Isolations of (a) bar AC, (b) bar AD, and (c) pin A

1
FAC = 0
50 – (c)
2
from which we find FAC = 70.71 kN and FAD = 50 kN. The force FAC tends to shorten
the bar AC and is called a compressive force; the force FAD tends to extend the bar
AD and is called a tensile force.

Example 1.5 Figure 1.28 shows a 10 kN load held in equilibrium by a

2 m derrick boom ABC supported by the guy wires BD and BE and
a ball-and-socket joint at C. The points C, D, and E all lie in the xy plane as shown.
It is desired to determine the reactions at C, D, and E due to the 10 kN load at A.
∑ First exercise is to draw the free-body diagram detaching the assembly from
the supports at C, D and E.
∑ The directions of the guy wire forces are along the guy wire and, therefore,
the direction is known. Write those forces as appropriate vectors.
∑ It is easy to eliminate the reactions at C by taking moments about C of all the
forces. The two guy forces and the load at A will be involved in this. This will
help solve the guy wire forces.
∑ Then the force equilibrium equations involving the three directions will fetch
the three reactions at C.

Fig. 1.28 Example 1.5. Derrick boom ABC is supported by ball-and-socket joint at C and guy
wires at D and E
 Fundamental Principles of Mechanics 31

The sketch of Fig. 1.28 can be used to represent a free-body diagram of the
boom and guy wires if we indicate the external forces acting at A, C, D, and E. We
idealize the situation by neglecting the weight of the boom and guy wires. At C we
show a force FC acting on the ball joint with unknown orientation; we neglect the
possibility of a frictional moment. At D and E we make use of the property of an
ideally flexible cable given in Table 1.2 to show FD and FE acting on the wires along
the directions BD and BE. Thus, if FD and FE are the magnitudes of these forces
and i, j, and k represent unit vectors in the x, y, and z directions, we may write
Ê3 4 ˆ
FD = FD Á i - k ˜
Ë5 5 ¯
(a)
Ê 4 2 4 ˆ
FE = FE Á - i + j - k ˜
Ë 6 6 6 ¯
Since the derrick is in equilibrium, the forces in Fig. 1.28 must satisfy (1.5) and
(1.6). A convenient method of application is to take C as a moment center for (1.6).
This has the advantage of eliminating the three components of FC.
SMC = CA ¥ (10 j) + CB ¥ FD + CB ¥ FE = 0 (b)
Using the determinant representation illustrated in Prob. 1.4 at the end of this
chapter, the vector cross products in (b) can be expanded as follows:
i j k i j k i j k
Ê 1 ˆ Ê 1 ˆ +F 0 1 1
+ FE
0 1 1
=0
0 2Á ˜ 2Á ˜ D
Ë 2¯ Ë 2¯ 1 1 2 1 2
0 - - -
0 -10 0 2 2 3 3 3

Ê 1 ˆ Ê 1 2 ˆ Ê 1 ˆ
ÁË 14, 142 - FD - FE ˜ i + Á -
¯ Ë
FD + FE ˜ j + Á -
3 ¯ Ë
FD + 2 / 3FE ˜ k = 0 (c)
¯
2 2 2
Setting the components of i, j, and k separately equal to zero yields simple
simultaneous equations5 for FD and FE with the solution
FD = 8 kN
(d)
FE = 8.485 kN
In (b) we have taken the guy-wire tensions as acting at point B. We would obtain
the same final result (d) if we let the forces act on the total system at D and E as
shown in Fig. 1.28. Equation (b) would then become
SMC = CA ¥ (– 10j) + CD ¥ FD + CE ¥ FE

5
This example is unusual in that we have three simultaneous equations with only two
unknowns. The solution (d) satisfies all three equations. The physical reason for this
apparent paradox lies in the fact that the particular loading we have considered in Fig.
1.28 involves a set of forces, all of which pass through ABC, and therefore whose moment
vectors about C can only be perpendicular to ABC. This leaves only two independent
scalar conditions of moment balance. The three conditions of (c) are actually equivalent to
two since balance of moment components along ABC is automatically ensured. In fact, the
structure of Fig. 1.28 is incapable of supporting a moment around ABC; the boom would
spin in its socket and the guy wires would wind around at B. Twist could be prevented by
replacing one of the guy wires with a rigid bar welded to the boom at B.
Other documents randomly have
different content
dem Punkte sind alle Theaterdirektoren empfindlich und
ebensowenig objektiv. Zufällig kam es am 26. November 1810 bei
der zweiten Aufführung von Weigls »Schweizerfamilie« zu einem
solennen Theaterskandal; die Darstellerin der Hauptrolle paßte einer
Klique von Offizieren nicht. Auch Kleist hatte sich in diesem Sinne
ausgesprochen, was sein gutes Recht war. Die Vorstellung wurde
durch laute Mißfallensäußerungen unterbrochen. Iffland beschwerte
sich, drohte mit Abdankung; eine Untersuchung des Vorfalls hatte
den Erfolg, daß etliche der militärischen Kunstenthusiasten aus der
Stadt verwiesen wurden – gewiß ein warnendes Exempel, denn die
Herren wohnten in Charlottenburg! Die »Abendblätter« aber waren
wieder das »Karnickel«. Ob Iffland, der sich bei seinem früheren
persönlichen Konflikt mit Kleist wegen des »Käthchens von
Heilbronn« tadellos gegen den Dichter benommen hat, zu der
Maßregelung der »Abendblätter« selbst den Anstoß gab, ist nicht
erwiesen, liegt aber nahe und wäre menschlich verständlich, hatte er
doch schon 1803 das Verbot aller Theaterkritiken gefordert, dem
sich der Zensor Renfner mit Recht widersetzte. Nicht verständlich
aber ist, daß die Zensurbehörde 1810 seiner Empörung nicht den
nötigen Dämpfer aufsetzte, sondern im Gegenteil seine Sache zur
ihren machte und unmittelbar darauf, Anfang Dezember, der Zeitung
Kleists und – des bessern Aussehens wegen – auch dem ganz
ungefährlichen Unterhaltungsblatt »Der Freimüthige« die weitere
Führung der Berliner Theaterkritik ein für allemal untersagte! Unter
Hardenbergs Regime duldete man es also nicht, daß ein Journalist
und Dichter wie Kleist über die Führung des Königlichen Hoftheaters
eine andere Meinung hatte als der amtierende Theaterdirektor
selbst! Arnim hatte gewiß nicht unrecht, wenn er den Witz machte,
Iffland und Hardenberg hingen »wie Rad und Wagenschmiere«
zusammen. Drei Jahre später stellte derselbe Iffland wieder den
Antrag, alle Kritiken über Neuaufführungen bis nach der dritten
Vorstellung zu verbieten. Diesmal aber erhielt er die Antwort, das
widerstreite »der Freiheit des Urteilens«. Aber 1810 ließ man sich
um diese Freiheit des Urteils noch keine grauen Haare wachsen,
sondern hing dem unbequemen Kritiker einfach den Maulkorb um
und fragte nicht danach, ob durch solch ein radikales Verbot eine
Zeitung wie die »Abendblätter« und mit ihr der Herausgeber
zugrunde gingen.

