The 'Black Horror on the Rhine'
A campaign of the 1920s alleging that African soldiers in the French occupation force were raping and mutilating German women on a mass scale. Investigators found the crimes did not exist. The campaign ran for a decade anyway, in four countries.
Why this verdict
Debunked at the time and since: French, American and British investigations of the occupied Rhineland found the alleged epidemic of rapes and mutilations by African colonial troops to be unsupported — the local complaint records did not contain it — and historians have documented the campaign as a manufactured propaganda operation.
- Period
- Region
- Reading time
- Sources
01The claim
That Senegalese, Malagasy and Indochinese soldiers of the French army occupying the Rhineland after 1918 were committing sexual crimes and mutilations against German civilians on an epidemic scale, and that France had deployed them deliberately in order to degrade the German population.
02Where it came from
The German government and the nationalist press began the campaign in 1920, in the aftermath of a war in which colonial troops had been decisive at Reims and elsewhere, and in which German propaganda had already framed their use as a racial outrage. It was carried abroad with unusual success: the British socialist journalist E. D. Morel, previously known for exposing atrocities in the Congo Free State, coined the English phrase and pressed the campaign in the Daily Herald, and committees formed in Britain, the United States, Sweden and Canada. Postcards, pamphlets and films circulated the imagery. Adolf Hitler took up the theme in Mein Kampf, adding that Jews had brought the troops to the Rhine.
03What the record shows
✕ DEBUNKED — Investigated and refuted. Here is what actually happened.
The claims were investigated at the time, repeatedly, and failed on the most basic test: the complaints did not exist in the places where they would have been recorded. Local German authorities, whose interest ran the other way, could not produce them in the numbers alleged. Inquiries by the French military, an American investigation, and British press scrutiny all found the specific atrocity stories unsupported; individual crimes by individual soldiers occurred, as in every occupation, at rates no different from those of the white French garrison.
The campaign's own conduct is evidence of its character. The same photographs and drawings were reused across countries with new captions; the images were largely produced by the campaign rather than gathered from events; and the volume of material rose and fell with the diplomatic calendar — the Ruhr crisis and the reparations negotiations — rather than with anything happening in the Rhineland.
The historical literature, principally Keith Nelson's 1970 study and Robert Reinders' work on Morel, treats it as a case of a state-sponsored propaganda campaign that succeeded internationally by attaching a racial panic to a real diplomatic grievance. Morel's role is the part that has drawn most attention since, because he was a man with a genuine record of exposing colonial atrocity who took up a fabricated one.
04What it cost
The children of German women and colonial soldiers, several hundred of them, were catalogued by the Nazi state as 'Rhineland bastards' and sterilised without consent from 1937 — a direct administrative consequence of a decade of manufactured panic. The entry is in this archive under the rule that governs the Springfield case: a false claim casting a racial group as a criminal menace is a conspiracy narrative about them, not by them, and belongs here for the same reason as any other refuted claim — because the refutation is the record.