Continuities in a Historiography Overshadowed by Its National Socialist Past?

Dirk Rupnow

Source Description

The study “Sephardic Jews on the Lower Elbe” published by Franz Steiner Verlag in 1958 as volume 40 of their supplement to the academic journal Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte (edited by Hermann Aubin) may be considered a central contribution to Hamburg’s Jewish history of the early postwar period. Its author, Hermann Kellenbenz, was one of the most influential German economic historians of his generation. In his 600-page book, he studied the economic significance of the Sephardic Jews who were expelled from Spain in the early 16th century and had been allowed to settle in Hamburg. However, the publication’s origins date back to the National Socialist period, when Kellenbenz had received a research assignment by the Reich Institute for the History of the New Germany Reichsinstitut für Geschichte des neuen Deutschlands. This fact is omitted in the study’s preface – which is hardly surprising for this time period.
  • Dirk Rupnow

In the pref­ace to his study “Sephardim on the Lower Elbe” pub­lished in 1958, Her­mann Kel­len­benz men­tions that his first en­counter with this topic went back al­most 20 years and that it was the “ex­otic na­ture” of one of the study’s pro­tag­o­nists, Manuel Teix­eira, which had ap­pealed to him dur­ing the re­search for his dis­ser­ta­tion on the Swedish demesne of Holstein-​Gottorf, pub­lished in Kiel in 1938. He calls it im­pos­si­ble to men­tion the names of all those who had sup­ported him with as­sis­tance and ad­vice through­out the years. He is con­ceal­ing the fact that this study by an eco­nomic his­to­rian who was quite in­flu­en­tial in post­war Ger­many was the re­sult of a multi-​year re­search com­mis­sion from the Reich In­sti­tute for His­tory of the New Ger­many Re­ichsin­sti­tut für Geschichte des neuen Deutsch­lands. Kel­len­benz was ha­bil­i­tated at the Uni­ver­sity of Würzburg on the basis of the re­sult­ing pub­li­ca­tion ti­tled “Das Ham­burger Fi­nanzju­den­tum und seine Krise” [“Ham­burg’s Fi­nance Jewry and Its Cri­sis”] in late No­vem­ber 1944, shortly be­fore the end of the Sec­ond World War. Nei­ther the orig­i­nal ver­sion of the text nor the ha­bil­i­ta­tion cer­tifi­cate has sur­vived, how­ever. They were most likely de­stroyed dur­ing an air raid on Würzburg in March 1945 dur­ing which the uni­ver­sity li­brary was dam­aged.

The Reich Institute for the History of the New Germany


The Reich In­sti­tute for the His­tory of the New Ger­many Re­ichsin­sti­tut für Geschichte des neuen Deutsch­lands founded in Berlin by Wal­ter Frank in 1935 was meant to be­come the cen­ter of a newly de­vel­oped, Na­tional So­cial­ist, an­ti­se­mitic study of his­tory. Its in­ter­dis­ci­pli­nary branch de­voted to the “Jew­ish Ques­tion” Forschungsabteilung Ju­den­frage es­tab­lished in Mu­nich in 1936 made it one of the main in­sti­tu­tions of Na­tional So­cial­ist “Ju­den­forschung” [re­search on Jews], es­pe­cially in its early phase. Dur­ing the Na­tional So­cial­ist regime, “Ju­den­forschung” or “Er­forschung der Ju­den­frage” [study of the Jew­ish Ques­tion] was the term used for stud­ies car­ried out by non-​Jewish schol­ars in the hu­man­i­ties, cul­tural stud­ies, and so­cial sci­ences which ex­am­ined the his­tory of Ju­daism and the so-​called “Jew­ish Ques­tion” from an ex­plic­itly an­ti­se­mitic per­spec­tive. By found­ing a num­ber of in­sti­tutes, start­ing pub­li­ca­tions and or­ga­niz­ing events, the “Third Reich’s” “Ju­den­forschung” sought to tran­scend the tra­di­tional bound­aries be­tween fac­ul­ties and es­tab­lish it­self as a dis­ci­pline in its own right.

