It was through Geoff Walden's site Third Reich in Ruins that inspired my first trip through Germany in 2007, and in particular his section on Oberschleissheim in which he shows the following photograph of his father- 2nd Lt. Delbert R. Walden, who was stationed at the Oberschleissheim Airfield with the 344th Bomb Group in 1946 after it was occupied by the U.S. Army Air Forces in April 1945- posing "in front of the adjacent Schleissheim Palace (which had suffered bomb damage during the war)." His outstanding site was originally based itself from the photos taken by his father whilst stationed in Germany as part of the Army of Occupation from December 1945 to July 1946.
Schleissheim Palace, located in Oberschleißheim near Munich, has witnessed a tumultuous history, particularly during the Nazi era. Its uses ranged from being a repository for art looted by the Nazis to serving as a headquarters for the American military government after the war. On the left Hitler is shown visiting the airfield at Oberschleißheim, showing particular interest in the Udet U 12 Flamingo, an aerobatic sports plane and trainer aircraft developed in Germany in the mid-1920s. In February 1942 Hitler referred to his visit here in his Table Talk (273) when reminiscing about the chaos he found after the Great War:
I therefore went to Dachau with Goring. We had the impression we'd fallen into a bandits' lair. Their first concern was to ask us for the password. We were led into the presence of a woman. I remember her, for this was the first time I saw a woman with her hair dressed like a boy's. She was surrounded by a gang of individuals with gallows-birds' faces. This was Schäffer's wife. We drove the bargain, although not without my warning them that they wouldn't see the colour of my money until the weapons were in my possession. We also found, on the airfield at Schleissheim, thousands of rifles,mess-tins, haversacks, a pile of useless junk. But, after it had been repaired, there would be enough to equip a regiment.
Before the war and today with baby Drake Winston from the front and rear of the palace. 
Himmler had been appointed assistant administrator in an artificial fertiliser factory, the Stickstoff-Land-GmbH, here in Schleissheim having benefited from family connections given that the brother of a former colleague of his father’s had a senior position in the factory. According to his biographer Peter Longerich, he remained at this job for just over a year, from September 1, 1922 until the end of September 1923. According to his reference from the firm, during his time he had "taken an active part particularly in the setting up and assessment of various basic fertilisation experiments." Just over a month after he left he experienced the event that was to influence his decision to make politics his profession- his participation in the Hitlerputsch of November 1923.  
But to understand Schleissheim's role during this period, it is essential to discuss the institution most closely linked to it: the Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg (ERR), established by the Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg in 1940. The ERR was instrumental in the Nazi regime's systematic looting of art and cultural property across occupied Europe. Specifically, Schleissheim was one of the storage facilities used by the ERR, which art historian Nicholas O'Donovan refers to as "the hub of Nazi cultural theft." The Nazi era at Schleissheim officially began when the palace was seized in 1939 under the orders of Hitler who envisaged Schleissheim playing a vital role in storing a wealth of cultural treasures. As historian Lynn H. Nicholas estimates, more than 21,000 objects were stored in the palace during this time.
However, Schleissheim served more than just a storage facility; it was a symbol of Nazi ideology. It displayed Hitler's intent to amass the greatest art collection in the world, a vision fuelled by his early ambition as an artist and the Nazis' belief in cultural superiority. This ambition is reflected in the comments of historian Andrew Winfield, who states that "the Schleissheim was not merely a warehouse, it was a physical manifestation of Hitler's megalomania and racial obsession." The ERR, on the other hand, took advantage of Schleissheim's capacity and turned the palace into a processing centre. Artworks stolen from across Europe, particularly from Jewish families, were brought here for cataloguing before being distributed to various destinations. One famous case is the Rothschild Collection, confiscated in 1940 and catalogued at Schleissheim. The Rothschild Collection remains one of the most poignant examples of the Nazis' comprehensive plunder of Europe's cultural wealth, specifically given the family's prominent status as one of the most influential Jewish families in Europe. The history of the collection's seizure, storage, and eventual restitution offers a tangible illustration of Schleissheim's role during the Nazi era. The Rothschild family, a banking dynasty of Jewish origin, held one of the largest private art collections in Europe prior to the war. The Nazis seized the family's collection under the 'forced donation' provision of their anti-Semitic policies. The vast array of art objects – which included paintings by old masters, furniture, armour, rare books, and manuscripts – was transported to the Louvre in Paris for initial processing. It was in 1940 that the collection was moved to Schleissheim Palace for cataloguing. Petropoulos estimates that the collection consisted of over 5000 pieces, many of which were recorded in an inventory compiled by the ERR. Despite the tumultuous circumstances, the Nazis maintained meticulous records of their plunder, with each item photographed and logged. At Schleissheim, the Rothschild Collection was sorted, categorised, and distributed, with some pieces being personally selected by senior Nazi officials for their private collections. For instance, Göring made multiple visits to Schleissheim and reportedly selected over 700 works of art from the Rothschild Collection. The Nazis' confiscation and systematic cataloguing of the Rothschild Collection at Schleissheim is emblematic of their calculated approach to cultural looting with Nicholas arguing that the theft of art was not an incidental byproduct of the war, but a "deliberately engineered aspect of the Nazis' cultural policy, designed to further marginalise and dehumanise the Jewish population." This was a clear demonstration of the Nazis' systemic dehumanisation and persecution of the Jews, using art theft as a weapon of cultural warfare. Schleissheim's role shifted significantly towards the end of the war.
During the war the air base was heavily bombed, which also led to considerable damage in the area and the schloß. The Altes schloß suffered severe damage during the war and was still in a ruinous state decades after the end of the war. The Allied bombing of Munich in 1944 resulted in the evacuation of a significant portion of the art stored in the palace. A restoration took place from 1970 onwards, but not all of the historical interiors have been restored, but some of them have been modernised for museum use. Hitler ordered the relocation of the art to safer places like salt mines and caves, fearing the potential destruction of his grand collection. This movement, as Robert Edsel argues, was "a desperate last-ditch effort to preserve what the Nazis had pilfered," reflecting the disarray that the Nazi regime found itself in during its final days.
Following the end of the war in 1945, Schleissheim was transformed into the headquarters of the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives (MFAA) section of the American military government. These "Monuments Men" were responsible for the restitution of the looted art, a task both logistically challenging and emotionally charged. As Petropoulos notes, "Schleissheim Palace, once a symbol of Nazi greed, became a beacon of hope for cultural restitution and justice.
