The Mixed Marriage - A Guarantee of Survival or a Reflection of German Society? (Part A)
Source: Beate Meyer , International conference: German Society's Responses to Nazi Anti-Jewish Policy 1933-1941, Yad Vashem, 10-13 February 1995.
Until emancipation of the Jews in the mid-nineteenth century and the introduction of civil marriage, marriage between Christians and Jews was prohibited 1 . In the twentieth century, the number of mixed marriages increased considerably - a sign not only of the assimilation of Jews, but also of the declining significance of religion in marriage. The city of Hamburg, whose example will be used in this essay to illustrate the interplay of external pressure and internal breakdown of mixed marriages during the Nazi regime, provides as early as the 1920s the most ΓÇ£unfavourable pictureΓÇ¥ from the Jewish point of view - in other words, the most mixed marriages - followed by Berlin and Breslau 2 . By 1933 the percentage of mixed marriages in the Hanseatic City had risen to more than 57 percent of all Jewish weddings. Whereas the average in Germany fell to 15 percent in 1934 3 , the numbers dropped in Hamburg to only 32 percent despite restrictive measures introduced by the registry offices 4 . When the Nazis came to power, there were approximately thirty-five thousand couples living in mixed marriages in Germany 5 . This development had been causing the Jewish communities in the cities much concern since it generally meant that the next generations were lost to the community 6 . The ban on mixed marriages laid down by the Nuremberg Laws finally put an end to a development that had been prevalent for almost eighty years.
Far more Jewish men than women married non-Jewish partners. Those Jews living in mixed marriages were more likely to have come from long-established Hamburg families than from among Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe, who as a rule still had stronger ties to their religion 7 . Jewish women living in mixed marriages were no longer recognised as members of the Jewish community; Jewish men, on the other hand, were only excluded from Orthodox associations but were allowed to remain in the community 8 . The mixed marriage very often led to conversion to Christianity, and in Hamburg conversion was usually to the Protestant Church. By 1940, when emigration was no longer possible and the mounting pressure against Jews, accompanied by the destruction of their economic existence, had already led to a sharp rise in the divorces rate, 972 couples were living in mixed marriages - 623 with Jewish men and 349 with Jewish women 9 .
The term ΓÇ£mixed marriageΓÇ¥ now no longer referred to marriages between members of the Jewish community and non-Jews, but according to the National Socialists, to relationships in which one partner fitted their ΓÇ£racialΓÇ¥ definition of a Jew. From a National Socialist viewpoint, Jews who had entered into a marriage with ΓÇ£ DeutschbluetigeΓÇ¥ (German-blooded) were even more undesirable than other Jews, as they posed a direct threat to the ΓÇ£ deutschen Blutsverband.ΓÇ¥ Accordingly, any future mixed marriage should be forbidden in order to prevent " Blutmischung " (The mixing of blood), and the effects on the ΓÇ£ deutschen Blutsverband ,ΓÇ¥ should as far as possible be made undone. This is why specialists of ΓÇ£racial scienceΓÇ¥ were so eager to know where a couple had originally come from, and on what grounds they had entered into a mixed marriage. In 1937, one of the leading racial-hygienists, Ottmar Frhr. v. Verschuer, publicly posed the question: What kind of people were they, on both the German and the Jewish side, who entered into mixed marriages?' 10 Statistics had long shown that wealthy Jewish men married non-Jewish women who were "often below their rank." 11 Verschuer's question led to the first large-scale investigation on the subject, which was carried out by the anthropologist Alexander Paul 12 . He had documents on 1,115 male and 670 female Jews that the Reich Ministry of the Interior had put at his disposal 13 . Paul, a convinced racial-hygienist, investigated the class that the prospective couple belonged to, as well as the allegedly hereditary diseases. Although his study is unacceptable because of its racist, pseudoscientific character 14 and the proposed political consequences of exclusion of the offspring, it is very precise and subtle with respect to the social classes of the mixed marriages. In short, he reached the conclusion that Jewish men who entered into a mixed marriage came, as a rule, from the upper or upper middle classes (mostly from the merchant class), and generally married much younger women of a lower social status. While a mixed marriage offered male Jews the opportunity of integration into non-Jewish society, the attraction of marrying a Jew for non-Jewish women was that it meant a step up the social ladder. On the other hand, when Jewish women married non-Jewish men (on the whole this was less common), both man and woman usually came from the same social background and there was no great difference in their ages. Although both partners in the marriage came from a higher class, the marriage seldom meant social advancement for the Jewish woman. It seems that Jewish women chose non-Jewish partners more for emotional than materialistic reasons.