National Socialist “research on Jews”


Apart from racial sci­ence, “Ju­den­forschung” rep­re­sents the most strik­ing in­ter­sec­tion of aca­d­e­mic study and an­ti­se­mitic pro­pa­ganda and of Na­tional So­cial­ist ide­ol­ogy and anti-​Jewish pol­icy in its prac­ti­cal ap­pli­ca­tion rang­ing from mar­gin­al­iza­tion to ex­pul­sion and mass mur­der. Within Na­tional So­cial­ist “Ju­den­forschung,” An­ti­semitism was in­sti­tuted as the prin­ci­ple lead­ing to all fore­gone con­clu­sions, while the “Jew­ish Ques­tion,” al­ready an­ti­se­mitic in its phras­ing, served as point of de­par­ture for all sci­en­tific in­ter­est and be­came the focus of all re­search. In con­trast to Ger­man his­to­ri­og­ra­phy’s usual habit of ig­nor­ing top­ics of (German-​) Jew­ish his­tory, these were now con­sid­ered of schol­arly in­ter­est. The ex­pul­sion and mur­der of Eu­ro­pean Jewry was thus par­al­leled by the study of Jew­ish his­tory from a Na­tional So­cial­ist, an­ti­se­mitic per­spec­tive – a study which ob­vi­ously went be­yond the pro­pa­gan­dis­tic re­quire­ments for jus­ti­fy­ing anti-​Jewish Ger­man poli­cies on the one hand and the po­lit­i­cal re­quire­ments for im­ple­ment­ing them on the other. Ger­man schol­arly study of Jew­ish his­tory did not begin with Na­tional So­cial­ist “Ju­den­forschung,” yet it rep­re­sents its first ob­vi­ous foothold in the aca­d­e­mic land­scape, where it con­tin­ued to exist under dif­fer­ent cir­cum­stances after 1945. The forced in­te­gra­tion of Jew­ish his­tory into Ger­man his­tory was un­der­taken by those who si­mul­ta­ne­ously le­git­imized and car­ried out anti-​Jewish pol­icy. In Ger­many, the in­sti­tu­tion­al­ized study of Jew­ish his­tory was vir­tu­ally com­ple­men­tary to the ex­pul­sion and mur­der of Ger­man and Eu­ro­pean Jewry.