Kleists Ende.
Und mit ihr der Herausgeber! Davon ist nichts abzuwaschen! Daß
Kleist völlig mittellos war, steht fest. Das einzige Unternehmen,
durch das er sich über Wasser halten konnte, brach zusammen. In
seiner Verzweiflung verlangte er vom Staatskanzler Entschädigung
für die Zugrunderichtung der »Abendblätter«; die Verhandlungen
darüber unter Vermittlung des ebenfalls über ihn aufgebrachten
Regierungsrats Friedrich von Raumer, des bekannten Historikers, der
später selbst sehr viel von der Zensur auszustehen hatte, gehören zu
den unerfreulichsten Momenten in Kleists Leben. Der Stil, mit dem
man solche Gesuche aufsetzt, war Kleist nicht gegeben. Er erreichte
natürlich nichts. Ende März 1811 stellten die »Abendblätter« ihr
Erscheinen ein, und sieben Monate später fand man ihren
Herausgeber mit durchschossener Schläfe dort, wo heute – am
kleinen Wannsee bei Berlin – sein Grab eine heilige Stätte geworden
ist.
Der Fall Kleist steht durch die Bedeutung seines Opfers und die
Tragik seines Abschlusses vereinzelt da. Aber nur dadurch! Denn er
war leider der Anfang eines ganzen Systems. Man mag zur Romantik
und selbst zu Kleists Poesie stehen wie man will, das eine läßt sich
nicht bestreiten: die »Abendblätter« waren ein ernsthafter Versuch,
mit bescheidenen äußeren Mitteln in Berlin ein populäres Blatt zu
begründen, das die Weltanschauung einer modernen
Literaturbewegung zum Ausdruck brachte und zugleich das Organ
einer politischen Partei sein wollte. Der Versuch wäre gelungen, er
hatte vom ersten Tage an einen kaum erwarteten großen Erfolg. Die
preußische Zensur erstickte ihn durch ihre unfaßbare Willkür. Das
literarische Sündenregister der preußischen Zensur setzt damit
vielversprechend ein und erreicht bis 1848 eine erschreckende
Länge. Was war die Folge? Die Berliner Zeitschriftenliteratur sank auf
einen Tiefstand, der durch nichts zu unterbieten war. Der schale Witz
und die persönliche Skandalsucht wurden Trumpf in der dortigen
Presse, nur auf solchem von der Zensur bereiteten Boden konnte
eine Giftpflanze wie der berühmte Humorist Saphir gedeihen, dieser
Revolverjournalist par excellence, der in den zwanziger Jahren dort
Triumphe feierte und den Geschmack für ein Menschenalter
verdorben hat. Auf diese Weise vernichtete die Literatur sich
schließlich selbst, und der Zensor konnte ruhig schlafen!

Die Verherrlichung des Selbstmords.

Noch der tote Kleist sollte der Zensurbehörde eine Verfügung des
Königs bringen.
Der Berliner Kriegsrat Peguilhen, dem Kleist und seine Freundin
einige Besorgungen aufgetragen, spielte sich als Freund und
Testamentsvollstrecker des Dichters auf und veröffentlichte in der
»Vossischen Zeitung« eine alberne Verherrlichung des Selbstmordes
Kleists. Darauf erließ der König am 27. November 1811 eine
Kabinettsorder, worin es hieß:
»Wenn es jedem, dessen sittliches Gefühl erstorben ist, freystehen
soll, seine verkehrten Ansichten in Blättern, die in jedermanns Hände
kommen, laut und mit anmaßender Verachtung Besserdenkender zu
predigen; so werden alle Bemühungen, Religiosität und Sittlichkeit
im Volke neu zu beleben, vergeblich seyn, indem der Glaube an das
einstimmige Zeugnis jedes unverdorbenen Herzens verdächtig
gemacht, das moralische Urtheil verwirrt, und die Kraft des Volkes im
innersten Lebenskeime vergiftet werden.«
Der König befahl daher, diese seine Meinung gehörigen Orts aufs
nachdrücklichste einzuschärfen, »damit überhaupt bey der Aufsicht
auf die öffentlichen Blätter, der Mißbrauch derselben zur Verbreitung
der Immoralität aufs sorgfältigste verhütet werde«, und dem Zensor
der Zeitung einen ernstlichen Verweis zu erteilen. Außerdem befahl
er, die Schrift über den Tod Kleists, die Peguilhen gleichzeitig
angekündigt hatte, nicht zum Druck zu verstatten. – Sie erschien
denn auch damals nicht, sondern wurde erst zweiundsechzig Jahre
später veröffentlicht.
 10. Bürokratie und Militarismus.
Ach, Herr! Gesegn' uns Wein und Brot,
Und schlage den Napoleon tot,
Durch uns und mit uns, Amen!

Altes Soldatenlied.

Die Flucht der Patrioten.

Das Jahr 1812 ist das am tiefsten beschämende der Geschichte
Preußens. Am 24. Februar mußte der König mit Napoleon ein
förmliches Bündnis schließen und ebenso wie Österreich zu dem
bevorstehenden Feldzug gegen Rußland Hilfstruppen stellen. Im Mai
versammelten sich die deutschen Fürsten in Dresden zur Huldigung
vor dem Imperator; dann kam dieser als gefeierter Gast seines
»allergetreuesten Bundesgenossen« nach Berlin, und starke
französische Besatzungen in der Hauptstadt und in den Festungen
sorgten dafür, daß auch nach dem Durchzug der französischen
Truppen nach Rußland kein Wort des Mißfallens laut wurde. Den
neuen Minister der höheren Polizei, den reaktionären Fürsten zu
Sayn-Wittgenstein, Oberkammerherrn des Königs, und den ebenfalls
neuen Minister des Innern, von Schuckmann, hatte sich der
französische Gesandte selbst ausgesucht. Der »Moniteur« allein gab
in Preußen den Ton an, und von den deutschen Fürsten hatte nur
Herzog Karl August den Mut, sich zu verbitten, daß französische
Lügen in preußischen Zeitungen als Nachrichten aus Weimar
umgingen.
Nebst andern Patrioten wie Gneisenau und Clausewitz hatte auch
Gruner sofort nach dem Bündnis mit Frankreich sein Amt
niedergelegt und war nach Österreich gegangen, wo er mit dem
Freiherrn vom Stein den geheimen Minenkrieg und die Erhebung
Deutschlands gegen Napoleon organisierte und vor allem die
literarische Offensive durch Flugschriften und Aufrufe vorbereitete.

