Ingo Haar, Michael Fahlbusch, eds.. German Scholars and Ethnic Cleansing, 1920-1945. New York: Berghahn Books, 2005. xxii + 298 pp. $25.00, paper, ISBN 978-1-84545-048-9.
Reviewed by Eric J. Engstrom
Published on H-German (May, 2006)
The philosopher Odo Marquard once own profession; they have found it decidedly provocatively defned history as a "Dauerfucht wanting. aus dem Gewissenhaben in das Gewissensein."[1] Georg Iggers has written a foreword for the Arguably, Marquard's observation was never collection, briefy sketching the historiographic truer than in the 1970s and 1980s. Among seg‐ terrain out of which this volume emerged. He, like ments of the historical profession at that time many others, is right in emphasizing the embar‐ (and not only in Germany), there was no shortage rassing failure of professional historians up until of practitioners who, by exposing the crimes of the early 1990s to examine critically the history of the National Socialist regime and documenting its their discipline during the Third Reich. This fail‐ murderous work, were inclined to cast them‐ ure is the more glaring for implicating those histo‐ selves as the conscience of the nation. Of course, rians who, in the wake of 1968, defned them‐ there can be no doubt that (especially in Ger‐ selves as standard bearers of a critical historio‐ many) there was a pressing need to research graphic tradition. those crimes and the events that precipitated Although the editors do not explicitly adver‐ them. Perhaps not surprisingly, however, histori‐ tise it as such, this is a collection of studies on the ans turned their critical gaze more easily toward ethics of historiographic practice. Ingo Haar and other professions (especially doctors, but also civil Michael Fahlbusch have set themselves the task of servants, lawyers and politicians) than they did demonstrating that historians and other scholars toward their own disciplinary ancestors. Research in the humanities stood "prominently in the fore‐ over the past decade--thanks in part to a ground" (p. xix) when it came to drafting and im‐ boomerang efect generated by the searing criti‐ plementing Nazi policies of ethnic cleansing and cism aimed at East German historians post-1989-- genocide. The emphasis is on felds such Volks‐ has begun to change this. The essays published in geschichte, Ostforschung, Westforschung, Heimat‐ this volume represent the eforts of a generation forschung and Migrationsforschung. The editors of young scholars to question the past of their H-Net Reviews stress that researchers in these felds hailed from linked with state policy, be it the revision of the widely varying disciplines, ranging from statistics Versailles Treaty in the Weimar Republic, the re‐ and geography to linguistics and cartography. His‐ settlement and extermination policies in the torians, however, also played a prominent role in Third Reich or postwar repatriation policies and these policy-oriented research endeavors. At the Western reorientation during the Cold War. Be‐ time, various generic terms were used to describe yond this, however, Haar stresses that völkisch these practitioners, such as Volkstumspolitische historians tended to share the antisemitic visions Berater, Volkstumsspezialisten or Ethnopolitiker of the National Socialist regime and its ideology of (p. 59). Some of the authors in this volume follow Lebensraum. Focusing mainly on the Nord- und Michael Burleigh in describing them as "eth‐ Ostdeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, he empha‐ nocrats." sizes the overlapping "racist and conservative na‐ About half of the contributions have an ex‐ tionalist dispositions" (p. 11) within the organiza‐ plicitly biographic focus. One of the great advan‐ tion. At the same time, however, he argues that tages of this approach is that it calls into question (like the regime itself) ethnocratic scholars be‐ the historical ruptures of 1933 and 1945. Almost came progressively more radical in their policy all of the chapters highlight the biographic perme‐ proposals. In Haar's account, therefore, an implic‐ ability of these dates. Furthermore, this approach it tension exists between political dynamics on the turns a spotlight on the history of scholars who one hand, and the claim that many practitioners whitewashed their biographies and massaged of Volksgeschichte were inherently antisemitic on their curricula vitae. Indeed, many of the eth‐ the other. More traditional histories would have nocrats depicted in this book went on to pursue resolved this tension along a bipolar functionalist/ well-respected, lucrative and even highly decorat‐ intentionalist spectrum. But Haar avoids deploy‐ ed careers in the Federal Republic. This is one of ing this weary model to organize his material, the more important aspects of the book. It sug‐ largely eschewing analytic frameworks in favor of gests that if historians are in search of lines of descriptive narrative. continuity within their own profession, it may not Michael Fahlbusch's account of ethnopolitical be racism, but careerist opportunism that is likely experts in the Reichssicherheitshauptamt is more to be the strongest bridge spanning the caesurae rigorously structured than Haar's chapter. of 1933, 1945 and indeed 1989-90. Watching con‐ Fahlbusch sketches the highly organized and con‐ temporary historians scramble to secure funding voluted network of ethnocrats and research insti‐ from federal or EU-sponsored projects today can tutions put in place to serve the aims of the SS. De‐ be a disturbing reminder of not-so-bygone