Within a short space of time, the “Third Reich” saw a ver­i­ta­ble boom of in­sti­tu­tions ded­i­cated to “Ju­den­forschung.” Var­i­ous gov­ern­ment of­fices sought to be in­volved in this field, at times co­op­er­at­ing, at times com­pet­ing. The In­sti­tute for the Study of the Jew­ish Ques­tion In­sti­tut zum Studium der Ju­den­frage was founded in Berlin as early as 1935. In 1939, it was re­named “An­ti­se­mitic Ac­tion An­ti­semi­tis­che Ak­tion, and as of 1942 it was called “Antijüdische Ak­tion Anti-​Jewish Ac­tion. It ac­tu­ally was a branch of Goebbels’ pro­pa­ganda min­istry, but this con­nec­tion was con­cealed from the pub­lic in order to keep up the pre­tense of an in­de­pen­dent aca­d­e­mic re­search in­sti­tute. One of the most im­por­tant and pro­duc­tive or­ga­ni­za­tions of Na­tional So­cial­ist re­search on Jews was founded in 1936, when the Reich In­sti­tute for the His­tory of the New Ger­many Re­ichsin­sti­tut für Geschichte des neuen Deutsch­lands opened the in­ter­dis­ci­pli­nary branch de­voted to the “Jew­ish Ques­tion” Forschungsabteilung Ju­den­frage in Mu­nich. The Berlin based Reich In­sti­tute was meant to be the re­place­ment for the Reich Com­mis­sion for His­tory His­torische Re­ich­skom­mis­sion and, along with the Reich In­sti­tute for Early Ger­man His­tory Re­ichsin­sti­tut für ältere deutsche Geschichte, was charged with the study of mod­ern his­tory and es­pe­cially the pe­riod since the French Rev­o­lu­tion. Com­pet­ing with ac­tiv­i­ties at Frank’s Reich In­sti­tute was the In­sti­tute for the Study of the Jew­ish Ques­tion In­sti­tut zur Er­forschung der Ju­den­frage ope­nend in Frank­furt am Main in March 1941 after hav­ing been for­mally es­tab­lished in 1939. This in­sti­tute was the first re­al­ized branch of the Na­tional So­cial­ist al­ter­na­tive uni­ver­sity called “Hohe Schule lit­er­ally High School, which had been con­ceived by Al­fred Rosen­berg and was planned to be es­tab­lished after the war. In 1939, the In­sti­tute for the Study and Ex­tinc­tion of Jew­ish In­flu­ence on Ger­man Parochial Life In­sti­tut zur Er­forschung und Be­sei­t­i­gung des jüdischen Ein­flusses aus dem deutschen kirch­lichen Leben led by Protes­tant the­olo­gian Wal­ter Grund­mann was founded in Eise­nach. In the con­text of its se­cu­rity po­lice tasks, the Reich Main Se­cu­rity Of­fice, De­part­ment VII Re­ichssicher­heit­shaup­tamt’s Amt VII also in­ves­ti­gated racial and ide­o­log­i­cal en­e­mies under sci­en­tific pre­tense, in­clud­ing Jews among oth­ers (“Geg­n­er­forschung”). Some uni­ver­si­ties not only fol­lowed suit in their staffing of teach­ing po­si­tions, but also at­tempted to es­tab­lish des­ig­nated chairs: the uni­ver­si­ties of Tübingen, Vi­enna, Berlin, and Frank­furt, for ex­am­ple. How­ever, Her­mann Kel­len­benz’ ha­bil­i­ta­tion at the Uni­ver­sity of Würzburg shows that “Ju­den­forschung” was also car­ried out by in­di­vid­ual schol­ars at uni­ver­si­ties with­out a des­ig­nated chair.

National Socialist ideology in Kellenbenz’ work


In the 1958 ver­sion of Kel­len­benz’ study orig­i­nally com­pleted in 1944, there is no strik­ing an­ti­se­mitic residue of the kind often found in con­tem­po­ra­ne­ous pub­li­ca­tions. How­ever, the post­war ver­sion’s bib­li­og­ra­phy still lists works pub­lished as part of Na­tional So­cial­ist re­search on Jews: Volk­mar Eichstädt’sBib­li­ogra­phie zur Geschichte der Ju­den­frage” (1938) [“Bib­li­og­ra­phy on the His­tory of the Jew­ish Ques­tion”], as well as an essay by Wil­fried Euler ti­tled “Das Ein­drin­gen jüdischen Blutes in die en­glis­che Ober­schicht” [“The In­tru­sion of Jew­ish Blood into the Eng­lish Upper Class”] in the jour­nal “Forschun­gen zur Ju­den­frage” (vol. 6, 1941).

The ques­tion to what ex­tent Kel­len­benz’ crit­i­cism of Werner Som­bart that he had over­es­ti­mated the Jews’ im­por­tance for the de­vel­op­ment of mod­ern cap­i­tal­ism, which at first seems in­com­pat­i­ble with Na­tional So­cial­ist ide­ol­ogy, con­ceals an an­ti­se­mitic ar­gu­ment deny­ing Jews all cre­ativ­ity can­not be an­swered with ab­solute cer­tainty. Ar­gu­ing based on a close read­ing of the sources he di­ag­nosed a par­tic­u­lar sig­nif­i­cance of the Sephardic Jews for the mod­ern­iza­tion of Ham­burg’s trade with Por­tu­gal and Spain due to their in­ter­na­tional ex­pe­ri­ence. He states the same for mi­grants from the Nether­lands and south­ern Ger­many, yet he re­jected Som­bart’s as­sump­tion that they had in fact es­tab­lished and dom­i­nated Ham­burg’s trade with Por­tu­gal and Spain.

