University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Anthropologist Anthropology, Department of 2002 THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY Megan Young Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebanthro Part of the Anthropology Commons Young, Megan, "THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY" (2002). Nebraska Anthropologist. 78. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebanthro/78 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Anthropologist by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Young THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY 29 THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY Megan Young The Nazi Party found that archeology is a very useful tool in propaganda. The Nazis used it to justify their nationalistic interests, from the conquest ofEurope to create the Third Reich to genocidal racial cleansing. They glorified their past to unite the German people and gain their support. However, the people could not have been misled without the cooperation or apathy of German archeologists in general. Archeology is a science that can be easily subject. At the tum of the century, Houston manipulated and misinterpreted for Stewart Chamberlain wrote The conscious or unconscious reasons. The Foundations ofthe Nineteenth Century, a biases of the researchers can determine what two volume set that revived interest in is believed about the past. This is especially Gobineau's ideas. The German Kaiser made true for prehistoric archeology which mainly sure all of his army officers had a copy as relies on non-written sources for its well as all bookstores and libraries. In it interpretation (Daniel 1962: 120). Chamberlain claimed a German could Archeology was especially vulnerable in the become a Jew if he interacted with them or time between the world wars; many read their writings (Daniel 1962:115-118). European nations were developing, or had Not only did nationalistic ideas spread as a been developing since the end of the 19th result, but also anti-Semitism. century, a nationalistic ideology. Another contributing factor to the growth Nationalism became integral in forming new of nationalism was the formation of the first national boundaries after W orld War I. German nation in the late 1800's. The new However, the Nazis in Germany saw the nation was created from numerous territories chance to use nationalism and archeology in of German speaking people who had no real an unprecedented way to support and justify sense of national unity. Gustav Kossinna, a their party ideology of the superior language expert turned prehistorian, Germanic race. Unfortunately, many intended to prove their common ancestry archeologists were all too willing partners in and history with his idea of ethnic cultures this scheme. (Shennan 1989:7). His Kulturkreis theory used material culture in the archeological Beginnings of Nationalistic Archeology record to define ethnic groups. Prehistoric Germans were seen as a great race that The marriage between nationalism and spread throughout Europe, conquering the German archeology did not occur overnight. inferior races and of course leaving their Its roots go back to the mid-1800's when material culture in the territories they two Frenchmen, the Comte de Gobineau and occupied as proof of their presence. the Comte de Boulainvilliers, developed the Kossinna tried to prove, through archeology idea of a superior race of Germans, possibly and a very "inflated chronology", that the for the fIrst time. Supposedly, the 19th most important prehistoric innovations and century French nobles were descendants of their subsequent spread were results of the German Aryans who defeated the Germans because culture always diffused Roman Empire and have ruled over the from the more advanced people to the less inferior Gauls ever since. Gobineau's advanced. Kossinna wanted to impress writings were very popular in Germany and upon his fellow Germans the importance of influenced others to write more on the studying their ancestors; he produced many Young THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY 30 publications that were aimed at a "non­ Kossinna argued that German prehistory academic audience" (Arnold 1990: 464; was very important in rebuilding Germany Clark 1957:259; Daniel 1962:123; Veit after the war. Quoting the "Crown Prince" 1989:37). He used an idea from the Kossinna said that there was a need to put historian Sybel that "'a nation which fails to emphasis on the ""'German-national people, keep in living touch with its past is as near in contrast to the internationalizing to drying up as a tree with severed roots. tendencies, which threaten to wipe out our We are today, what we were yesterday'" healthy ethnic characteristics"'" (Baker (Clark 1957:259). In other words, the 1988:103). German nation could not become a great The position of prehistoric archeology power unless it was also one in the past. changed dramatically when the Nazis came , After the German defeat in World War I, to power in 1933. They