Even if the motivating force for entering into a mixed marriage did not influence to any considerable extent every decision made in married life, it was given a new relevance after the National Socialists came to power, since the measures taken against the Jews, especially the destruction of their economic existence, had just as much effect on Jews in mixed marriages as on other Jews. In the first five years of the Nazi regime, precisely those marriages contracted for materialistic reasons broke up very quickly, although the divorce rates from this period are not known.
A woman living at that time recollected in an interview 15 the break-up of such a marriage. When her parents married her mother converted to Judaism (this was more an exception than the rule). Her father, a wealthy merchant, supported his wife's relatives for some years and provided a comfortable life for his family. Severe anti-Jewish measures, however, brought about a serious decline in his business. Her mother's relatives suggested clubbing together to buy a sewing machine so that the mother could take in work and earn enough money to feed the family. She vehemently rejected the proposition: How could I stoop to that!' Her husband's arrest during Kristallnacht and subsequent internment in KZ Sachsenhausen clearly indicated to her that he would be stigmatised as a criminal in addition to the decline in social status that he had already experienced. Both strengthened her in her resolution to seek a way out of a marriage whose material foundation had crumbled. She filed a petition for divorce while her husband was making emigration plans. Through obtaining the divorce and leaving the Jewish religious community, she was able to return to her deutschen Blutsverband .
This ΓÇ£offerΓÇ¥ to the ΓÇ£German-bloodedΓÇ¥ women was included in categories of ΓÇ£privilegedΓÇ¥ and ΓÇ£non-privilegedΓÇ¥ mixed marriages that were formulated by Hitler in the winter of 1938 and promulgated by Goering 16 . The intention was to lure these women into divorces while they were still reeling under the shock of Kristallnacht and ΓÇ£Aryanization.ΓÇ¥ Even if the majority of ΓÇ£German-bloodedΓÇ¥ women did not choose to take advantage of this ΓÇ£offer,ΓÇ¥ the repressive atmosphere had a destabilising effect on mixed marriages. Thus, the roles played by the individual members of a family underwent a change during the first five years of the Nazi regime. Jewish husbands were scarcely in a position to play their traditional male role of breadwinner, and most of them were no longer able to represent the family in public. They were obliged to sign over their assets to their wives or children, entrust them with the daily running of their companies, let them deal with the authorities, burden them with negotiations concerning rent and/or visas, etc. The wives, a rule, were ill prepared to take on these tasks 17 , as their upbringing anmarried life until then had been dictated by the traditional male and female roles. If they wanted to earn money, they were obliged to resort to ΓÇ£a woman's capabilities,ΓÇ¥ like sewing for example, which meant it was impossible to maintain their previous standard of living. A man living at that time describes how this change affected family life:
Yes, but there were many..., you couldn't call them ΓÇ£quarrels.ΓÇ¥ The family's morale was steadily broken. Although my father was very authoritarian, he was not a strong man..., he was otherwise mild, gentle, especially with children. And anyway, my mother didn't understand anything about such things [earning money, B.M.]. Of course, she stood by my father. There was no question about it. Nevertheless, the pressure from outside - the pressure on those people who had to live under such circumstances - made family life difficult. One wrong word led to a quarrel.... The relationship between my parents was no longer as peaceful as it used to be. We were short of money and then finally we were short of food. Eventually my father no longer received full rations, which meant we had even less food.... There was a lot of unrest, which actually had nothing to do with my parents. It was a result of the pressure from outside' 18 .