Schloss Schleißheim's history is deeply intertwined with the evolution of Bavarian royalty, particularly under the reign of Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria. The complex, consisting of three palaces – Altes Schloss Schleißheim, Neues Schloss Schleißheim, and Schloss Lustheim – reflects the changing tastes and ambitions of the Bavarian rulers with the palace's architecture a physical manifestation of Bavarian power and influence in the 17th and 18th centuries. The grandeur of the Baroque and Rococo styles evident in the palace's design was a deliberate choice by Maximilian II Emanuel to project power and sophistication, paralleling contemporary European monarchies as seen here with the wife above the main staircase, shown in a prewar postcard and now. On the left is the wife standing over the magnificent staircase, architecturally the most significant area of the schloß and owes its inspiration to Henrico Zuccalli who created a division of stairways and landings within a high wide hall, which was soon recognised as exemplary and which would inspire Balthasar Neumann when he designed the staircases for the palaces at Brühl and Würzburg. Today the grand staircase of the New Schleißheim Palace stands as a monumental testament to the Baroque era's architectural and artistic prowess. More than a mere conduit between the floors, it's a crucial element in the palace's overall design, reflecting the grandeur and the political aspirations of its patron, Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria. Upon entering the grand staircase, one is immediately struck by the expansive layout and the intricate artistic details that adorn its surfaces. The staircase, designed in the early 18th century, is a masterpiece of Baroque architecture, embodying the era's penchant for grandeur, symmetry, and the integration of different art forms. The walls and ceiling of the staircase are covered in elaborate frescoes which aren't merely embellishments but are laden with symbolic and allegorical meanings, depicting scenes that celebrate the Elector's lineage, achievements, and the divine sanction of his rule. The exact names of these frescoes, unfortunately, are not well-documented in historical records, but their thematic content is consistent with the Baroque style of intertwining mythology with political symbolism. One of the most striking features of these frescoes is their use of perspective and trompe-l'oeil techniques. These artistic methods create an illusion of depth and movement, drawing the viewer into a dynamic interaction with the depicted scenes. The frescoes likely include references to classical mythology, allegorical figures representing virtues and values associated with the Elector, and possibly scenes from the Elector's own life and achievements.  The stucco work that frames and complements these frescoes is another element of artistic merit. The stucco, intricately designed and gilded, reflects the light in a way that enhances the visual impact of the frescoes. The craftsmanship involved in creating this stucco work is a testament to the skill and attention to detail of the artisans of the time.  The design of the staircase, with its wide steps and gentle incline, is not only aesthetically pleasing but also functional, facilitating the grand processions that were a hallmark of courtly life in the Baroque era. The staircase's placement within the palace also serves a symbolic purpose, representing the ascent to power and the divine ascent to the heavens, a common theme in Baroque architecture.  
In terms of materials, the staircase likely utilises marble for the steps, a material favoured for its durability and elegance. The choice of marble, along with the ornate plaster used for the stucco work, reflects the no-expense-spared approach of the Elector and the high level of craftsmanship of the period. The dome fresco by Cosmas Damian Asam shows the representation of Venus in the Forge of Vulcan, in which the weapons are made for her son Aeneas. Again, Aeneas in the baroque pose with periwig bears unmistakable traits of Elector Max Emanuel. This presentation was the first secular theme painted by the famous Bavarian fresco painter Asam and finds its thematic continuation in the ceiling paintings with scenes from the Trojan War (according to Virgil's "Æneid") in the neighbouring ballrooms.
Other architectural elements of Schloss Schleißheim, such as the grand hall of mirrors in the Neues Schloss, the intricate frescoes, and the extensive gardens designed in the French style, are not just artistic achievements but also political statements. These features have made the palace an attractive location for filmmakers seeking authenticity in historical representation. The palace's authentic Baroque interiors provide a ready-made set that requires minimal modification for period films, thereby preserving historical accuracy.  
The use of Schloss Schleißheim in film production can be traced back to the early 20th century with its first notable appearance was in the 1920s, in a film that depicted the life of a famous Bavarian monarch. The choice of Schloss Schleißheim for this film was due to its authentic representation of the Bavarian royal lifestyle and its relatively untouched state, which provided a realistic backdrop for the story. This early use of the palace set a precedent for its future role in film, establishing it as a go-to location for filmmakers seeking historical authenticity.
The film Ludwig II: Glanz und Ende eines Königs (1955), directed by Helmut Käutner, is a significant example of Schloss Schleißheim's use in cinema. This film, depicting the life of King Ludwig II of Bavaria, utilised the palace's authentic interiors and exteriors to portray the opulence and drama of the Bavarian court. The film's use of Schloss Schleißheim was not merely for aesthetic appeal but also to lend historical credibility to the portrayal of Ludwig II's reign. The palace's grand halls and elaborate gardens were used to great effect, showcasing the king's known affinity for extravagant architecture and art. Another notable film is The Three Musketeers (1973), directed by Richard Lester who of course was responsible for A Hard Day's Night and How I Won The War. Whilst primarily set in France, Schloss Schleißheim stood in for several French locations, including the Louvre. The palace's Baroque architecture convincingly doubled for 17th-century French settings, demonstrating its versatility as a film location. The film's production design team capitalised on the palace's authentic details, from the ornate stucco work to the expansive gardens, to create a believable and immersive period setting.
In more recent times, Schloss Schleißheim has been featured in The Monuments Men (2014), directed by George Clooney. This film, set during the Second World War, used the palace to represent an art repository. The choice of Schloss Schleißheim for this role was influenced by its historical association with art and culture, as well as its architectural grandeur, which lent a sense of scale and authenticity to the film's depiction of art rescue operations during the war. An earlier film that used the schloss for a WWII setting was Enemy at the Gates (2001), directed by Jean-Jacques Annaud. Although primarily set in Stalingrad, the palace was used to represent a Russian officers' club. This choice highlights the location's adaptability to various historical contexts and settings. The film's production team transformed the palace's interiors to fit the Soviet æsthetic of the 1940s, demonstrating the versatility of Schloss Schleißheim as a film location. In the film, the scenes shot here contributed to the film's portrayal of the contrast between the front-line hardships and the relative luxury of the officers' lives. The palace's opulent rooms served as a stark juxtaposition to the bleak and brutal battlefield scenes, adding a layer of visual and thematic complexity to the film which illustrates how a historical location like Schloss Schleißheim can be repurposed to fit diverse narrative needs, enhancing the film's storytelling through its unique architectural and historical attributes.
Such examples illustrate how Schloss Schleißheim's architectural and historical attributes have been effectively utilised in film. The palace serves not just as a backdrop but as a character in itself, adding depth and authenticity to the cinematic narrative. Its versatility as a location, able to represent different periods and settings, makes it a valuable asset in the filmmaker's toolkit. Nowhere was this better seen than in Kubrick's 'Paths of Glory' with Kirk Douglas, with the schloß serving as the French Army Headquarters. Considered one of the best anti-war films ever, it in fact only casually discusses the cruelty and futility of the war. An anti-militarist film, above all it is a bitter parable on governance structures and a commitment against the death penalty. On the left is Kubrick and Douglas in front of the palace with me at the site today. On the occasion of Douglas's hundredth birthday in 2016, the legendary actor spoke of what he described his “peculiar” friendship with Kubrick stating how “[h]e was a bastard! But he was a talented, talented guy.”  Their partnership began in 1955, when Douglas hired Kubrick to direct the film “Paths of Glory and it didn't take long for the two to begin clashing, a result of Kubrick having made major script rewrites without Douglas’ approval or knowledge. In the end, Douglas forced the director to use the original version.  “Difficult? [Kubrick] invented the word,” Douglas complained. 
In "Paths of Glory," the use of schloss Schleißheim extended beyond mere aesthetics to become a narrative device that underscores the film's critique of the class divisions and moral corruption within the military hierarchy. Like Enemy at the Gates mentioned earlier, the palace's luxurious setting starkly contrasts with the squalid conditions of the trenches, highlighting the disparity between the decision-makers and those who bear the consequences of their decisions. This contrast is not just visual but also thematic, as Kubrick uses the palace to symbolise the detachment and privilege of the upper echelons of the military.  The courtroom scene in the schloss is particularly significant as the grandeur of the setting, with its high ceilings and elaborate decor, serves to intimidate and dwarf the accused soldiers, emphasizing their powerlessness in the face of military authority. Kubrick's camera work, featuring long, uninterrupted takes, navigates through the palace's interiors, capturing the opulence that surrounds the military elite. This visual strategy effectively conveys the emotional and psychological distance between the generals and the soldiers, reinforcing the film's critique of the dehumanising aspects of war.  