Der Umschwung.
Gruners Nachfolger seit dem 10. März 1812 wurde der Kurator des
Büros im Staatskanzleramte, Geh. Staatsrat Friedrich von Bülow, ein
Verwandter und damaliger Vertrauter Hardenbergs; Himly führte
jetzt die Zensur der historisch-politischen Schriften, und der Geh.
Legationsrat Jordan verwaltete mit großer Strenge die Zensur der
Zeitungen. Als er am 22. Januar 1813 mit dem Könige, der sich bei
dem beginnenden Umschwung den Fängen der Franzosen entzog,
nach Breslau abging, wurde wieder der seit 1792 bewährte Staatsrat
Renfner sein Nachfolger. Auch dieser sorgte nach dem Willen des
abwesenden Staatskanzlers und der ihn vertretenden
Oberregierungskommission mit von der Goltz an der Spitze dafür,
daß durch keine Entgleisung der öffentlichen Aussprache das gute
Verhältnis zu den Franzosen getrübt wurde. Alle französischen
Siegesbulletins mußten die Berliner Zeitungsleser über sich ergehen
lassen, von dem Strafgericht, das in Rußland über Napoleon
hereinbrach, erzählten nur durchgeschmuggelte Privatnachrichten
und Gerüchte, das grausige Elend des Rückzugs der großen Armee
aus Rußland trat den Berlinern erst leibhaftig vor Augen, als die
zerlumpten Reste durch die Stadt fluteten, den Brand von Moskau
und ähnliche Vorfälle kannte man nur in französischer Beleuchtung,
und die Nachricht von der Konvention von Tauroggen (30.
Dezember) ließ die Berliner Zensur erst am 19. Januar durch,
zugleich mit der Nachricht von der Absetzung des Generals von York
und der strengen Verleugnung seiner Tat durch den König.
Schleiermacher, der schon von der Ungültigkeit erzwungener
Verträge zu predigen begann, wurde noch am 3. Januar 1813 unter
Aufsicht gestellt. Der Aufruf zur Bildung von Freiwilligenkorps vom 3.
Februar durfte in Berlin erst am 9. Februar, später als in den
märkischen Provinzblättern, erscheinen, und daß schon am 20.
Februar vereinzelte Kosaken von der Armee Tschernyscheffs in den
Straßen Berlins als Befreier bejubelt wurden, mußten die Zeitungen
völlig verschweigen, denn noch war ja eine starke französische
Besatzung in der Stadt, und der französische Kommandant von
Berlin, Augereau, und der Gesandtschaftssekretär Le Fèvre, der
Vertreter St. Marsans, hätten am liebsten jede Nachricht über
militärische Vorgänge wörtlich vorgeschrieben, was selbst dem
pflichteifrigen Renfner etwas stark schien.
In der Nacht vom 3. zum 4. März rückten endlich die Franzosen
ab, und am andern Tage begann der Einmarsch der Russen. Die
preußischen Behörden, unter denen sich kein York befand, hielten
sich aber in subalterner Gewissenhaftigkeit noch immer streng an
ihre Instruktion, alle Feindseligkeiten gegen Frankreich sorgfältig zu
vermeiden, so daß heißblütige Patrioten wie Gneisenau kaum an sich
halten konnten. Arndts im Februar verfaßtes und in Königsberg
gedrucktes Flugblatt »Aufruf an die Deutschen zum
gemeinschaftlichen Kampfe gegen die Franzosen« durfte Anfang
März in Berlin noch nicht nachgedruckt werden, denn der Anschluß
Preußens an Rußland wurde ja erst durch den »Aufruf an mein Volk«
am 20. März amtlich kundgemacht.

Worauf die Kosaken reiten.

1813 berichtete eine Zeitung – nach andern ein Schulbuch – von
den Kosaken: »Sie reiten auf kleinen unansehnlichen Pferden.« Ein
Zensor in Breslau strich die beiden Adjektiva, die ihm jedenfalls mit
dem Ansehen der jetzigen Bundesgenossen unverträglich schienen,
und so erfuhr die Welt die große Neuigkeit, daß die Kosaken nicht
auf Eseln, Kamelen oder Stecken ritten, sondern auf Pferden.

Der »Preußische Correspondent«.

Bei dem trostlosen Zustand der Berliner Presse, an dem das
politische Chaos ein gut Teil Schuld trug, war es dem
Militärgouvernement höchst willkommen, daß aus dem Kreise der
preußischen Patrioten ein neues Zeitungsunternehmen erwuchs,
dessen Leitung der angesehene Historiker Niebuhr und dessen
Verlag die Realschulbuchhandlung von Reimer übernahm, und noch
ehe das offizielle Jawort des Staatskanzlers vorlag, genehmigte es
die Herausgabe des »Preußischen Correspondenten«, der am 2. April
1813 »einfach und mit Würde zu dem Volke von dessen heiligsten
Interessen« zu reden begann. Niebuhr sah seine Aufgabe darin, »die
Überzeugung von der Notwendigkeit eines Volkskrieges im äußersten
Sinne des Wortes täglich zu nähren, den Haß gegen die Franzosen
zu mehren und über die allgemeine Politik ein gesundes Urteil zu
bewirken«.
»Die Freiheit der Rede und der Schrift ist uns wiedergegeben«,
frohlockte Niebuhr im Leitartikel der ersten Nummer. Das sollte sich
sehr bald als eine gewaltige Hyperbel erweisen. Renfner erlaubte
sich sogar Änderungen an den Kriegsberichten aus dem
Hauptquartier, die Gneisenau selbst schrieb, so daß dieser schon
bald mit ihrer Entziehung drohte. Einer dieser Kriegsberichte von
Gneisenau (26. April) beschuldigte auf Grund von französischen
Feldpostbriefen die Berliner Bankiers hochverräterischer
Beziehungen zum Feinde. Als darauf die »Vossische« ihre
Abonnenten von der Hochfinanz in Schutz nahm, verhinderte
Renfner (2. Mai) die Fortsetzung der Polemik.
Unter seinem Nachfolger von Schultz wurde das Verhältnis
zwischen Redaktion und Zensor auch nicht besser; der Albdruck des
Waffenstillstandes lastete auf dem »Preußischen Correspondenten«
naturgemäß noch stärker, und als erst der temperamentvolle
Schleiermacher am 25. Juni dessen Leitung übernahm, kam es
zwischen ihm und den Behörden über Fragen mehr der innern als
der äußern Politik zu Konflikten, die an Schärfe den Zusammenstoß
Heinrich von Kleists mit Hardenberg noch weit übertrafen. Der
»Correspondent« ist nach den »Abendblättern« die zweite Berliner
oder preußische Zeitung, in der sich die Umrißlinien einer werdenden
politischen Partei, hier eines konservativen Liberalismus, deutlich
abzeichneten, und die Regierung war keineswegs gewillt, solche
neuen Machtgruppen aufkommen zu lassen.