The Jewish husbands found it difficult to come to terms with the loss of their position and reputation in society; their wives had to provide them with the emotional support they needed, especially when they were plagued by depression and thoughts of suicide 19 . Another person interviewed summarised the effect that the drop in status had on her family: My father was always very depressive; he constantly thought about suicide and kept on saying if it weren't for him, if he were out of the way, then it would be easier for all of us. Of course, we all suffered under these circumstances because we always wanted to cheer him up and unfortunately we weren't very successful.' 20 In many families, it was left to the wives alone to earn the money as well as to come to terms emotionally with the pressure from outside; they, in turn, tried to share this responsibility with their adolescent children.
If, on the other hand, the wife was Jewish, her husband's professional status determined to what extent racial discrimination affected their life. In the civil service, racial discrimination was particularly severe and either prevented the husband from being promoted or even brought about his dismissal. This could well mean hard times for the family. Someone who was self-employed, however, was neither forced to give up his business nor was his Jewish wife affected by such dramatic events as Kristallnacht , but was ΓÇ£merely ΓÇ¥ subject to social discrimination.
In the winter of 1938, as already mentioned, Hitler classified mixed marriages as either "privileged" or "non-privileged.ΓÇ¥ 21 "Privileged" meant that for the time being a family was allowed to stay where they had been living, and that the family property could be transferred to the non-Jewish partner or the children. "Privileged" was either a marriage without children where the wife was Jewish, or a marriage in which the husband was Jewish and their children had not had a Jewish upbringing. If, however, the husband was Jewish and there were no children, if the non-Jewish wife had been converted or if the children had been brought up in the Jewish faith, then the marriage was "non-privileged.ΓÇ¥ The married couple lost not only the right of residence in non-Jewish districts and power over the family property, but in addition were treated like Jews who were emigrating; in other words, they lost both their citizenship and their property. Jews living in "privileged" mixed marriages were exempt from wearing the yellow badge 22 . When the Sicherungsanordnung fuer Vermoegen (blocking of accounts), was revised according to the status: In the case of the husband being Jewish, his assets and those of his wife and their non-Jewish children were ΓÇ£savedΓÇ£ by the state of Germany. However, in the case of the wife being Jewish, the Sicherungsanordnung affected only her 23 . If an exception had been made and the "German-blooded" husbands in mixed marriages were allowed to stay in the Wehrmacht 24 , their wives were exempt from forced labour 25 , which they were initially summoned to (as were all Jews), at the beginning of 1939 26 .
The government granted such "privileges" in order to placate the "German-blooded" relatives as the measures taken against the Jewish population were becoming more and more radical. The categories of ΓÇ£privilegedΓÇ¥ and ΓÇ£non-privilegedΓÇ¥ mixed marriage were never legally protected, but for each measure taken against the Jews this status allowed exceptions to be made.
While the Jewish men in mixed marriages had to be in constant touch with the Reichsvereinigung der Juden in Deutschland (RVJD ), because of their status, Jewish women were to a great extent protected by their ΓÇ£German-bloodedΓÇ¥ husbands. These husbands, however, after their wives had been obliged to do forced labour, found that their role as protectors was gradually dwindling. In 1940-41 discussions took place in Hamburg's Jewish community about the critical financial situation. The topic of the discussions was whether or not to regard Jewish women living in mixed marriages as members of the community (again). However, it was not possible simply to dispense with the religious principles that had led to their expulsion. Moreover, attempts to induce these women to pay the membership fees met with little, if any success. Consequently, the plan was shelved 27 . In 1942 those people living in mixed marriages who were members of the Juedischen Religionsverband (religious association), and in 1943 the remaining people who were - according to Nazi definition - Jewish, were forced to join the RVJD 28 .