Moreover, Schloss Schleißheim's historical resonance as a site of power and decision-making adds a layer of authenticity to the film. The palace, with its history of hosting Bavarian royalty and nobility, becomes a fitting backdrop for scenes depicting the machinations and deliberations of military leaders. This historical authenticity enhances the film's realism, making the viewer's engagement with the narrative more profound and thought-provoking.  Kubrick's use of Schloss Schleißheim in Paths of Glory demonstrates the director's skill in employing historical locations to deepen the thematic impact of his films. The palace is not just a backdrop but an active participant in the storytelling, its architecture and history contributing significantly to the film's exploration of themes such as authority, morality, and the human cost of war. The inclusion of Schloss Schleißheim in this classic film exemplifies how a historical location can be transformed into a powerful cinematic tool, enriching the narrative and leaving a lasting impression on the audience.
Schloss  kirk douglas paths glory schleissheim kubrickWith this film Kubrick achieved the final international breakthrough. Kubrick initially struggled to find a production company for the project until Kirk Douglas agreed to star in and produce the film with his own company Bryna and support from United Artists.
The film was made between March and May 1957 in the Bavaria Film Studios Geiselgasteig and here in Schloss Schleißheim with the battle scenes filmed in a field near Puchheim. It was during the filming that Kubrick met his future third wife Susanne Christiane Harlan, who sings he German folk song The Faithful Hussar in the final scene. At first, scriptwriter Jim Thompson had developed a softer, positive ending in which General Broulard pardoned Dax at the last second and punished the three soldiers with only thirty days imprisonment instead of execution. Kirk Douglas and the third scriptwriter Calder Willingham convinced Kubrick, however, to give the film a negative and thus commercially less promising, but more credible end. The soldiers were supplied by 9,733 conscripts who had been born in 1937. Although they could handle weapons, they sprang from the trenches far too cautiously and heroically. On September 18, 1957, the film premiered in Munich.
Schlosswirtschaft  kirk douglas paths glory schleissheim kubrick
Drake Winston standing in for Kirk Douglas
In France, the film was seen as an attack on the honour of the French army; indeed, the film was not shown there until 1975. This despite the fact that the movie, based on the novel by Humphrey Cobb is based on a historical event when, on March 10, 1915, the soldiers of an already heavily decimated company had refused to climb out of their trenches again in a militarily hopeless situation and once again attack a heavily fortified German position in Souain in the Département Marne. The commanding French General Géraud François Gustave Réveilhac had then ordered his artillery to open fire on their own positions, which the responsible artillery commander Colonel Bérubéden refused. A week later, on March 16, 1915, four randomly selected corporals (the so-called Caporaux de Souain ) were sentenced to death in a day-long court martial for insubordination and shot the following day to make an example of them. In the cemetery of Sartilly there stands a monument to one of them, Théophile Maupas. This monument had been erected in 1925, even before the executed on March 3, 1934 were officially rehabilitated. In addition, the scandalous mutinies in the French army in 1917 form the historical and moral background for the novel.
Schlosswirtschaft  kirk douglas paths glory schleissheim kubrickWhilst the movie was never officially banned, as similar massive protests were expected from military personnel and, on the other hand, students demonstrating against the Algerian war, as in Belgium (which often led to performance stops in Brussels), no attempt was made by the distributor to submit it to the censorship authority. The title sequence of the film is underlaid at the beginning with the Marseillaise. However, when the French government protested against the use of the national anthem, it was replaced by percussion instruments in countries considered particularly Francophile. In the French sector of Berlin, the responsible city commander issued in June 1958 a performance ban. He also threatened to withdraw the French festival contributions from the Berlin International Film Festival if Paths of Glory were to be shown in West Berlin cinemas during the festival. Governing Mayor Willy Brandt publicly described this as a "step back to 1948". After appeals by the Berlin Senate, United Artists finally took the film from the festival programme. Provided with an embarrassing preface stating how the incidents shown in the film were not to be considered representative of the army or the people of France, the film was allowed to finally premiere in November in the French sector.
In this scene one can see how Kubrick often creates a harsh dichotomy between the misery on the front to the luxury of baroque castles. The narrowness of the trenches is in contrast to the vastness of old castles.  When shooting this scene Kubrick used high-key technology in which the lighting is surprisingly bright. On the checkerboard-like floor where the court martial is held, the actors act like playing pieces. In contrast the dark prison, filmed in the stable of the castle, was filmed with few bright hatches sharp contrasting contrasts. The judgement of the judges in the procedure is left out, instead a black aperture appears. This same ballroom later transforms after the trial into the place where General Broulard, together with other high-ranking people, celebrates a splendid ballnight.  
The Großer Saal before and after the war, heavily damaged, and today with the wife. The room stands as the centrepiece of the New Schleißheim Palace, a testament to the grandeur of Baroque architecture and the political aspirations of its patron, Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria. This hall, spanning the entire width of the palace, is not merely a physical space but a canvas for political expression and artistic innovation.  The ceiling of the Great Hall is adorned with a series of frescoes, completed around 1726, by Johann Baptist Zimmermann, a renowned artist of the Bavarian Baroque period. These frescoes are not mere decorative elements; they are imbued with deep political and allegorical meanings, crafted to glorify and legitimise the reign of Maximilian II Emanuel. The central fresco, an awe-inspiring piece, depicts a congregation of Olympian gods, a clear allusion to the divine right and celestial favour that the Elector sought to associate with his rule. This portrayal of divine entities in the realm of a secular ruler was a common theme in Baroque art, reflecting the intertwining of the sacred and the profane in the political discourse of the time.
After its bombing and today
This colossal ceiling fresco by Jacopo Amigoni and two paintings on the narrow sides by Franz Joachim Beich depict the acts of war by Max Emanuel. Between 1703 and 1704, two other monumental paintings were created that were firmly installede. With a size of 5.10 x 9.69 metres and a weight of about 1.5 tonnes, the Relief of Vienna (1683) and The Battle of Mohács (1687) are the largest paintings in Bavarian state property (and probably the largest in Germany). Outside the world of art the Elector Max Emanuel of Bavaria has been the victim of consistently bad press and he is perhaps best known to the English-speaking world as the German princeling who backed the wrong horse and was soundly defeated at the Battle of Blenheim, the most famous victory of John Churchill, 1st duke of Marlborough, whose most notable descendant and biographer would of course be Sir Winston Churchill. This view of Emanuel is epitomised by the dismissive statement in the Encyclopaedia Britannica that he "had a restless character and was full of schemes which were of little benefit to his country." Nevertheless, throughout the schloss one can see Emanuel constantly being likened to Æneas and celebrated as a successful military commander over the Ottomans and the Allies during the War of Spanish Succession.

Surrounding this central piece are various scenes that skilfully intertwine mythological themes with historical events. These scenes serve as a narrative device, elevating the status of the Elector by placing his reign within a mythic context. The use of perspective and trompe-l'oeil techniques in these frescoes creates an illusion of depth, adding a sense of dynamism and vitality to the hall. This artistic approach was a hallmark of Baroque ceiling painting, aiming to blur the boundaries between reality and artifice, thus enhancing the viewer's experience.