Schleiermachers Hochverrat.
Am 14. Juli 1813 sprach der »Preußische Correspondent« von
Gerüchten über einen Friedenskongreß, der in Prag
zusammengetreten sei und auch wirklich stattfand. Die Anhänger
eines schnellen Friedensschlusses warnte er, sich nicht vorschnell zu
freuen, und die Gegner, darob nicht zu verzweifeln. Die Ansicht der
letztern Partei, zu der Schleiermacher selbst gehörte, gehe dahin,
daß Preußen, »um zu einem würdigen Zustande zu gelangen«, noch
einer »ungeheuern Kraftentwicklung« und Deutschland im
allgemeinen noch »großer entscheidender Ereignisse« bedürfe, die
»den Grund zu einer künftigen Form legen« müßten. Denn, so
schrieb Schleiermacher wörtlich, »was sich Deutschland von einer
Verfassung versprechen kann, welche durch die Willkür sich
durchkreuzender diplomatischer Verhandlungen begründet wäre, das
wissen wir seit dem westphälischen Frieden, der Deutschland
zerstörte, indem er es neu zu bilden glaubte«. Unter dem »würdigen
Zustand« Preußens, das ja schon eine feste »Form« hatte, verstand
er die völlige Unabhängigkeit von Napoleon, und das schwierige
Problem der »künftigen Form« Deutschlands beschäftigte ein Jahr
später den Wiener Kongreß. Diese Fragen durften wohl dem
Redakteur eines politischen Blattes einigermaßen am Herzen liegen.
Schleiermacher beruhigte nun die Gegner eines vorschnellen
Friedens mit der Versicherung, ihre »allgemein verbreitete« Ansicht
werde »gewiß auch bei den Friedensverhandlungen eine Stimme
haben«; er meinte damit: dieser oder jener der beteiligten
Diplomaten werde wohl auch so denken. Und wenn auch, erklärte er
zuletzt, ein Friede geschlossen werde, den man noch nicht als »den
wahren Anfang einer neuen Ordnung der Dinge ansehen« könne, so
müsse man ihn eben »nach den Principien eines Waffenstillstandes
beurteilen« und alle Vorteile, die er gewähre, gehörig benutzen.
 Am 15. Juli erklärte das Auswärtige Amt Schleiermachers
Äußerungen als »unbefugte anmaßende vorgreifende Urteile einer
Privatperson über künftige Resultate« des Friedenskongresses; die
»absprechende Zurückweisung ›Diplomatischer Verhandlungen‹ und
die ›Berufung auf eine allgemein verbreitete Ansicht, die bei den
Friedensverhandlungen eine Stimme haben werde‹, die
Entgegenstellung der Begriffe: ›einzelne Mächte‹ und ›Deutschland
und Preußen‹,« gebe eine »Tendenz pflichtwidriger Eigenmacht und
Willkür zu erkennen. Der Ton und die Tendenz mancher Schriftsteller
und ihrer Anhänger, zusammengehalten mit gleichzeitigen
verwegenen Vorgängen, deuten auf ein Streben jener Personen, ihre
Eigenmacht und Willkür an die Stelle der rechtmäßigen Macht und
Autorität zu setzen.« Das Auswärtige Amt glaube daher nach dem
Grundsatz verfahren zu müssen: »den Keimen zu widerstehen« (was
wohl eine Übersetzung des Ovidischen »Principiis obsta« sein sollte!)
und berichtete darüber an Hardenberg.
Daraufhin befahl der König am 17., Schleiermacher sofort seines
Predigtamtes zu entsetzen und binnen 48 Stunden über Schwedisch-
Pommern ins Ausland abzuschieben!
Diese Strenge hielt aber Hardenberg offenbar für übertrieben; er
wußte den König umzustimmen, und so wurde die schon fertige
Kabinettsorder dahin gemildert, daß dem Herausgeber des
»Preußischen Correspondenten« sein Benehmen »ernstlich
verwiesen« und ihm bedeutet wurde, eine Wiederholung desselben
werde »aufs nachdrücklichste und mit unfehlbarem Verlust seiner
Dienststelle geahndet werden«.
Am 19. mußte Schleiermacher vor dem Minister des Innern von
Schuckmann erscheinen, und dieser »bedeutete« ihm laut Protokoll,
der betreffende Artikel »verkündige die Notwendigkeit einer
Umwälzung der preußischen Staatsform durch gewaltsame
Ereignisse und enthalte die Anmaßung des Zeitungsschreibers, die
Schritte der Regierung öffentlich meistern und leiten zu wollen, um
sie diesem Ziele entgegenzuführen«. Das sei nach dem Landrecht
nichts geringeres als Hochverrat!
 Schleiermacher verteidigte sich ausführlich schriftlich mit großem
Scharfsinn und schlagender Dialektik gegen die unsinnige Auslegung
seines Artikels. Aber seine »Nase« hatte er weg, und dabei blieb es.
»Ich habe aber alles sehr lustig abgeschüttelt«, schrieb er sechs
Jahre später an seinen Freund Arndt, als auch dieser ein Demagog
sein sollte, »und halte mir die Sache nur noch als einen Schinken in
Salz«. Und über die Szene bei Schuckmann berichtete er, dieser
habe zwar erst »mit seiner ganzen Bärenhaftigkeit aufgetatzt«, sei
dann aber im Gespräch mit ihm so »gekirrt« worden, »daß er
hernach ordentlich mit dem Maulkorb herumging«. »Es gibt wohl
keine ärgere Erbärmlichkeit für einen König,« fügte er hinzu, »als
solche Schnippchen in der Tasche zu schlagen, und darum kann man
sie ihm ja wohl gönnen.«

Reformation und Revolution.