Until early 1945, those Jews living in "privileged" mixed marriages had been exempted from the deportations that began in October 1941; the deportation of those living in "non-privileged" marriages was deferred initially, unless either divorce or the death of the ΓÇ£AryanΓÇ¥ partner had ended the marriage. In this case, other reasons had to be found for deferring the deportation; one reason often used was that the son was on active military service, another was that the child was still a minor. Since decrees were issued that prohibited Mischlinge from serving in the armed forces after 1941-42, this excuse often served the purpose of drawing attention to the son, with the result that, after his discharge from the Wehrmacht, his mother was deported 29 . Even after divorce, Jewish women were still to a certain extent protected if they had young children who had not had a Jewish upbringing. The age at which a child ceased to be a protection for his mother was lowered from eighteen to sixteen years 30 . In 1942, the participants at the Wannsee Conference and subsequent conferences discussed the future fate of the Mischlinge and the twenty-eight thousand mixed marriages in the area of Germany and the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia 31 . They considered the possibility of compulsory divorce 32 , and in the event that the "German-blooded" partner refused, whether he should also be sent to a ghetto 33 . Since there was resistance from the Ministry of the Interior to the idea of a deportation without a divorce, and the Ministry of Justice was opposed to compulsory divorce 34 a final decision was not reached. Hitler was asked to find a solution, but he postponed making a decision until after the war. The majority of people in mixed marriages owe their lives to the fact that this decision was deferred. Nevertheless, even without compulsory divorce and deportation, the chances of survival for individuals or small groups lessened in the face of the Gestapo's activities.
Yet, when the Gestapo arrested Jews living in mixed marriages in Berlin in February 1943 as part of the Fabrik-Aktion , the public protests by the "German-blooded" wives and other relatives apparently were successful. This has been given considerable attention by post researchers 35 . The people concerned soon came to the conclusion that tGestapo was intent on gradually including "privileged" mixed marriages in the deportations. In reality, this action was an attempt by the Gestapo to radicalise anti-Jewish policy and they simply employed methods of public raids that were quite routine in the East 36 . Moreover, there were an unusually large number of people from the world of art and letters among those arrested, which caused an uproar and united the women in their protest. In addition, the arrests only served the purpose of registration and not deportation - a fact that came to light upon new investigations. Indeed, the result was fully acceptable to the state 37 .
References:
1. The increase of mixed marriages until 1933: Kerstin Meiring, Zwischen zwei Welten: Studien zur christlich-juedischen Mischehe in Deutschland, vom 19. Jahrhundert bis zum Ende der Weimarer Republik , Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Bielefeld, 1995, p.123 ff.
2. Zeitschrift fuer Demographie und Statistik der Juden , 3-4 (1924), p. 79.
3. Jeremy Noakes, ΓÇ£The Development of Nazi Policy toward the German-Jewish Mischlinge' 1933-1945,ΓÇ¥ Leo Baeck Institute Year Book, 34 (1989), p. 291.
4. Baruch Zwi Ophir, ΓÇ£Zur Geschichte der Hamburger Juden 1919-1939,ΓÇ¥ in: Juden in PreussenΓÇöJuden in Hamburg , Peter Freimark, ed., Hamburg, 1983, pp. 89ff.
5. Ursula Buettner, Die Not der Juden teilen , Hamburg, 1988, p.14. In 1939 it was estimated that there were between 20,000 and 30,000 mixed marriages in the areas of Germany and the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (see Bruno Blau, ΓÇ£Die Mischehe im Nazireich,ΓÇ¥ Judaica 4/48, p. 48. and Eberhard Roehm, Joerg Thierfelder, Juden-Christen-Deutsche , Stuttgart, 1995, vol. 3/II, 1938-41, p. 112.)
6. Arthur Ruppin, ΓÇ£Die Verbreitung der Mischehe unter den Juden,ΓÇ¥ Zeitschrift fuer Demographie und Statistik der Juden 4 (1930), p. 58.