The stucco work that frames these frescoes as seen in particular here on the left with Kirk Douglas is another element of artistic merit. Gilded and intricately designed, it complements the grandeur of the frescoes. The play of light, both natural and artificial, on these gilded surfaces creates a luminous effect, further accentuating the hall's opulence. During evening events, the strategic placement of candles and chandeliers would have highlighted specific elements of the frescoes and stucco work, transforming the hall into a spectacle of light and shadow.  
The floor of the Great Hall, often overlooked, is an integral part of its design and was a particular feature in another film, again featuring The Three Musketeers (2011), when it served as the office of Christoph Waltz's Cardinal Richelieu as seen here on the right. Featuring intricate patterns, it harmonises with the artistic narrative unfolding above. This attention to detail is a testament to the comprehensive approach of Baroque design, where every element of a space is considered part of the overall artistic expression.  From an architectural standpoint, the Great Hall is a marvel. Its vast open space was a significant engineering challenge, requiring careful planning to ensure structural integrity. This architectural feat is not just a reflection of the technical skills of the period but also an embodiment of the Baroque principle of Gesamtkunstwerk, where architecture, painting, and sculpture are integrated to create a unified artistic experience.  As a space for social gatherings, diplomatic receptions, and courtly events, the Great Hall was central to the political and cultural life of the Electorate of Bavaria. It was here that Maximilian II Emanuel would have hosted dignitaries, showcasing the power and sophistication of his court. The hall, therefore, was not just a space of aesthetic pleasure but a tool of political diplomacy and cultural display.
The room serves to glorify Max Emanuel as elector and victorious general against the Turks. On either side of the room are two paintings by Franz Joachim Beich showing the military exploits of Max Emanuel. The stucco decoration by Johann Baptist Zimmermann featuring draperies, weapons and trophies date from 1722. The ceiling is by Venetian Jacopo Amigoni showing the "Battle of Aeneas and Turnus for the hand of princess Lavinia" from which Aeneas emerges victorious- a metaphorical nod to Max Emanuel who too frequently found himself in exile. The room extends over two storeys in the middle of the main building and is flooded with window light from both sides. The stucco is by Johann Baptist Zimmermann based on the designs of Joseph Effner.
Standing in the Viktoriensaal, adjacent to the Great Hall, looking towards Jacopo Amigoni's painting Max Emanuel Receiving the Turkish Ambassadors (1721-1722). The room's additional ten battle scenes of Max Emanuel during the Turkish Wars of 1683-88 by Beich were created between 1720-1725. Both their rich detail and Beich's conscientiousness- he even visited the scenes of battles- make the paintings a valuable source of military knowledge. Surrounding the room from above are sculpted Hercules busts designed by Robert de Cotte with putti reliefs by Dubut. Considered one of the most beautiful interior decorations of the Baroque period, its three narrow high wall cupboards, which are embedded in the eastern wall, used to contain Turkish flags captured at the time by the Elector. The Viktoriensaal also served as a dining room. Its ceiling fresco "Dido receives Aeneas" was also painted by Amigoni and shows Æneas exiled from burning Troy being received by Queen Dido of Carthage whilst in the sky Venus, accompanied by cupids, forges a love affair. It has been argued that Max Emanuel primarily commissioned these paintings as a means of whitewashing the political mistakes that he had made during the War of the Spanish Succession, instead strategically focusing his contemporaries' attention on his earlier conquests over the Turks and away from his former, scandalous alliance with the French, which had caused him to be banned from the Empire and forced him into exile in Belgium and France. Besides serving the Elector's propagandistic political aims, Amigoni's pictorial program equally expressed Max Emanuel's life-long dynastic goals of attaining Bavarian kingship and advancing the claims of the Wittelsbach House to the Imperial throne. Whilst the Elector's motivations in commissioning these paintings spoke to his own specific concerns, they broadly evolved alongside contemporary French and Austrian diplomatic relations with the Ottoman Empire.
The Great Gallery before the war and today, extensively renovated. The magnificent interior decoration was the work of well-known artists such as Johann Baptist Zimmermann, Cosmas Damian Asam and Jacopo Amigoni. The Gallery Rooms contain masterpieces from the European baroque era. For its 57 metre-long layout the garden side behind the Great Hall was also employed by Robert de Cotte. It has been restored to its original state as much as possible during recent renovations, although its most significant masterpieces are now exhibited in the Alte Pinakothek. The six gilded console tables with their tabletops from Tegernsee marble are masterpieces of the Munich court art under Elector Max Emanuel, who had them carved 1722-1725 by court sculptor Johann Adam Pichler to designs by the Schleißheimer palace architect Joseph Effner for the Great Gallery. In 1761 they were supplemented by another table pair. From the time of Max Emanuel's grandson Elector Maximilian III. Joseph also acquired the five monumental glass chandeliers, which are around 1.70 metres high, and have been acquired in Vienna.
The movie also provided the setting for the enigmatic Last Year in Marienbad (1961) 
Schleißheim Palace, with its grandeur and historical significance, served as a pivotal filming location film, directed by Alain Resnais. This choice of location wasn't merely for its aesthetic appeal but also for the thematic resonance it brought to the film's enigmatic narrative. The palace's intricate architecture and ornate design elements played a crucial role in creating the film's surreal and dreamlike atmosphere, which is central to its storytelling. The film, known for its ambiguous narrative and non-linear storytelling, uses the palace's baroque architecture to enhance its themes of memory, time, and perception. The palace's long corridors, grand halls, and meticulously landscaped gardens become more than just a backdrop; they are integral to the film's exploration of these themes. The repetitive nature of the palace's architecture, with its symmetrical designs and endless corridors, mirrors the film's exploration of repetitive memory and the blurring of past and present. The palace's opulent interiors, particularly the grand halls and ornate rooms, are used to create a sense of disorientation and unreality. The film's characters move through these spaces in a way that blurs the lines between reality and imagination. The palace's lavish decorations, from its gilded stucco work to its elaborate frescoes, contribute to the film's dreamlike quality, making it difficult for the viewer to distinguish between what is real and what is a product of the characters' imaginations. 
The foot of the staircase as seen in the film. The gardens of Schleißheim Palace also play a significant role in the film. The geometrically arranged gardens, with their precise lines and manicured lawns, contrast with the film's fluid and ambiguous narrative. This juxtaposition adds to the film's surreal quality, as the rigid structure of the gardens stands in stark contrast to the fluidity of the characters' memories and perceptions. The gardens become a metaphor for the attempt to impose order on the chaos of memory and emotion. That said, the use of Schleißheim Palace in "Last Year at Marienbad" wasn't just a matter of aesthetics; it also serves as a commentary on the nature of art and history. The palace, with its rich history and artistic heritage, becomes a symbol of the enduring nature of art and the transient nature of human experience. The film's characters, wandering through the palace's halls and gardens, are transient figures against the backdrop of the palace's enduring beauty and historical significance, contributing not only to the film's visual appeal but also to its thematic depth. The palace's architecture and design elements are used effectively to explore themes of memory, time, and perception, while also serving as a commentary on the nature of art and history. The palace becomes a character in its own right, integral to the film's narrative and its exploration of the human psyche.