Kurz vor dem Verfahren gegen Schleiermacher war in Berlin bei
Hitzig eine kleine Broschüre erschienen »Zur politischen
Reformation«. Sie bezeichnete als die schlimmsten Folgen der
Französischen Revolution die »absolute Souverainität,
Maschineneinrichtung der Staatsverwaltung und Conscription«. Der
biedere Zensor Himly selbst hatte sie zum Druck genehmigt, denn er
sagte sich: Preußen hat durch Hardenbergs Finanzedikt vom 27.
Oktober 1810 schon eine Nationalrepräsentation eingeleitet, will also
keine absolute Souveränität; Maschineneinrichtung läßt sich dem
preußischen Staat ebenfalls nicht vorwerfen, und Konskription kennt
er nicht; also geht die Tendenz der Schrift gegen Frankreich und
seine Gewaltherrschaft in deutschen Landen.
Am 5. Juli aber kam der Polizeiminister Fürst Wittgenstein darüber.
Der sah in dem Büchlein nur die deutlich ausgesprochene Absicht,
»die monarchische Regierungsform, wie sie in dem preußischen
Staat eingeführt ist, aufzuheben und dem Volke wesentlichen Anteil
an der Verwaltung und recht eigentlich eine Mitregierung
einzuräumen«. Man brauche nur den Ausdruck »Reformation« in
»Revolution« umzuändern, dann habe man den Sinn und Zweck des
Schriftchens am richtigsten erfaßt. Wolle es doch sogar die Sprache
»revolutionieren« und die Ausdrücke abschaffen, »womit seit länger
als tausend Jahren die Untertanen die schuldige Ehrfurcht gegen
ihre Regenten an den Tag zu legen gewohnt sind«. Genau so seien
auch die französischen Jakobiner vorgegangen.
Jetzt lag es klar zutage: dieses zunehmende dreiste Verlangen
nach Nationalrepräsentation noch während des Krieges war nichts
anderes als die Folge des unseligen Landsturmedikts, das ja das
ganze Volk zur Verteidigung des Staates aufgerufen hatte! Das
unvorsichtige Wort des Fürsten Kaunitz zu Kaiser Joseph II. von dem
ganzen »Volk in Waffen«, das an Majestät dem Kaiser ebenbürtig
sei, war furchtbar lebendig geworden. Die gefährliche Phrase von
einem »Volksheer« brauchte ja selbst ein Mann wie der General von
Clausewitz, der mit Scharnhorst die ostpreußische Landwehr ins
Leben gerufen hatte. Von da bis zur Regierung des Staates durch
ebendieses Volk war nur ein Schritt! Und hatte nicht der
Deutschrusse Kotzebue in seinem »Russisch-deutschen Volksblatt«,
das er von Ende März bis Ende Juni 1813 in Berlin herausgab, im
Anschluß an jene Broschüre schon die künftige Verfassung Preußens
entworfen? Ein Oberhaus wollte er eingerichtet sehen aus den
deutschen Fürsten, und ihm gegenüber ein Unterhaus, das aus den
»freien deutschen Männer des Landsturms« zu bilden sei! Diese
Projekte galt es »in den Keimen« zu ersticken.
Daß Fürst Wittgenstein so dachte, bestätigt der Briefwechsel
zwischen Gneisenau und Clausewitz. Darnach waren sowohl
Wittgenstein wie Polizeipräsident Le Coq und von Bülow der
Überzeugung, das Landsturmedikt sei revolutionär, stürze die
Verfassung um und führe »zu völliger Anarchie und Umsturz des
Thrones«. Und ebenjenes anonyme Büchlein »Zur politischen
Reformation« wurde der Anlaß, daß der Oberkammerherr jetzt auch
den König zu seiner Ansicht zu bekehren wußte. Am 17. Juli, als
Friedrich Wilhelm III. die Kabinettsorder gegen Schleiermacher
unterzeichnete, verfügte er auch die Aufhebung des bisher
gebildeten Berliner Landsturms. Die Formation des Landsturms
überhaupt wurde »nunmehr als vollendet« bezeichnet, er sollte nur
noch eine Reserve der Landwehr sein, seine Selbständigkeit wurde
ihm völlig genommen und er nicht nur den ihm vorgesetzten
Kommandanten, sondern allenthalben »den Polizeiobrigkeiten des
Orts oder Bezirks« unterstellt. Auch seine aus Zivilpersonen
gewählten »Schutzdeputationen« wurden beseitigt, und gleich
hinterher, am 21. Juli, eine Verordnung gegen den Mißbrauch der
Landsturmwaffe erlassen, als ob es sich um eine Räuberbande
gehandelt hätte.
Dieser 17. Juli ist daher als ein dies ater in der Geschichte
Preußens zu betrachten, denn er bezeichnete den ersten
entschiedenen Schritt auf dem Wege der Reaktion, auf dem der
König von da an, begleitet von seinem allmächtigen
Oberkammerherrn und Polizeiminister, zeitlebens hartnäckig
weiterging.

Engelsturz.
Noch zwei Männer in Preußen hatten Anlaß, in ihrem Kalender den
17. Juli 1813 mit schwarzer Tinte anzumalen: die beiden Zensoren
Himly und von Schultz. Ersterer hatte durch die Druckerlaubnis der
Flugschrift »Zur politischen Reformation« auch nach Hardenbergs
Urteil »alles Vertrauen als Censor politischer Schriften verloren« und
wurde am selben Tage zu anderer Verwendung seines Amtes
enthoben.
Schlimmer erging es dem Zensor von Schultz wegen des
»Preußischen Correspondenten«; dieses Mannes Zensorlaufbahn
scheint damit ihr wohlverdientes Ende gefunden zu haben. Ihn
stürzte nicht die bloße Tatsache, daß er den Artikel Schleiermachers
über den Prager Friedenskongreß hatte durchschlüpfen lassen,
sondern die nachträgliche freche Entschuldigung, daß er dies »zu
Erreichung eines großen, auf das Wohl des Staats gerichteten
Zwecks absichtlich« getan habe; er wollte damit »auf die Gefahr
persönlicher Verantwortung einen materiellen, unzweideutigen
Beweis von der eigentlichen Tendenz gewisser Verbindungen vor
Augen bringen, um dadurch womöglich zu kräftigen Maßregeln
gegen Thron und Land verderbliche Anschläge Veranlassung zu
geben«! Diese niederträchtige Dienstbeflissenheit ließ auch
Hardenberg nur als das gelten, was sie war: eine faule Ausrede,
denn jenen »großen« Zweck hätte er ja durch Vorweisung des
Korrekturbogens schon erreichen können.
Und noch ein dritter war von dem Engelsturz am 17. Juli
keineswegs erbaut: der Polizeipräsident Le Coq, denn Hardenberg
übertrug nunmehr ihm trotz seines Sträubens interimistisch die
gesamte Zensur der Berliner Zeitungen sowie der historisch-
politischen Flug- und Zeitschriften.