prac‐ scribing the Volksdeutsche Forschungsgemein‐ tices. schaften as a "brain trust" (p. 31), he outlines the Two introductory articles by the editors pro‐ extensive fnancial and administrative resources vide important context for the book as a whole. that the regime devoted to ethnic German re‐ Ingo Haar's chapter on "German Ostforschung search societies. He also uses a cohort structure to and Anti-Semitism" argues that, in order to under‐ analyze three distinct groups of elite functionar‐ stand the role Ostforschung played in Nazi Ger‐ ies within the Volksdeutsche Forschungsgemein‐ many, historians must study it not just as an iso‐ schaften. On the whole, he makes a strong case lated academic discipline, but also in the context for Volkstumsforschung being big, heavily state- of a "dynamic political situation" (p. 1). Ost‐ sponsored science. He then rounds out his ac‐ forschung was not simply an innocuous scholarly count with a case study of one infuential ethno‐ exercise, but a research agenda inextricably crat, Wilfried Krallert, a geographer and historian who headed the Kuratorium für Volks- und Lan‐
2 H-Net Reviews desforschung and participated in ethnic cleansing phasis on Eastern Europe in most of the early operations in the Balkans. Fahlbusch's contribu‐ chapters. He draws on the case of Franz Petri, a tion is especially important for surveying the larg‐ historian and National Socialist whose research er administrative apparatus in which the events concerned the language boundary dividing me‐ described in the ensuing chapters transpired. dieval Germanic and Frankish peoples. After the Several of those chapters are especially note‐ invasion of Belgium in 1940, Petri became a so- worthy. Eric J. Schmaltz and Samuel D. Sinner as‐ called Kulturpapst in Brussels, responsible for sess the work of Georg Leibbrandt and Karl many of the Nazis' cultural and ethnic policies. Stumpp, two ethnopolitical advisors on the Translated into policy terms, Petri's West‐ Ukraine. Drawing on personal diaries and ofcial forschung was designed to "abolish the 'Western reports, the authors paint a vivid picture of the orientation' of the Flemish and Walloon people; to mundane, but murderous enthusiasm of these 'germanize' science and its institutions.... [and] to "liberators" of German ex-patriots in the Ukraine. transform into practice the demands formulated Furthermore, in a section entitled "From Geno‐ in his Habilitationsschrift concerning the Sprach‐ cide to Genealogy," they demonstrate how the grenze such as, for instance, support for the eth‐ legacy of Leibbrandt and Stumpp lived on in post‐ nic Germans in Arel and Luxemburg" (pp. war repatriation policies and in the genealogical 186-187). In the person of Franz Petri, personal in‐ interests of Russian-German heritage societies. terests, the ideals of Westforschung and Nazi ide‐ ology coalesced into one. Michael Wedekind's chapter "The Sword of Science" investigates the role of German scholars Karl-Heinz Roth's contribution on Hans Roth‐ in National Socialist annexation policies in Slove‐ fels aims to sidestep recent disputes that zero in nia and northern Italy. With the more or less ex‐ on Rothfels's work in the late 1920s and early plicit annexation of the provinces bordering Yu‐ 1930s. Roth takes a wider biographic perspective, goslavia and Italy in 1941, the Third Reich ex‐ analyzing three periods in Rothfels's life. First, he panded into regions renowned for intractable eth‐ considers the radicalization of Rothfels's politics nic confict. The ensuing deportation, resettle‐ in the early 1930s. On the one hand, he disputes ment and germanization policies were undertak‐ the basis of Eckart Kehr's claim that Rothfels had en with the aid of various institutions within the fascist leanings, but on the other hand he con‐ Südostdeutsche and Alpenländische Forschungs‐ frms Rothfels's status as a spokesman for a group gemeinschaften, especially the Institut für Kärnt‐ of young neo-conservatives inspired by the works ner Landesforschung. These actions marshaled a of Arthur Moeller van den Bruck, Carl Schmitt mix of geopolitical, economic, historical and ethic and Oswald Spengler. Second, Roth recounts the arguments in pursing strategies of ethnic segmen‐ stages of Rothfels's maginalization within German tation and antagonism. Arguably, no other part of academia and his ultimately futile attempts to se‐ the Third Reich was so fraught with overlapping cure the patronage of Nazi ofcials. Finally, Roth political, linguistic and ethnic tensions. assesses the impact of Rothfels's experiences in Wedekind's article does an excellent job in driv‐ England and the United States on postwar Ger‐ ing home just how enormously complex these man historiography, arguing that emigration de‐ patchwork regions were--and simultaneously how radicalized Rothfels's thinking, even while the hopelessly utopian Nazi attempts to sanitize them Cold War proved conducive to his neo-conserva‐ were. tive views. Hans Derk's chapter on German West‐ Other articles treat a variety of topics. Alexan‐ forschung comes as a sober corrective to the em‐ der Pinwinkler examines the völkisch historian
3 H-Net Reviews