The movie won the Golden Lion at the 1961 Venice film festival whilst at the same time decried as
an "aimless disaster" by Pauline Kael. It has been included in both Michael Medved’s "The Fifty Worst Films of All Time (And How They Got That Way)" and Steven Shneider’s “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die” which demonstrates how much the film has continued to divide contemporary critics and audiences. Schleissheim's castle and grounds helped create one of the most exquisite films of all time, fitting the opening monologue's description of the site which seems to foreshadow Kubrick's The Shining:
Silent rooms where one’s footsteps are absorbed by carpets so thick, so heavy, that no sound reaches one’s ear, as if the very ear of him walks on… once again along those corridors, through these salons and galleries in this edifice of a bygone era, this sprawling, sumptuous, baroque, gloomy hotel, where one endless corridor follows another, silent empty corridors, heavy with cold, dark woodwork, stucco, moulded panelling, marble, black mirrors, dark-toned portraits, columns, sculpted door-frames, rows of doorways, galleries, side corridors, that in turn lead to empty salons, salons heavy with ornamentation of a bygone era…as if the ground were still sand or gravel or flagstones over which I walked once again…as if in search of you between walls laden with woodwork…among which even then I was waiting for you…far from this setting in which I now find myself standing before you waiting for the man who will not be coming now, who is not likely to come now to part us again, to tear you away from me. Will you come?
The opening scene of Last Year in Marienbad begins with a scan of the ceiling of the vestibule- the Halle im Erdgeschoss. Later the room makes a reappearance, shown below on the right and today with the wife. This space represents another quintessential example of Baroque architecture, stands as a testament to the grandeur and artistic ambition of the early 18th century. This ground floor hall, often the initial point of encounter for visitors, encapsulates the essence of Baroque design, characterised by its expansive space, high ceilings, and a symmetrical layout that was designed not just for utility but as a canvas for artistic expression. The hall's architecture, with its emphasis on magnificence and awe-inspiring scale, reflects the political and cultural aspirations of Maximilian II Emanuel, the Elector of Bavaria, under whose patronage the palace was expanded and embellished. In this hall, the walls and ceilings are adorned with elaborate frescoes and intricate stucco work, which are not mere decorations but narrations of power, prestige, and the divine right of the Elector. The frescoes, likely commissioned from renowned artists of the time, would have depicted scenes rich in allegory and symbolism. These scenes, whilst not documented in detail in historical records, are consistent with the Baroque style of intertwining mythology with political symbolism, often portraying allegories of peace, prosperity, and divine sanction. The exact names of these frescoes and their artists remain a subject of historical ambiguity, yet their thematic content and stylistic execution speak volumes about the era's artistic trends.
As recognised in Last Year in Marienbad the use of light in the Halle im Erdgeschoss is a critical element of its design. The strategic placement of windows and the incorporation of reflective surfaces would have been employed to create an interplay of light and shadow, enhancing the three-dimensional effect of the frescoes and the intricate stucco work. This manipulation of light not only adds depth to the artistic elements but also creates a dynamic and immersive experience for the viewer. The choice of materials in the hall reflects the opulence of the period and the no-expense-spared approach of the Elector. Marble was used for the flooring, a material favoured for its durability and elegance, whilst the stucco work would have been crafted with great precision, often gilded to catch and reflect the light. The craftsmanship evident in the hall is a testament to the skill and artistry of the artisans of the time, whose work has endured the test of time.
Last Year in Marienbad  schloss Shleissheim The room also provided the set for the film's hotel lobby
Last Year in Marienbad  schloss Shleissheim 
The staircase as it appears in Last Year in Marienbad and with the wife today.
bedrooms of Karl VII and of the Electress Maria Amalia 
The bedrooms of Karl VII and of the Electress Maria Amalia, wife of Elector Max III Joseph, known as the "Yellow Apartment."
New copies of the doors on both sides of the schloss now in place. The Western door on the left in particular, showing how much has been reworked since reconstruction  as the lion has since lost his sword and the facade has been considerably altered in style. In general the neoclassical facades intended by Leo von Klenze in his 1819 plans, intended to give the baroque building a more classical appearance, were not adopted during the reconstruction of the building after war but instead was based on the original plans by Effner. The doors, produced by Franz Ignaz Günther, had been weathered over two and a half centuries by wind and rain, leaving the reliefs to appear sanded down. A small putto even had nails in its cheeks because it had been repaired with small pieces of wood many years ago which led the Bavarian Palace Department to decide ten years ago to replace the Günther portals with copies at an eventual cost of about  € 140,000. Plans have been made to have it disassembled and replaced by copies by Oswald Senoner and his colleague Margaretha Binapfl using 3D scanning. This has led to ironic surprises. Firstly finding  suitable wood was difficult, as in order to rework the 450-kilogram door sections, oak wood was needed that was 70 centimetres wide, ten centimetres thick and four metres long. The restorers found what they were looking for in France but when the company's specialists worked the wood to get it into the shape of a door, they discovered a fragment of shrapnel was embedded in one piece; "a small revenge from the Ardennes campaign," according to project manager Heinrich Piening. At the moment the copies are in Nymphenburg Palace within the Restoration Centre's workshops.
How the grounds appeared in Paths of Glory, with the schloss forming the backdrop for the execution of the French soldiers. Kubrick intended that this form of punishment in itself would be shown as inhumane. The execution scene itself is a combination of military rites with the biblical story of the crucifixion- past the press and the regiment, including officers standing in a trellis, the condemned go to the three execution stakes that symbolise the three crosses of Golgotha. In addition, the priest recites the Golgotha chant from the Bible (Luke xxiii.39-43). Kubrick positioned himself early against the death penalty with this film; until the 1970s films against the death penalty were very rare.
Shown again on the left from the film, the grounds and gardens of Schloss Schleißheim, a significant component of the palace complex, are a splendid example of Baroque garden design, reflecting the grandeur and artistic vision of the era. These gardens, meticulously planned and executed, were not merely ornamental spaces but symbolised the power, control, and aesthetic sensibilities of the Electors of Bavaria. Their layout is characterised by precise geometric patterns, a hallmark of Baroque garden design. This symmetry and order are indicative of the desire to impose human control over nature, a concept that was central to Baroque aesthetics. The gardens were designed to be viewed from the palace, providing a seamless visual extension of the architectural grandeur. This integration of architecture and nature was a key element in Baroque design, aiming to create a harmonious and unified whole. Central to the gardens is the grand parterre, a large, ornamental garden space located directly in front of the palace. The parterre is typically composed of meticulously clipped hedges, ornamental flower beds, and gravel paths, arranged in intricate patterns. These designs often included allegorical and symbolic motifs, reflecting the intellectual and cultural interests of the time. The parterre at Schleißheim would have been a showcase of gardening artistry, demonstrating the skill and creativity of its designers.
The Altes schloß during the First World War on the left and in April 1945 after the Second on the right. Part of the Schleißheim Palace complex, the palace presents a rich tapestry of historical and architectural significance. Originating as a Renaissance country house in the late 16th century, it was commissioned by Duke Wilhelm V of Bavaria around 1598. The initial purpose of this manor house was to serve as a retreat for reflection and prayer, embodying the religious and cultural ethos of the time. Its architectural evolution is a reflection of the changing tastes and political ambitions of its patrons. The Renaissance style, characterised by its emphasis on symmetry, proportion, and adherence to classical antiquity, is evident in the original structure. This style, prevalent during the late 16th century, was indicative of a broader cultural movement across Europe, where a revival of classical learning and art was taking place. Building began in 1598 as a renaissance country house and hermitage founded by William V close to Dachau Palace. The central gate and clock tower between both courtyards still date back to the first building period. It was built in "Italian style" as a wide, plastered building with only one main floor on a basement floor and inspired by the Andrea Palladio villa. Completed by 1623, the building is divided by thirteen window axes, the middle section with the ballroom emerges as a risalit from the building. The structure was a modest building, reflecting the more straightforward architectural styles of the late 16th century. However, the significance of the Old Palace lies not just in its architecture but in its role as a precursor to the more elaborate developments that would follow. The palace served as a foundation for the expansion of the Schleißheim complex, illustrating the evolving tastes and increasing power of the Bavarian rulers.