Kellenbenz’ defensive arguments


Con­se­quently, Kel­len­benz was in­dig­nant at being men­tioned in Hel­mut Heiber’s book on Wal­ter Frank and the Re­ichsin­sti­tut. Heiber, a re­searcher at Mu­nich’s In­sti­tute of Con­tem­po­rary His­tory In­sti­tut für Zeit­geschichte, was one of the first to study Ger­man his­to­ri­ans of the Na­tional So­cial­ist pe­riod. In a let­ter to Theodor Schieder, then a col­league of his at the Uni­ver­sity of Cologne who had re­viewed Heiber’s study along with Hans Roth­fels and had rec­om­mended it to the In­sti­tut für Zeit­geschichte for pub­li­ca­tion, he re­ferred to Wil­helm Enßlin’s re­view of his Würzburg ha­bil­i­ta­tion and pointed out that “from the out­set, the study had been con­ceived to con­sider not just the Sephardic Jews’ so­cial and eco­nomic his­tory, but also how the en­tire topic fit into the po­lit­i­cal his­tory of the 17th cen­tury.” In fact, Kel­len­benz never was an ac­tual ex­pert on Jew­ish his­tory, but rather an eco­nomic his­to­rian. Nev­er­the­less, it ap­par­ently seemed ad­vis­able to retroac­tively and clearly shift the study’s focus away from a “Ju­den­forschung” topic and to­wards clas­sic po­lit­i­cal his­tory. Sig­nif­i­cantly, his ex­cul­pa­tion from the ide­o­log­i­cal con­text of Na­tional So­cial­ist acad­e­mia went along with a gen­eral dis­tanc­ing from the field of Jew­ish his­tory and thus an im­plicit ad­mis­sion that all study of Jew­ish his­tory in the “Third Reich” was po­lit­i­cally and ide­o­log­i­cally mo­ti­vated.

As part of the 1947 Christ­mas amnesty, Her­mann Kel­len­benz was ex­on­er­ated by a de­naz­i­fi­ca­tion court in Mu­nich Spruchkam­mer München I: it ruled that de­spite his party mem­ber­ship he had op­posed Na­tional So­cial­ism, that he had not worked in the Na­tional So­cial­ist spirit, and that he was con­sid­ered a critic and enemy of Na­tional So­cial­ism. His work as “Forschungs­beauf­tragter des Re­ichsin­sti­tuts für Geschichte [!]” Se­nior Re­search Fel­low at the Reich In­sti­tute for His­tory was not con­sid­ered in­crim­i­na­tory be­cause the in­sti­tute was not a party or­ga­ni­za­tion. In his state­ment be­fore the de­naz­i­fi­ca­tion court, Kel­len­benz cited eco­nomic hard­ship and a “con­stant feel­ing of being threat­ened by state co­er­cion” as his ex­cuses, but also—in an in­ter­est­ing mod­i­fi­ca­tion of his self-​portrayal as a scholar—stu­pid­ity and in­ex­pe­ri­ence: “Please con­sider that back then, de­spite my book learn­ing, in terms of life ex­pe­ri­ence I was still stu­pid and in­ex­pe­ri­enced at 22.” He styled him­self to be one of those “small peo­ple who al­ways have a tough lot in life.” He claimed he had re­jected the party’s an­ti­se­mitic pro­gram in par­tic­u­lar, and more­over his mother had al­ways kept com­pany with Jews. His stud­ies were of an ex­clu­sively his­tor­i­cal na­ture and “strictly schol­arly.” He stated that his mo­ti­va­tion for writ­ing his ha­bil­i­ta­tion the­sis had been to “present the topic strictly aca­d­e­m­i­cally and only based on de­ter­mined facts, con­trary to the books on Jews pub­lished at the time.” He ex­pressly vol­un­teered his ser­vices for par­tic­i­pat­ing in the re­build­ing of a de­mo­c­ra­tic Ger­many.