7. Dora Weigert, ΓÇ£Die juedische Bevoelkerung in Hamburg,ΓÇ¥ Zeitschrift fuer Demographie und Statistik der Juden 5-7 (1919), pp. 66-112.
8. Ina S.Lorenz, ΓÇ£Das Hamburger System' als Organisationsmodell einer juedischen Grossgemeinde. Konzeption und Wirklichkeit,ΓÇ¥ in: Juedische Gemeinden und Organisationsformen von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart , Robert Juette and Abraham P. Kustermann, eds., Vienna, pp. 221-255. The exclusion of women later meant that they could not be included as members of the religious society in the compulsory organization Reichsvereinigung der Juden in Deutschland (RVJD). They were protected because they had changed their names and addresses and were much more difficult to trace than the men.
9. Leo Lippmann, "…Dass ich wie ein guter Deutscher empfinde und handele.' Zur Geschichte der Deutsch-Israelitischen Gemeinde in Hamburg, ” in: der Zeit vom Herbst 1935 bis zum Ende 1942 , Finanzbehoerde Hamburg, ed., Hamburg, 1993, p. 41.
10.Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, ΓÇ£Was kann der Historiker, der Genealoge und der Statistiker zur Erforschung des biologischen Problems der Judenfrage beitragen?,ΓÇ¥ in Forschungen zur Judenfrage, vol. II, Sitzungsberichte der zweiten Arbeitstagung der Forschungsabteilung Judenfrage des Reichsinstituts fuer Geschichte des neuen Deutschlands vom 12. bis 14. Mai 1937, Hamburg, 1937, p. 219.
11.Dora Weigert, ΓÇ£Die juedische Bevoelkerung in Hamburg,ΓÇ¥ Zeitschrift f ue r Demographie und Statistik der Juden 5-7 (1919), p. 85. See also Meiring, Welten , p. 228ff.
12.Alexander Paul, Juedisch-deutsche Blutsmischung. Eine sozialbiologische Untersuchung , Berlin, 1940.
13.These family documents were probably attached to applications for marriage permits submitted by " Mischlingen ersten Grades " (persons with one Jewish parent), who had hoped to be allowed to marry "German-blooded" partners with the permission of Reichsausschuss zum Schutzes des deutschen Blutes ("Reich Committee for the Protection of German Blood").
14.The terms that Paul uses in his investigation indicate his convictions as an advocate of the pseudo-science of racial theory and racial hygiene; for example, Kaufmannssippen ("merchant tribes"), Juwelierssippen ("jeweller tribes"), etc. He pleads for a comprehensive model for the exclusion of the offspring from the German community. Because of the rigidity of this model it was not carried out.
15.All interviews quoted were compiled and archived (Fst/WdE), as part of the project Hamburger Lebenslaeufe - Werkstatt der Erinnerung in the Forschungsstelle fuer die Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus in Hamburg (now: Forschungsstelle fuer Zeitgeschichte ). The names given are aliases. Fst/WdE 009, Interview with Irene Heuermann (9 June 1988).
16.Bundesarchiv (BA), Reichsministerium des Innern 5519 (343-345), Letter (Geheimer Schnellbrief), of Goering, to the Minister of the Interior and others, 28 December 1938.
17.The 60 interviews conducted by the author in which Mischlinge ersten Grades talk about their personal experiences reveal that only about 10% of the non-Jewish mothers were employed before 1933.
18.Fst/WdE 052, Interview with Dennis Berend (5 May 1993), Transcript, p. 7.
19.Dissertation of the author on "Verfolgung juedischer Mischlinge' im Nationalsozialismus,ΓÇ¥ to be published in 1998.
20.Fst/WdE 010V, Interview with Hermann Iversen (21 May 1990), Transcript, p. 8.
21.The term "privilege" is not used by Goering, he acquired the administrative jargon to define the exceptions for certain mixed marriages.