Schleiermachers Obstruktion.
Der neue Zensor Le Coq las den »Preußischen Correspondenten«
mit besonderer Aufmerksamkeit und mit offenbarer
Voreingenommenheit gegen dessen Herausgeber. Nach seiner
Versicherung hörte Schleiermacher auch nach der ihm gewordenen
Zurechtweisung nicht auf, sich durch anstößige Äußerungen »gegen
den Wert der diesseitigen Verfassung, wie gegen das Ansehen der
königlichen Regierung und deren Maßregeln vor andern
auszuzeichnen«, und schon am 2. August stellte er den Antrag, die
Zeitung ganz zu verbieten. Hardenberg ging darauf nicht ein. Gründe
zu nachdrücklicherem Vorgehen fanden sich bald.
Am 12. August erklärte Österreich an Napoleon den Krieg, und das
diesen Schritt begründende, von Friedrich von Gentz verfaßte
glänzende Manifest des Kaisers bedachte Schleiermacher in Nr. 86
vom 28. August mit hohem Lobe. Er brauchte dabei in dem der
Zensur vorgelegten Text die Wendung: »Die Gesinnung, welche sich
hier ausspreche, sei, wenn man wolle in einer Art Gegensatz gegen
die königliche, die wahrhaft kaiserliche.« Denn, so hieß es weiter,
»dem Kaiser gebührt eine Mehrheit von Staaten, die sich in ihren
innern Bestrebungen sehr unterscheiden können, mit gleicher
ruhiger Liebe zu umfassen«. Zweifellos brauchte Schleiermacher die
Worte Kaiser und König hier gewissermaßen als Quantitätsbegriffe,
aber ebenso zweifellos war er sich des zweideutigen Klangs dieser
Wendung voll bewußt. Sie ist eine frühe Probe des später
aufkommenden Zensurstils, dessen Meister der witzige, oft boshafte
Schleiermacher geworden wäre. Le Coq übertrug denn auch den
begrifflichen Gegensatz sofort auf die Personen, den Kaiser von
Österreich und den König von Preußen – also »grober Anstoß gegen
des Königs Maj. Allerh. Autorität«! Und da der »Correspondent« ihm
auch weiterhin Ärger verursachte, sogar Ausfälle gegen die Zensur
wagte, gegen »die krankhafte Wachsamkeit über alles was durch
Druck der Welt mitgetheilt werden soll«, so forderte Le Coq am 25.
September in einem geharnischten Schriftstück von Schleiermacher
eine strengere Befolgung der Zensurinstruktion. Das Gesetz erlaube
jedem, seine Einwendungen gegen Regierungsmaßregeln dem
Oberhaupt des Staates oder den Vorgesetzten der Departements
anzuzeigen; eine »weit umher cirkulierende politische Zeitung« der
Residenz sei dazu nicht der Ort! Nur die Redaktion des
»Correspondenten« gebe zu steten »Berichtigungen« seitens der
Zensur Anlaß und beantworte diese statt mit größerer Vorsicht nur
mit »ungegründeten Klagen über Beschränkung der Preßfreiheit«.
Schleiermacher antwortete darauf nicht weniger entschieden,
nicht die Redaktion, sondern der Zensor habe für die Beobachtung
der Zensurinstruktion zu sorgen, und auch nicht durch
»Berichtigungen«, wie sich Le Coq auszudrücken beliebe, sondern
nur durch »Streichungen«. Der Vorwurf, als ob er »ein eigenes
Vergnügen daran fände, etwas vorlegen zu lassen, was gestrichen
werden« müsse, sei ehrenrührig, und er verlange dafür Beweise. Er
lasse in fremden Aufsätzen manches stehen, was er selbst, »um die
Freude eines recht reinen Censurbogens zu genießen«, nicht
schreiben würde, auch wenn es nicht anstößig sei; er rechtfertige
sich dann bei seinen »nicht bezahlten«, sondern nur »gefälligen«
Korrespondenten durch Vorlegung des Zensurbogens und denke das
auch weiter so zu halten. Auch verstehe er nicht, warum sich Le Coq
darüber beklage: »Das Verhältnis zwischen Schriftsteller und Censor
auf diesem Gebiet ist wie ein Handel, bei welchem es einmal üblich
ist, vorzuschlagen und zu dingen.«
Zum Schluß bedankte er sich noch mit schneidender Ironie für den
Hinweis auf das Gesetz; Le Coq möge ihm aber lieber eine andere
Stelle des Gesetzes nachweisen, die der Zensurbehörde das Recht
gebe, Verweise zu erteilen und Drohungen zu erlassen, denn diesen
»Ton« habe er nicht ohne Befremden in des Polizeipräsidenten
geehrter Zuschrift gefunden. Sollte eine solche Gesetzesstelle nicht
existieren, so möge Le Coq diese Schlußbemerkung gefälligst als
einen Gebrauch der Freiheit betrachten, die das von ihm selbst
erwähnte Gesetz zugestehe. Jeder Satz des Briefes verrät die innere
Genugtuung des Schreibers, die überlegene Schärfe und
Geschmeidigkeit seines Stils den Gegner fühlen zu lassen.
Auf diese vollendete Kriegserklärung konnte die Antwort nicht
ausbleiben. Le Coq legte den Briefwechsel dem Staatskanzler vor,
um für den schon bekannten »Geist der Anmaßung und Renitenz«
Schleiermachers einen neuen Beweis zu bieten, und ersuchte um
eine nachdrückliche Zurückweisung des Widerspenstigen »in die
Schranken der Ordnung und des Gehorsams«. Diesem Verlangen
kam Hardenberg mit ungewöhnlicher Schärfe nach und verwies
Schleiermacher nun seinerseits den »unpassenden Ton« seines
Briefes: »Sie scheinen darin ganz vergessen zu haben, daß Sie dem
St.-R. Le Coq Achtung schuldig sind, und daß es Ihnen in keiner
Hinsicht gebührt, sich seinen Verfügungen zu widersetzen … Sie
haben hierzu als Volkslehrer eine doppelte Verpflichtung und sind
doppelt straffällig, wenn Sie derselben entgegenhandeln.« Für
diesmal wolle er es bei der Zurechtweisung bewendet sein lassen,
warne ihn aber ernstlich, »sich künftig bescheidner gegen Königl.
Behörden zu betragen, widrigenfalls« usw.
Von der Achtung, die der Polizeipräsident einem Manne wie
Schleiermacher schuldig sei, war dabei nicht die Rede.
Schleiermacher nahm auch diese »staatskanzlerische Nase« nicht
ohne Widerspruch entgegen, sondern antwortete sehr kühl und fest:
Er habe seinerseits Ursache genug gehabt, sich über den
unangemessenen Ton des Le Coqschen Schreibens zu beschweren,
habe aber den Kanzler, der »jetzt mehr als je mit den wichtigsten
Angelegenheiten nicht nur des preußischen Staates, sondern des
gesamten Europa beschäftigt« sei, mit dieser »Kleinigkeit« nicht
behelligen wollen. Nun das aber durch Le Coq geschehen sei, müsse
er bitten, der Kanzler wolle jenen zum Beweis oder zur Zurücknahme
der ihm gemachten Beschuldigungen veranlassen, da der
gewöhnliche Weg der Injurienklage dem Polizeipräsidenten
gegenüber nicht offen stehe.
Hardenberg gab diese kühne Antwort stillschweigend zu den
Akten. Einer nochmaligen groben Ansprache des Polizeipräsidenten
ging aber Schleiermacher aus dem Wege, indem er am 1. Oktober
die Redaktion an Achim von Arnim abgab. So war es ihm nicht
vergönnt, als Journalist ein Geschichtschreiber des glorreichen
Oktobermonats zu werden.