Kellenbenz’ further academic career


Kel­len­benz’ self-​portrayal was sup­ported by a num­ber of af­fi­davits. These re­peat­edly em­pha­sized that he had al­ways felt “a stranger to” Na­tional So­cial­ism who had “re­jected” it and had be­came a vic­tim of con­tem­po­rary cir­cum­stances. He had only pur­sued the ca­reer of an “ab­solutely ob­jec­tive his­to­rian” who was filled with a “purely schol­arly as­pi­ra­tion.” An­other ar­gu­ment made was that the Re­ichsin­sti­tut had to re­sist the in­ter­fer­ence of both party pol­i­tics and ide­ol­ogy. Thus Kel­len­benz was able to con­tinue his ca­reer rel­a­tively un­scathed. In 1947, he was given a teach­ing po­si­tion at the Philosophisch-​Theologische Hochschule Re­gens­burg and later be­came an as­sis­tant pro­fes­sor in Würzburg, spend­ing time at Har­vard Uni­ver­sity and the École Pra­tique des Hautes Études in Paris as a vis­it­ing lec­turer. In 1957, he be­came a tenured pro­fes­sor at the Hochschule für Wirtschafts-​und Sozial­wis­senschaften in Nurem­berg. He spent the years from 1960 until 1970 as a pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­sity of Cologne be­fore re­turn­ing to the Uni­ver­sity of Erlangen-​Nuremberg until his re­tire­ment.

It is quite ev­i­dent that the his­tory of Na­tional So­cial­ist “Ju­den­forschung” by no means ended in 1945. Kel­len­benz’ work, too, can­not be con­sid­ered with­out the crimes of Na­tional So­cial­ism in mind. In the spring of 1945, at the end of the war, he al­legedly spent sev­eral days burn­ing the files of the branch de­voted to the “Jew­ish Ques­tion” Forschungsabteilung Ju­den­frage in Mu­nich.

Select Bibliography


Helmut Heiber, Walter Frank und sein Reichsinstitut für Geschichte des neuen Deutschlands (Quellen und Darstellungen zur Zeitgeschichte 13), Stuttgart 1966.
Horst Junginger, Die Verwissenschaftlichung der ‚Judenfrage‘ im Nationalsozialismus, Darmstadt 2011.
Hermann Kellenbenz, Sephardim an der unteren Elbe. Ihre wirtschaftliche und politische Bedeutung vom Ende des 16. bis zum Beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts (Beihefte zur Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 40), Wiesbaden 1958.
Dirk Rupnow, Judenforschung im Dritten Reich. Wissenschaft zwischen Politik, Propaganda und Ideologie, Baden-Baden 2011.

Selected English Titles


Alan E. Steinweis, Studying the Jew. Scholarly Antisemitism in Nazi Germany, Cambridge, Mass. 2006.

This text is li­censed under a Cre­ative Com­mons At­tri­bu­tion - Non com­mer­cial - No De­riv­a­tives 4.0 In­ter­na­tional Li­cense. As long as the work is unedited and you give ap­pro­pri­ate credit ac­cord­ing to the Rec­om­mended Ci­ta­tion, you may reuse and re­dis­trib­ute the ma­te­r­ial in any medium or for­mat for non-​commercial pur­poses.

About the Author

Dirk Rupnow, Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr., born 1972, is head of the Institute for Contemporary History at the University of Innsbruck. His focus of research is: Austrian, German, and European contemporary history, Holocaust and Jewish studies, intellectual history, history of science, cultural studies, transnational history, migration history and theory and methods of historiography.

Recommended Citation and License Statement

Dirk Rupnow, Continuities in a Historiography Overshadowed by Its National Socialist Past? (translated by Insa Kummer), in: Key Documents of German-Jewish History, September 22, 2016. <https://dx.doi.org/10.23691/jgo:article-88.en.v1> [March 29, 2025].

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Non commercial - No Derivatives 4.0 International License. As long as the work is unedited and you give appropriate credit according to the Recommended Citation, you may reuse and redistribute the material in any medium or format for non-commercial purposes.