almost immediately Kossinna wanted the negotiations at recognized the power and legitimacy Versailles to include a reoccupation of what archeology could give them; it was seen as a he called ancient German territory (Poland). great propaganda tool and a way to solidify He and other German archeologists used the pure Germans under the Nazi party. The archeology and sources written by Pliny the timing was perfect since "public interest in Elder and others to support their claims. archaeology, and political manipulation of They said the Germanic Vandals had archaeological research" is highest during occupied the territory between the Odra and "periods of internal unrest or stress" (Arnold Vistula rivers in modem Poland during the 1997-1998:249). State funding poured into time of the Roman Empire. The Vandals prehistoric archeology; university chairs in were associated with the archeological prehistory were created; the Institute for Przeworsk culture that later occupied the Prehistory and the Institute for Pre- and territories of modem Slovakia and Hungary. Early History were founded in 1938 and Their efforts proved fruitless as the Polish 1939 respectively; institutes for rune state was created in 1919 (Arnold 1990:467; research were started in the late 1930's; new Martens 1989:58-60;Veit 1989:38). museums were built while old ones opened new exhibits; many excavations were shown German Prehistory to the public as "open-air museums"; and several documentaries of German prehistory Despite Kossinna' s efforts, prehistoric were filmed for public education. The archeology was not a very popular discipline public responded by patriotically joining in the years before the National Socialist prehistoric organizations such as the government. Kossinna and other German Confederation for German Prehistory prehistorians complained that German (Arnold 1990:468; Arnold 1997-1998:248- archeologists put too much focus on 249; Clark 1957:259). studying Classical archeology and were Polish museums of the time are good making German prehistory look dark and examples of how museums were affected by barbaric. Kossinna claimed that German the change. The Nazis used them to present prehistory was given less funding and lectures and exhibits that supported the Nazi museum space than the Hottentot and doctrine, especially those aspects that Papuan cultures. It was true that German concerned the occupied territories. An urn prehistory was only taught in a few with a swastika symbol that had been found universities and received little state funding before the occupation was rediscovered in a (Arnold 1990:467; Baker 1988:103; Daniel L6di: museum by the Nazis. It was made the 1962:122). The discipline and its scholars main exhibit and the coat of arms of the city. were neglected and not given as much Many African, South Arnerican, and Slavic respect as they would have liked. This artifacts were either sold to other museums became very important when the Nazis in Germany or destroyed because they did turned to German prehistorians for help. Young THE NAZIS' ARCHEOLOGY 31 not support Nazi propaganda (Mikolajczyk the past or present because "culture is a 1990:247,250). creation of race" (Arnold 1997- During the 1930's British archeologists 1998:247,250; Frick 1934:298-299). held Gennan archeology in high regard. The Minister of the Interior's guidelines Some even said they were jealous ofthe also included teaching how the Germanic state funding it received and the high public race (superior in culture and language) was interest and involvement. There were, in distributed in prehistory based on artifacts. fact, far more prehistoric archeology classes He provided the following examples to offered at German universities than at support his argument that all great European English ones by 1939 (Evans 1989:441). and Near Eastern civilizations owed their Grahame Clark said, '''It reflects a situation development to the Germanic race. He in which a whole people thrills with a claims that archeological evidence points to consciousness of its past and in which a German invasions of Asia, North Africa, and knowledge of national archaeology is Egypt as early as the 5th millennium B.C. regarded as much a part of the normal resulting in the advanced Indians, Medes, equipment of children as algebra or Latin Persians, and Hittites all being descendants verbs'" (Evans 1989:440). There was, of the Germanic race. In addition, the ruling however, some criticism ofthe state classes of the later great Greek and Roman involvement in German archeology. A.M. civilizations were Germanic. The Greek Tallgren (1937:155) argued that Germany aristocracy was Germanic and the was using archeology as a "political weapon indigenous commoners were originally in the service of ideology in home and Asians. When democracy was developed, it foreign policy." helped break down some class barriers and Archeology was definitely employed to the subsequent intermarriage of races indoctrinate the next generation of Germans resulted in a low birth rate and a collapse of with the Nazi ideology.