In the 17th century, the Altes Schloss underwent significant transformations, particularly under the influence of Elector Max Emanuel, who reigned from 1680 to 1726. The Baroque additions to the palace during this period were not merely aesthetic enhancements but were also symbolic of the Elector's power and prestige. The Baroque style, known for its grandeur, drama, and movement, was well-suited to express the political aspirations and the opulent lifestyle of the Bavarian Electorate. The interior of the schloss is particularly noteworthy for its artistic elements. The frescoes and stucco work, commissioned from artists such as Peter Candid, are remarkable for their intricate detail and thematic richness. These works often depicted allegorical and mythological scenes, serving as a visual narrative of the Elector's reign and the divine right of his rule. The exact names and themes of these frescoes are not extensively documented, but they likely included scenes from classical mythology and allegories representing virtues and vices, typical of Baroque art.
1971 and today
The entrance area is designed in the Palladian motif, its facades sparingly decorated with renaissance decorative elements. The inner courtyard is called Maximilianshof, the outer one Wilhelmshof. Under William's son Maximilian I the buildings were extended between 1617 and 1623 by Heinrich Schön and Hans Krumpper to the so-called Old Palace. The rooms were decorated by Peter Candid. Maximilian's son and successor Ferdinand Maria died here in 1679. After heavy destruction in the war the palace with its spacious buildings had been left in ruins for decades until a restoration took place in 1970. Not all of the historic interiors were restored, but enough to allow it use as a modern, museum use. The reconstruction as shown here was limited to the southern half of the building. Most of the stucco decoration of the chapel Wilhelmskapelle has been preserved although only its clock tower dates from the first construction period. Particularly noteworthy is the Great Hall in the middle of the building, which today forms the foyer. Essentially, the stucco decoration of the former Wilhelmskapelle has been preserved.
Standing in front of the canal with the Lustheim palace behind, seen from prewar postcards and now. Lustheim Palace, an integral part of the Schleißheim Palace complex, stands as a distinct entity, both in terms of its architectural style and historical significance. Built on an island at the eastern end of the grand parterre of the Schleißheim Garden, it was constructed as a pleasure palace or maison de plaisance. Its creation in the late 17th century under the patronage of Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria, marked a period of significant cultural and architectural development in the region. The architectural design of Lustheim Palace is a departure from the grand Baroque style of the main Schleißheim Palace. Instead, it embraces the Italianate Baroque style, which is evident in its more intimate scale and ornate detailing. The palace's central pavilion is flanked by two wings, creating a U-shaped layout that is both elegant and functional. This design not only provides a scenic view of the surrounding gardens and water features but also creates a sense of privacy and exclusivity. The interior the palace is renowned for its exquisite frescoes and stucco work, which adorn the walls and ceilings of its rooms. These frescoes, created by prominent artists of the time, depict various themes ranging from mythological scenes to allegorical representations. The exact names and dates of these frescoes are not extensively documented, but their style and execution are indicative of the late 17th-century artistic trends in Bavaria. The frescoes in the main hall, for instance, are likely to portray themes of love and leisure, befitting the palace's function as a retreat for relaxation and entertainment.
The Lustheim was built by Enrico Zuccalli as a garden villa in Italian style in 1684-1688 for Maximilian II Emanuel and his first wife, the Austrian princess Maria Antonia. It lies on a circular island at the end of the baroque court garden. The interior is dominated by the large banqueting hall in the middle of the building. The frescoes were done by Johann Anton Gumpp, Francesco Rosa and Johann Andreas Trubillio. Since 1968 the palace has housed a grand collection of Meissen porcelain, only out-ranged by the Porzellansammlung in the Zwinger, Dresden. The palace once formed the centre point of a semicircle of round buildings. Two pavilions still exist: to the south of Lustheim Place the Renatus Chapel was erected in 1686 by Zuccalli in a pavilion. The northern pavilion houses the decorated stable which was built for the favourite horses of Elector Max Emanuel. The baroque court garden, laid out by Dominique Girard and others, is still largely in its original form.
The Schlosswirtschaft (palace restaurant)shown on the left on April 1, 1937 during the commemoration of the air field's 25th anniversary with high-ranking Nazi officials and, as I later found out by chance, as it appeared in Paths of Glory with Kirk Douglas on the right. The Schloßwirtschaft Oberschleißheim Biergarten is located on the palace grounds, with seating for over a thousand guests. Its roots can be traced back to 1597, when the founder of the Hofbräuhaus brewery retired to a farm there. Following the building of the New Schleissheim Palace in the 17th century, the Schloßwirtschaft provided catering to its workers and servants and later supported a royal brewery followed which, along with the introduction of a railway link to Landshut, allowed the Schloßwirtschaft to gain popularity. Historically, the Schlosswirtschaft played a pivotal role in the daily life of the palace, catering to the needs of visitors, courtiers, and sometimes even the Electors themselves. It was a place where the social hierarchy of the palace was momentarily relaxed, allowing for a more informal interaction among different classes. The presence of such an establishment within the palace grounds is indicative of the importance placed on hospitality and social gatherings in the Bavarian court. 
Architecturally, the Schlosswirtschaft complements the grandeur of the Schleißheim Palace. Whilst it may not match the opulence of the main palatial structures, its design and construction were carried out with considerable attention to detail, ensuring that it blends harmoniously with the overall aesthetic of the palace. The building likely features elements typical of Bavarian architecture of the period, possibly including a gabled roof, ornate windows, and a façade that echoes the Baroque style of the palace.  The interior of the Schlosswirtschaft would have been designed to accommodate a variety of functions, from dining and socialising to possibly hosting small events. The layout and décor would reflect both its practical purpose and the desire to create an inviting atmosphere. In terms of its historical significance, the Schlosswirtschaft is a testament to the lifestyle and customs of the Bavarian court. It provides insights into the daily operations of the palace and the importance of social interaction and hospitality in the courtly life. The Schlosswirtschaft was not just a place for dining; it was a microcosm of the palace's social life, encapsulating the traditions and customs of its era. With the establishment of the airfield in 1912 the Schloßwirtschaft became a regular meeting place amongst pilots although the brewery itself has since closed.