Se. Heiligkeit der Kurialstil.

Im Jahre 1810 war – auch ein Ergebnis der Neuorientierung dieses
Jahres – der altehrwürdige Kurialstil im amtlichen preußischen
Verkehr abgeschafft worden. Das bot den »Züllichauer
wöchentlichen Nachrichten« vom 29. August 1813 Anlaß, folgende
köstliche Anekdote aus dem Jahre 1800 zu erzählen:
»Ein witziger Berliner erhielt zwei Gerichtsvorladungen auf einmal;
die eine beschied ihn vor das Kammergericht in Berlin, die andere
am selben Tage vor die Kammer zu Küstrin. Beide begannen in der
damals üblichen Form mit den Worten: ›Wir Friedrich Wilhelm von
Gottes Gnaden‹ usw.
»Der Geladene erschien weder da noch dort, und als er dieserhalb
zur Rechenschaft gezogen wurde, antwortete er:
›Ew. Kgl. Majestät zu Berlin haben mir allergnädigst befohlen, daß
ich vor allerhöchst demselben erscheinen soll, aber Ew. Kgl. Maj. in
Küstrin haben auch geruhet, mich zu gleicher Zeit vor sich zu
bescheiden. Da aber in der Mathematik der Satz feststeht, daß ein
Objekt, welches von zwei gleichstarken Kräften in demselben
Zeitraum nach zwei entgegengesetzten Richtungen angezogen wird,
im Ruhestand verbleibt, so bin auch ich im Stande der Ruhe
verblieben.‹«
Die Gerichtskollegien von 1800 mußten über den Scherz so
lachen, daß sie sich nicht einmal zu einem Verweis aufraffen
konnten. Anders die Berliner Zensurbehörde im Jahre 1813. Am 27.
September erklärte der Kriegsrat Himly, jetzt Zensor der
Provinzzeitungen, der Abdruck dieser Anekdote habe in »ruhigen
Zeiten wohl Rüge verdient, da Einrichtungen, die noch vor wenigen
Jahren gegolten haben, der öffentlichen Verspottung doch wohl noch
entzogen bleiben sollten«, und der Geh. Staatsrat von Raumer war
ganz mit ihm einer »erleuchteten« Meinung, daß der Scherz »besser
ungedruckt geblieben« wäre. Die Züllichauer Zeitung erhielt darob
eine »Ermahnung«.
Nicht einmal über abgeschnittene Zöpfe durfte man also seine
Glossen machen, und zu solchen bürokratischen Heldentaten hatte
die Berliner Zensurbehörde noch Zeit und Sammlung drei Wochen
vor der Völkerschlacht bei Leipzig!

Das Dankgebet nach der Leipziger Schlacht.

Ein »Augenzeuge« hatte in einem Brief geschildert, wie Fürst
Schwarzenberg am 19. Oktober 1813 den drei auf dem
Monarchenhügel versammelten verbündeten Fürsten die
Siegesnachricht überbrachte. Kaiser Franz stieg sogleich vom Pferde
und kniete zum Gebet nieder; alle übrigen Anwesenden folgten
seinem Beispiel. »Bewunderungswürdig war es,« setzte der von
seiner eigenen Schilderung ergriffene Berichterstatter hinzu, »daß
die zügelfreien Pferde während dieser imposanten Feierlichkeit ohne
einen Hufschlag zu tun, ruhig neben ihren Reitern standen.«
Dieser Brief war in der »Brünner Zeitung« gedruckt worden, und
am 13. Januar 1814 brachte ihn auch die »Vossische«. Die Redaktion
freute sich gewiß der höchst stimmungsvollen Szene, Schmok würde
von »Brillanten« gesprochen haben, und sie war auch zweifellos
ganz nach dem Herzen des Zensors Le Coq.
Wie bestürzt mag er gewesen sein, als ihm gerade diese zarte
Reporterlyrik einen ziemlich derben Verweis zuzog. Hardenberg fand
nämlich, daß jene rührende Schlußwendung das Gepräge der
»Ironie« an sich trage, und warnte den Zensor, in ein offizielles Blatt
nicht Erzählungen aufzunehmen, »die bei einem großen Teile des
Publikums nur gar zu leicht zu satirischen Bemerkungen Anlaß
geben«.
Verwunderlich ist, daß Hardenberg nicht lieber auf die
Unrichtigkeit der Tatsache selbst aufmerksam machte, von der er im
Hauptquartier, wo er weilte, hätte Kenntnis haben oder doch leicht
erhalten können. Die ganze Episode ist bekanntlich von den
Historikern als ein Märchen bezeichnet worden.

Das »System der Mäßigung«.