Erich Keyser and his concept of Bevölkerungs‐ "political dynamics" of ethnocratic work. And that geschichte. Keyser imagined a racial and biologi‐ is that the professional and disciplinary dynamics cal "essence" that united Germans across the ages tend to get pushed into the background. With the and that justifed their irredentist aspirations. exception of Karl Heinz Roth's chapter, most of Christof Morrissey presents a case study of the In‐ the other contributions sacrifce internal disci‐ stitut für Heimatforschung in Slovakia in order to plinary dynamics to larger political narratives. demonstrate how the Nazi regime incorporated Admittedly, given the interdisciplinary nature of regional scholarship in its eforts to reorder Cen‐ Ost- and Westforschung, treating these multiple tral and Eastern Europe. Viorel Achim provides a internal dynamics would have made it much fascinating account of the Romanian statistician more difcult to produce a coherent collection of Sabin Manuila, who (as director of the Central In‐ essays. But still, it is worth noting that a price has stitute of Statistics in Bucharest) supplied demo‐ been paid for the coherence that this volume de‐ graphic and ethnic data not only to German schol‐ livers. ars and ofcials, but also to the governments of In their brief introduction, Haar and Ion Antonescu, Great Britain and the United Fahlbusch express their gratitude to American States. Achim demonstrates how serving up statis‐ colleagues for helping to publish a volume that tics to such varied political masters was anything has been "up to now noticeably lacking in Ger‐ but an exercise in mindless bureaucratic number many" (p. xix). While it may be the case that crunching. Wolfgang Freud examines the migra‐ American audiences will be more receptive to tion research of Fritz Braun, who from 1936 to their claims and while they have certainly en‐ 1945 was instrumental in Nazi expulsion and re‐ countered stif resistance from some historians in settlement policies in Lorraine and Poland, and Germany, the implicit suggestion that such a vol‐ who after 1945 was honored on both sides of the ume has not or could not be published in Ger‐ Atlantic for his research on German emigration. many is misplaced and disingenuous. Their work Frank-Rutger Hausmann's chapter on the network (and that of several other authors in this collec‐ of Deutsche wissenschaftliche Institute (DWIs) ex‐ tion) has been widely discussed and published in plores the activities of these interdisciplinary re‐ Germany.[2] Some critics have attacked them for search institutions, designed as conduits of aca‐ stylizing themselves as enfants terrible in order to demic exchange between Germany and the cul‐ advance their own careers. tural elite of occupied countries. Unfortunately, The editors also fail to lay out explicit hy‐ Hausmann does not adequately embed these in‐ potheses or sketch an analytic framework that stitutions in the long tradition of German auswär‐ would help to focus further research. In their tige Kulturpolitik, but he does remind us that, in preface, they have missed an opportunity to make spite of such big-science initiatives, "only about a broader argument, not only about the role of the half of all DWIs really functioned" (p. 224). And of humanities in ethnic cleansing, but also about the those, most were fully active for only a brief peri‐ ethics of historiographic practice. A crucially im‐ od from 1940 to 1942. Finally, Jan Piskorski juxta‐ portant theme that is often missing in the articles poses German Ostforschung with Polish mysl za‐ concerns the specifc methodologies that eth‐ chodnia, adding a useful comparative perspective nocrats deployed: cataloging systems, statistical and a potential corrective to the discussions in techniques, cartographic procedures, documenta‐ Germany, which have not generally highlighted tion strategies and, more generally, the scientifc the work of non-German ethnocrats. methods of ethnic and racial profling. Some arti‐ The book is not without its faults. For exam‐ cles touch briefy on these topics. But the collec‐ ple, there is a price to be paid for stressing the
4 H-Net Reviews tion would have been much stronger had more contributors addressed these mechanics of schol‐ arly labor in the human sciences. In spite of these criticisms, this is a com‐ pelling collection of essays, well conceived, and judiciously assembled. The editors should be com‐ mended for publishing a set of articles that--un‐ like many essay collections--is thematically coher‐ ent and well balanced. Likewise, their move away from studying scholarly work as cerebral labor to focus instead on research agendas in their politi‐ cal contexts is important and laudable. Bringing these articles to English-language audiences pro‐ vides an opportunity to expand our understand‐ ing of the role of scientifc experts and political consultants in Nazi Germany and is a poignant re‐ minder to contemporary historians about the ethics of their own historiographic practices. Notes [1]. Odo Marquard, Abschied vom Prinzip‐ iellen. Philosophische Studien (Stuttgart: Reclam, 1981), p. 57. [2]. To mention but a few examples: Peter Schöttler, ed., Geschichtsschreibung als Legitima‐ tionswissenschaft (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1999); Winfried Schultze and Otto Ger‐ hard Oexle, eds., Deutsche Historiker im National‐ sozialismus (Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1999). H-Soz-u-Kult organized a review symposium on Versäumte Fragen in 2000, on Westforschung in 2003, as well as a forum on Hans Rothfels, like‐ wise in 2003.
If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-german
Citation: Eric J. Engstrom. Review of Haar, Ingo; Fahlbusch, Michael, eds. German Scholars and Ethnic Cleansing, 1920-1945. H-German, H-Net Reviews. May, 2006.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=11789
5 H-Net Reviews
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
6