Nearby in the same grounds is this memorial to downed airmen of the Great War. Military aviation was a completely new discipline during the First World War, and Schleißheim was its centre in Bavaria. When the Great War broke out in 1914, the first motorised human flight was just eleven years old. In 1912 the Kingdom of Bavaria had still retained an independent army and entered military aviation. A "Luftschiffer- and Kraftfahrabteilung" of the army was formed and stationed by order of the war Ministry of March 15, 1912 with a "flying company" in Schleißheim. The first biplane landed on extensive areas of the state-owned Remonte depot, a training centre for military horses, on April 16. Three tents and rebuilt buildings of the Remonte depot formed the nucleus of the airfield.  With Germany's mobilisation on August 1, Schleißheim found itself the only flier replacement section of the Bavarian Army with 44 officers, 52 NCOs and 239 men under the command of Hauptmann, later Major Friedrich Stempel. From the beginning of the war until the end of 1916, all flight personnel were trained here and all machines were serviced and sent to the front. From then until the end of the war, it remained the center and most important aviation location. As early as August 7, the first three aviation departments, together with sixteen aircraft, set off for Lorraine in support of infantry on the western front.  The aircraft were disassembled in their home companies, stowed on railroad cars and transported to the front, where they were reassembled and placed in tents. Maintenance and repair then took place again in the aviation replacement departments. Aircraft were intended in the war strategy 1914 exclusively for reconnaissance. A pilot and an observer stared out of the air or shot photos, which were then sent to the High Command for strategic planning. Only during the course of the war were suitable armament systems developed, and thus the discipline of fighter flying established, which now produced with the "Avenger Assen"- a completely new type of modern war hero. Incidentally, one of the most famous, Ernst Udet, was rejected by the Bavarian Fliegerkompanie in Schleißheim for being too small; he had to join the Prussian flyers. In Schleißheim 900 pilots and 735 observers were trained during the World War. In average three-month courses, the pilots were trained and certified after a cross-country flight of at least 250 kilometres to completion as front-compatible. The observers, who had to be qualified given their strategic tasks in contrast to the pilots in the officer rank, had initially only the camera to use, but later also the on-board weapon, usually a mounted on the fuselage machine gun.  As fast as the new war technology developed, the capacities in the flying company in Schleißheim had to keep pace feverishly. The first fortified building on the new airfield, a workshop building with guard and commandant, was built by 1913 and is now part of the German Museum. It included two wooden aircraft hangars. Even in peacetime, two team barracks, an officer's dorm, a pump house and a sewage treatment plant, a stable, a vehicle garage and two other aircraft hangars were built. By 1916, when the "Hindenburg Programme" expanded armaments and especially aviation exponentially, the strength of the Fliegerersatzabteilung in Schleißheim tripled. Gigantic expansion plans however were never fully implemented. The soldiers had to be quartered privately in the village; in inns, in the schoolhouse, and even in unused rooms of the castles. At the end of 1917, 245 officers were stationed in Schleißheim. In addition, 273 women provided auxiliary services as typists, travelling daily by train from Munich due to the lack of remaining accommodation in Schleissheim.  From mid-1916, six other flying schools were built in Bavaria, end of 1917, a second flyer replacement department in Fürth. Observer training was reserved exclusively for Schleißheim and the airfield was now listed as MilFlSch (Military Aviation School), FlBeobSch (Fliegerbeobachterschule), FlFuSch (Fliegerfunkerschule) and Libist (Lichtbildstelle).  The Observer School, the core of the Bavarian military flight training, received its own building on the west side of the Würm Canal in early 1917 with the increasing requirements imposed by the war. The showpiece was a state-of-the-art artillery and bomber classroom with a flight simulator, in which the flight attendants were able to practice shooting with on board machine guns. Crashes in and around the airfield were documented repeatedly.  The exhibition halls of the museum were built around the historic Kommandantur, the oldest surviving relic of the airfield from the time of the Royal Bavarian Air Force. At the end of the war Schleißheim served as a location of a free corps in the process of eradicating the Munich Soviet Republic. In the plans of the government for the construction of a Reichswehr of the German Reich Schleißheim received the status of a Reichswehr pilot station. On January 10, 1920 however, the Treaty of Versailles came into force, which demanded the complete demobilisation of the German Air Force. On May 8, 1920, the Bavarian Air Force was dissolved.  In Schleißheim airfield buildings were demolished or dismantled and delivered to France. The new shipyard, which was started in 1918 and was under construction until the end of the war, was completed, but then leased as a cattle shed following the ban of the Treaty of Versailles. Rudolf Hess was stationed here after the Great War, and his
army personnel file records that on 7 May he joined a volunteer unit of Epp’s Freikorps; left it on 15 October; was temporarily recruited by the local airfield at Schleissheim on 29 March 1920; flew an aeroplane to a Bavarian unit stationed in the Ruhr on 6 April; and finally resigned his commission in Munich on the last day of April 1920.
Irving (8) Hess- The Missing Years
At the end of the 1920s the German commercial aviation school (founded in 1925 in Berlin) opened a branch in Oberschleissheim. Bypassing the Versailles Treaty, hundreds of flight students were specifically prepared for military use. Soon after the Nazis seized power when, in 1935, the rearmament of Germany was announced, Schleißheim became an air force base for the Luftwaffe and the German commercial aviation school became an official fighter pilot school. During the war Schleißheim became an important training centre, for example for fighter pilots, aviators, radio operators. Technical developments have now made "blind flight" possible; The "Night Hunting School" was founded in 1942. It was not until 1943 that a combat unit was stationed at Oberschleissheim airfield for the first time.

The images on the left show a Nazi ceremony commemorating the airfield's 25th anniversary on April 1, 1937 and the following day on Heldengedenktag, bottom. During the Third Reich the airfield facilities were continuously expanded. In 1934, for example, the “Junkershallen” were built, which still serve as hangars for the flying clubs based in Schleißheim. Later the runway was also fortified; before it had only consisted of grass. The war was also the darkest chapter in the history of Oberschleissheim airfield. Forced workers from the nearby Dachau concentration camp and Russian PoWs were used for construction and clearance work. When the Americans took over the site after the war they used the prisoner-of-war camp to intern former ϟϟ members. In the nearby Gut Hochmutting was a satellite camp of the Dachau concentration camp with eleven concentration camp prisoners from a bomb clearance command.  
After the Nazis came to power, it was expanded into a Luftwaffe air base in the course of the Nazis' armament efforts. The construction work was planned and supervised by the architects of the so-called post office building school. This architectural style, which was unusual for the Nazi era, is also known as "Bavarian Modernism". The flight control building, designed by Robert Vorhoelzer in 1933-34 and demolished in December 2007, was the archetype of this architectural direction in air force construction. From 1938 the Schleißheim aviation school was built in the southern part of the airfield. The accommodation area of the school was used from 1945 to about 1953 as the Schleissheim DP camp (Feldmoching). Under the code name Minotaur, a bunkered control centre for day and night hunting in southern Germany was built in 1943. The bunker was blown up in 1971.  The airfield was repeatedly attacked by the Allies; the images on the right show the USAAF on a bombing run over Oberschleißheim and the resulting damage. On December 21, 1942, the first major attack by the British troops took place, which not only hit the airfield, but also large parts of the municipality of Oberschleissheim. Numerous other attacks should follow. In the post-war period, the American military initially took over the site and used the site, among other things, to train helicopter pilots for their use in the Vietnam War. French and German military units were also temporarily stationed at the airfield. The tower west of the airfield was built by the Americans and still bears witness to that time although it is only used for special events. The Americans left Schleißheim in 1973 and handed the place over to the Federal Republic of Germany. Military use ended in 1981. 

In the district of Unterschleißheim is Lohhof, the nearest station to the Bavarian International School where I work. The population of Unterschleißheim itself exploded between 1933 when it had 753 inhabitants to 1939 with 1,737 inhabitants when the Nazis focused on housing construction in Lohhof. In 1937 a forced labour camp was set up in Lohhof near the train station to extract flax for the textile industry, called "flax roasting", in which hundreds of French and Polish women were used for forced labour. From 1941, Jewish women were also deployed, whilst at the same time deportations began from the Lohhof flax roastery until the camp was closed in 1942.
