Hans Margulies (1889 - 1960)
Engaged, but ....
In 1919 Hans was engaged to be married.
How do I know this ? Because I read it in a book !
Or, to be more precise, because I read it in five books !!!!!
I recently entered Hans margulies in the "Google Books"
search machine and was surprised to find references to five books about Joseph Roth,
where Hans was mentioned. The books themselves weren't available on Google Books,
but I managed to track them all down in the local libraries here.
The story is as follows:
In 1919 Joseph Roth was in his 'local' Café-House in Vienna, when he saw a young lady
Friederike Reichler. She was engaged to a journalist, Hans Margulies. (Some accounts
say Hans was with her at the time, others say that she was alone.)
Joseph started courting Friederike (Friedl) and she broke off her engagement to Hans.
Joseph Roth, also a journalist at that time, was working for the "Neue Tage" newspaper,
which went bankrupt, so he then moved to Berlin. Friedl went with him to Berlin for a
while, but then came back to Vienna. Roth kept contact with Friedl, through letters and
occasional trips to Vienna, but in 1922 she wrote to him, to say that her parents had
been putting pressure on her, and she was re-engaged to Hans und would have to marry him
"Ich kann dich nicht vergessen, aber ich muß heiraten."
(I can't forget you, but I have to get married.)
Letter from Friederike to Joseph Roth
Roth came to Vienna immediately, and a few days later, on March 5th. 1922
Joseph Roth and Friederike Reichler were married in the Wiener Pazmaniten Tempel.
So far, so good, but there are a few "holes" in this story !
Joseph Roth married Friederike on 5th. March 1922 after
her parents had put
pressure on her, to marry Hans ...
... but Hans married Maria Remenyi on the 26th. June 1920
All five sources say that Friedl was the fiancée of Hans Margulies. It is
possible that one of these biographers wrote "Hans Margulies" without checking,
and the others just quoted him, without checking, but I find that very unlikely !
Four of these books are "normal" biographies, but one book, by Soma Morgenstern was
written by a friend of Joseph Roth's and consists of stories and reminiscences rather
than a biography.
Morgenstern not only describes Hans accurately, but he also later accused Roth of
"stealing" Hans' fiancée from him, not so much because he fell in love with her,
but because Hans wore a monocle ! (see image 4, below)
In 1913, when he was a young student, Roth was often laughed at for wearing a monocle.
Seeing Hans in the Café, wearing a monocle must have reminded him of this.
Da saß auch auch das Mädchen Friedl, an der Seite ihres Bräutigams, Hans Margulies. Das war ein
junger Journalist, der zur Zeit, da Joseph Roth noch Polizeireporte für Wiener Arbeiter-Zeitung
schrieb, schmissige Sportberichte verfaßte, die er gerne mit englischen Fachausdrücke wie endspurt,
grandioser finish und ähnlichem Zierat verbrämte. Er trug auch ein Monokel, was Joseph Roth,
der am selben Tisch zu sitzen pflegt, nicht wenig ärgerte, obwohl - oder, wie man's nehmen will, weil -
er selbst im Jahre 1913 als junger Student auch ein Monokel zu tragen pflegte, was bei seinen nächsten
Freunden (zum Beispiel bei mir) nicht wenig Hohn erregte. Ich erwähne dieses eigentlich lächerlich
belanglose Vorkommnis, weil ich im Ernst überzeugt bin, daß Joseph Roths Interesse für die Braut von
Hans Margulies mit dem Ärger über sein Monokel begonnen hat. 
(Memo to self: find the second quote !)
Hans' marriage certificate is not the original but a copy, produced in 1987.
Could it be that someone made a mistake, reading and transcribing the original ?
(Memo to self: try and get a copy of the original marriage certificate !)
Not necessarily proof of anything, but another mystery:
In Lunzer & Lunzer-Talos, 1994
there is a picture of Friedl with a soldier.
The caption reads
Friedl Reichler mit Hans Margulies [?]
... probably with her first fiancée, Hans Margulies
Is this Hans or not ??
In the hope of finding an answer I published several pictures of Hans, together with this one,
on a forum and asked for other opinions.
The consensus was, that this is not Hans because
- The facial structure is different
- Hans was decorated and promoted in the war, and his military photos show him with
medals and officers uniform. The man in the photo seems to be an ordinary private, and it is
questionable, whether Hans would pose for such a photo without wearing his dress uniform.