Solange Napoleon in Deutschland allmächtig war und Preußen
wohl oder übel für die Unantastbarkeit seines ihm gewaltsam
aufgedrungenen Verbündeten einstehen mußte, blieb ihm nichts
anderes übrig, als alle Angriffe gegen den Unüberwindlichen zu
unterdrücken. Als aber der Schlachtendonner des 18. Oktobers den
Nimbus des Korsen zerstört hatte, verlangte das Empfinden des
Volkes, das doch die Kosten des Krieges mit Gut und Blut zu zahlen
hatte, die Vogelfreiheit des Gegners. Statt diesem gerechten
Empfinden nachzugeben, versteifte man sich seitens der
preußischen Regierung auch jetzt noch auf ein »System der
Mäßigung«, das mit einer lächerlichen Konsequenz innegehalten
wurde. Eine schlimmere Beleidigung als die Schlacht bei Leipzig
konnte wohl schwerlich das bitterste deutsche Libell dem gestürzten
Franzosenkaiser zufügen.
Die Berliner Zensurbehörde dachte anders. Noch am 20.
Dezember 1813 erließ sie eine neue Warnung gegen alle eingeführte
Flugschriftenliteratur, die natürlich zum vorwiegenden Teil an dem
gestürzten Feinde ihr Mütchen kühlte, und die Lektüre dieser ins
Ungemessene wachsenden Druckschriften betrieb der gute Renfner
immer noch so, als ob Napoleon leibhaftig hinter der Tür stände.
Ein so heftiger Napoleonfeind wie Arndt mußte ihm daher
manches zu schaffen machen. Dieser »écrivain infatigable« ließ ja
kaum einen Monat verstreichen, ohne immer neue Literaturgranaten
auf den zurückweichenden Gegner zu schleudern. Arndts Flugschrift
»Das preußische Volk und Heer im Jahre 1813« ließ Renfner im
Dezember 1813 »gern und willig« durch, »obgleich der Schwung der
letzten Seiten wohl hätte gemildert werden können«. Seine
»wütende Einleitung« aber zu den »Betrachtungen über das
Concordat« von dem Russen Uwaroff überschritt nach Renfners
Urteil »alle Grenzen« und wurde verboten, denn Arndt hatte darin
Napoleon den »großen Virtuosen der Lüge« genannt. Arndts
politisches Programm »Der Rhein, Teutschlands Strom, aber nicht
Teutschlands Grenze« kam dem Zensor zwar reichlich »überspannt«
vor, denn es forderte kurzerhand die Vorschiebung der Grenze
Deutschlands »soweit die deutsche Zunge klingt«, bis zu den
Ardennen, den Vogesen und dem Jura, und die Herausgabe Elsaß-
Lothringens, Forderungen, auf denen leider die Diplomaten des
Wiener Kongresses zu unserm heutigen Leidwesen nicht bestanden.
Da aber diese »excentrischen Vorschläge mit ziemlicher
Bescheidenheit« vorgetragen seien, gab Renfner im Januar 1814 die
Schrift zum Verkauf frei.
Die Feder aber fiel ihm vor Schreck aus der Hand (»la plume
tombe des mains«), als er Arndts »Kurze und wahrhaftige Erzählung
von Napoleon Bonapartens verderblichen Anschlägen« (anonym:
Germanien 1813) las, und der unauslöschliche Haß, den die
gleichzeitige Schrift »über Volkshaß und über den Gebrauch einer
fremden Sprache« gegen die Franzosen und ihre Sprache predigte,
paßte allerdings wenig zur Proklamation der noch immer
unentschlossen am Rhein stehenden Verbündeten vom 2. Dezember
1813, die Frankreich »groß, stark und glücklich« wünschte, weil es
eine der »Hauptgrundlagen des europäischen Staatsgebäudes« sei.
 Beide Schriften wurden nach Vorschlag Renfners am 31. Januar
1814 durch Hardenberg selbst verboten, weil sie im diametralen
Widerspruch standen zu dem »System der Mäßigung«, das die
Alliierten zur Schau trugen.
Ebenso erging es im Februar 1814 dem 3. Teil des Werkes »Geist
der Zeit«, worin Arndt mit dem ganzen Pathos seiner volkstümlichen
Beredsamkeit alles heraussprudelte, was er über Napoleons
Verbrechen an der Menschheit und über die unmögliche Versöhnung
Deutschlands mit Frankreich auf dem Herzen hatte. Der erste Teil
dieses Werkes war 1806 in Dänemark, bei Hammerich in Altona,
ohne Angabe eines Verlegers erschienen, der zweite Teil 1808 in
Schweden, wo sich Arndt vor den Häschern Napoleons verborgen
hielt. Den dritten hatte Reimer 1813 in Berlin verlegt, ebenso eine 2.
Auflage des zweiten Teils, beide unter der Druckfirma Th. Boosey in
London, denn die Berliner Zensur würde nie die Erlaubnis dazu
gegeben haben.

Die Schonung Napoleons.

Für die Schonung Napoleons seitens der Zensur auch während der
Befreiungskriege waren hauptsächlich drei Gründe maßgebend. Für
einen Mann, der einmal – ob legitim oder illegitim – den Purpur
getragen, verlangte das Kartell der Fürsten Europas Achtung unter
allen Umständen; er war und blieb ein gekröntes Haupt, dessen
Verunglimpfung auch nicht als Ausnahmefall zugelassen werden
durfte. »Der Teufel, wenngleich ein Höllenfürst, bleibt doch immer
ein Souverain«, spottete Kotzebue in seinen »Politischen
Flugblättern«. Obendrein war Napoleon durch seine Heirat mit der
Erzherzogin Marie Luise der Schwiegersohn des Kaisers Franz, eines
der erlauchten Verbündeten. Daher hatte auch die österreichische
Regierung noch nach Wiederbeginn des Krieges alle »erniedrigenden
Ausfälle« gegen Napoleon verboten.
Der zweite Grund war ernster politischer Art: solange man noch
hoffte, mit dem Kaiser von Frankreich zu einem Frieden zu kommen,
wollte man ihn nicht reizen.
Zum dritten war man auch nach seiner Verbannung nach Elba von
der Furcht nicht frei, er werde wiederkommen, und die Tatsachen
schienen ja diesem Bedenken recht zu geben. Die deutschen
Regierungen rechneten also auch nach der Schlacht bei Leipzig mit
der Möglichkeit, noch einmal die Gnade des Siegers anrufen zu
müssen. Es ist Deutschland wahrlich schwer gemacht worden, sich
im Vertrauen auf seine Kraft dauernd zu befestigen.
Von diesen drei Gründen vermochte den ersten auch die
Geschichte niemals aus der Welt zu schaffen. Der Schwiegervater
Napoleons, Kaiser Franz von Österreich, regierte ja noch bis 1835,
und bis zu seinem Tode wenigstens ist dieser allerhöchsten
Verwandtschaft seitens der Zensur in Deutschland stets mit
rührendem Zartgefühl Rücksicht getragen worden.

Fremder Götzendienst.
Genau so wie Arndt erging es den übrigen Patrioten, die ihrem
Temperament nicht die von der Zensur verlangte »Mäßigung«
auferlegen konnten. Der Vorsteher der Berliner Blindenanstalt,
Professor August Zeune, schickte einem Vortrag über das
Nibelungenlied, das er als geeigneten Ersatz für die überschätzte
französische Literatur empfahl, eine Einleitung voll »Feuerbrände
und Congrevescher Raketen« gegen die »Rotte Kora«, das
französische Volk, voraus, in der er ebenso wie Arndt die
Verbannung der französischen Sitte und Sprache, die völlige
Abschaffung des »Fremden Götzendienstes« forderte. Die deutsche
Nachahmung der Franzosen erklärte Zeune aus unserer Unkenntnis
der wahren Geschichte Frankreichs, der Bestechung deutscher
Gelehrten durch Ludwig XIV., der verkehrten Erziehung Friedrichs
des Großen durch einen französischen Hofmeister und »aus der
Sucht gewisser hoher Stände, über das Volk erhaben zu sein«. »In
diesem Kapitel«, heißt es in dem Zensururteil Renfners, »werden
nun wieder die Vornehmen, oder wie sie Herr Zeune nennt, die
Welcome to Our Bookstore - The Ultimate Destination for Book Lovers
Are you passionate about books and eager to explore new worlds of
knowledge? At our website, we offer a vast collection of books that
cater to every interest and age group. From classic literature to
specialized publications, self-help books, and children’s stories, we
have it all! Each book is a gateway to new adventures, helping you
expand your knowledge and nourish your soul
Experience Convenient and Enjoyable Book Shopping Our website is more
than just an online bookstore—it’s a bridge connecting readers to the
timeless values of culture and wisdom. With a sleek and user-friendly
interface and a smart search system, you can find your favorite books
quickly and easily. Enjoy special promotions, fast home delivery, and
a seamless shopping experience that saves you time and enhances your
love for reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and
personal growth!

ebookgate.com