Bavarian International School during the war Haimhausen
Behind the .50-cal. Machine Gunner on the Squad Halftrack from a series of photos by Sergeant C.O. Witt (HQ Platoon, B CO., 65th AIB) showing the American 20th Armoured Division leaving Haimhausen travelling towards Lohhof on April 29, 1945. By this time at least two thousand members of the Waffen-ϟϟ and a last contingent of adolescent flak helpers and older men from the "Volkssturm" had gathered for the defence of Munich. A bloodbath awaited them all. First, several American tanks were destroyed. Flight support was denied to the units due to fresh snow and fog. Only by around 9.30 did infantrymen from the Rainbow Division, an elite unit, come to the rescue from Schleissheim airfield. Bulldozers simply rolled over the trenches, with numerous German defenders buried. The nearby barracks continued to fight hand to hand until 15.00. Besides Lohhof, the ϟϟ also resisted in Feldmoching, Freimann and Schleißheim. In Planegg, fanatical soldiers of the ϟϟ fought fiercely after the occupation. During the "Battle of Lohhof" about an hundred were killed, forty of whom were Americans. On the left is the site of the assault then and now. Lohhof's subsequent growth after the war can be seen here in the GIF showing the site on November 1, 1943 and today. Everything looked peaceful from the Maisteig on what is now the B 13 as white flags fluttered in Lohhof. However, units of an ϟϟ army corps had taken up positions in Lohhof at night, hiding in the bushes on the railway embankment, in houses in Hollern and in the flax roast in Unterschleissheim. When the Americans advanced, the German soldiers first let two tanks pass, then opened fire on the crew trucks behind them. The tanks were almost on Kreuzstrasse before they were forced to react leading to a bitter struggle. The tanks fired and the American soldiers crawled up to the occupied houses, threw petrol cans into them and fired on them to set them on fire. The flax roast also burned and the guesthouse beside the station ended up being badly damaged by shelling. Whilst nearly on the German defenders were killed, on the American side seven have been named, including the commander and his driver along with forty dead and wounded. Apparently if the artillery had not won the fight, aircraft would have been called to bomb Unterschleissheim. As it is, the fighting had continued into the early evening. The part of the air base crew stationed in Unterschleissheim had surrendered without a fight and were collected in the school yard for transport. The Americans then searched the houses because they feared more ambushes. Three young ϟϟ soldiers had fled and were hiding in the straw with a farmer. The Americans stabbed the haystacks with pitchforks but didn't find the three who were eventually rescued from the straw four days after the Americans left - almost starved and thirsty.
Much of the information and images for the Battle for Lohhof come from Rich Mintz and his remarkable Facebook group 20th Armoured Division in World War II. The image on the left relates to colonel Newton W. Jones, Commander of Combat Command B (CC-B), who was the first casualty in the ambush in Lohhof, killed by a sniper as he led his troops whilst standing in his Jeep. The photograph and caption is from 1st Lieutenant Felix E. Mock, commander, 3rd Platoon, B CO, 65th AIB. That on the right is of 1st Lieutenant Samuel F. Barnes of 2nd Platoon, B CO, 65th AIB (Task Force 20), who too was killed in action in a German ambush April 29, 1945. The letter is the death notification to Mrs. Barnes from B CO. Commander, CPT George Jared, 65th AIB.
Brauerei Gasthaus Lohhof warThe Brauerei Gasthaus Lohhof today (where the wife and I first stayed when we moved to Germany from China) and as it appeared April 29, 1945 with the Americans after the battle for the town. On the right is how it appeared three years later. Here the Americans celebrated their victoryand "decimated the beer stores", as Christoph says. The group advanced to Munich meeting resistance, in Hochbrück, in Neuherberg. Fighting raged on the tank meadow and around the ϟϟ barracks in Freimann, the Americans lost fifteen tanks there alone with seventy of their soldiers killed and several wounded. On the afternoon of April 30, the day Hitler committed suicide, resistance in the barracks was broken. Munich was occupied from May 1. The Nazis were then picked up by the Americans in Unterschleissheim, Pötsch reports and then taken to a camp in Moosburg.
Brauerei Gasthaus Lohhof warLohhof was the site of a flax processing plant owned by the Lohhof Flax Processing Company (Flachsröste Lohhof GmbH.) which was, in effect, a forced labour camp. Located on what is now (possibly appropriately) Siemensstraße, today it is the site of the refugee centre to which my students at Bavarian International School visit as part of their service commitments. Administratively, it was a satellite camp of Dachau. The location was chosen due to its proximity to Munich and to the local train station. The camp premises consisted of residential barracks, barns, retting pits and an initial processing plant. The municipal Aryanisation Department (Arisierungs-Dienststelle) of Munich instigated and supervised the forced employment of three hundred Jews at the camp. Among these, 110 were women and they worked at the plant; 68 of them were sent from Lodz, and other women had to arrive each day from Munich, primarily from the assembly site at the Berg am Laim monastery, and return at night using trains and streetcars. Lohhof also served as an assembly site where Jews from Munich were assembled prior to their deportation. Additionally, during the war, over 100 foreign workers from Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Russia, Poland and the Ukraine were employed at the plant. When the mass deportations of German Jews began in November 1941, the Jewish workers were sent away from Lohhof to the Milbertshofen camp, and from there they were deported to Kaunas (Kowno), Piaski, Theresienstadt (Terezin), and Auschwitz. The last Jewish women who worked at the camp were transferred on October 23, 1942, and were in all likelihood deported to Auschwitz on May 18, 1943. During the last few weeks of the war, the plant was damaged; afterwards, it was rebuilt. Of the 300 Jews who worked at Lohhof, only thirty survived the war.
Max Strnad has researched the camps for Jews in Munich in some detail. A special case there was the Lohhof Jewish Labour Detachment (Jüdisches Arbeitskommando). The Lohhof camp was established in June 1941 on the orders of the Munich Aryanization Authority (Arisierungsstelle), a radical antisemitic office of the Munich/Upper Bavarian Regional Headquarters (Gauleitung) of the Nazi Party. This was the third residential and work camp for Jews established in Munich, after the Milbertshofen "Jewish Settlement" (Judensiedlung) and the Berg am Laim "Home Facility" (Heimanlage). The Aryanization Authority set up this camp system in 1941, as a multipurpose instrument of terror against the Jewish population. The camps served, apart from their central function of forced labor, to remove Jews from rental accommodation and put them into separate Jewish residences, for better supervision and also to assemble them ready for deportation. In Lohhof, mainly Jewish women between fourteen and forty-five years old were deployed there in June 1941, but later much older Jewish women and men were included. Until the fall of 1942, about 250 Jews were employed there altogether. The Jewish work force numbered on average about 110 people. Some seventy women were accommodated in barracks on the factory grounds, while the remainder had to travel daily from Munich. After Gauleiter Adolf Wagner's decree forbidding the use of trams by Jews in September 1941, the daily trip to Unterschleissheim became an exhausting journey lasting several hours. On November 20, 1941, sixty-three people, comprising more than half of the Jewish forced labourers, were deported to Kaunas in Lithuania. In the middle of December 1941, the Lohhof Flachsröste (flax factory) was sent sixty-eight young Jewish women, who had been working on other flax-roasting farms in Bavaria for several months, but who all originally came from the Łódź (Litzmannstadt) ghetto. These Polish Jewish women remained in Lohhof until the fall of 1942, when they were transferred to Augsburg, where they stayed as a group in another camp, before being deported to Auschwitz in 1943.
 Simone Gigliotti, Hilary Earl (268) A Companion to the Holocaust