22."Polizeiverordnung ueber die Kennzeichnung der Juden" from 1 September 1941, § 3; Hilberg adds that Jews who were married to Mischlinge were also regarded as having "privileged" marriages. See Raul Hilberg, Die Vernichtung der europaeischen Juden, Frankfurt, 1990, vol. II, p. 445f. "Privileged" mixed marriages could only be the result of one's biological and not adopted children. Staatsarchiv Hamburg (StaHH), Juedische Gemeinden, Abl. 1993, Ordner 20, Letter of RVJD Berlin to RVJD Hamburg, 7 May 1940.
23.StaHH, Oberfinanzpraesident 10 (Devisen- und Vermoegensstelle), Enactment (Allgemeiner Erlass No. 23/40 D.St.), of the Reichswirtschaftsminister to the Oberfinanzpraesidenten, 9 February 1940, p. 1.
24.The "German-blooded" husbands of 25,000 Jewish and "half Jewish" women were discharged from the Wehrmacht on 8 April 1940. See Noakes, ΓÇ£Development,ΓÇ¥ p. 331.
25.Paul Sauer, Dokumente ueber die Verfolgung der juedischen Buerger in Baden-Wuerttemberg durch das nationalsozialistische Regime 1933-1945 , Stuttgart, 1966, vol. II, p. 374. For further special regulations see Buettner, Not , p. 44ff.
26.Letter of the Praesident der Reichsanstalt fuer Arbeitsverwaltung und Arbeitslosenversicherung to the Praesidenten der Landesarbeitsaemter a.o., 20 December 1938, in Dieter Maier, Arbeitseinsatz und Deportation. Die Mitwirkung der Arbeitsverwaltung bei der nationalsozialistischen Judenverfolgung in den Jahren 1938-1945 , Berlin, 1994, p. 30f.
27.StaHH, Juedischen Gemeinden, Beiakte zu C 6 (Mischehen), note Loeffler to Lippmann, 10 March 1941, pp. 4-7.The author would like to express her thanks to Dr. Ina S. Lorenz for this information.
28.Buettner, Not , p. 45 und StaHH, Senatskanzlei, Hans Martin Corten, Bericht ueber die Organisationen der Juden in Hamburg vor und nach dem Waffenstillstand, undated report (probably winter 1945).
29.In the case of the son being granted an exemption and remaining in the Wehrmacht , according to a " Fuehrerentscheid " (decision by the "Fuehrer"), the "privilege" still held if the only son died a Heldentod (hero's death), in the war. BA, Reichsjustizministerium 455, Letter of Lammers, to the Minister of the Interior, 4 March 1941.
30.Lippmann, Geschichte , p. 92.
31.Hilberg, Vernichtung, p. 436. Report of the Wannsee Con 20 January 1942, written by Adolf Eichmann according to instructions form Reinhard Heydrich, published in Kurt Paetzold and Erika Schwarz, Tagesordnung: Judenmord. Die Wannsee-Konferenz am 30. Januar 1942 , Berlin, 1992, pp. 108f.
32.Report "Besprechung ueber die Endloesung der Judenfrage" on 6 March 1942 in Paetzold and Schwarz, Judenmord, p. 111 and p. 118.
33.Letter of Staatssekretaer im Reichsjustizministerium Franz Schlegelberger to the participants of the Wannsee Conference from 5 April 1942, in Paetzold and Schwarz, Judenmord , p. 126f.
34.Uwe D. Adam, Judenpolitik im Dritten Reich, Duesseldorf, 1972, p. 325.
35.Kwiet assumes, for example, "that similar actions could havchanged the course of National Socialist policy as regards the Jews." Konrad Kwiet, ΓÇ£Nach dem Pogrom: Stufen der Ausgrenzung,ΓÇ¥ in Die Juden in Deutschland 1933 - 1945 , Wolfgang Benz, ed., Munich, 1988, p. 594.
36.Christof Dipper, ΓÇ£Schwierigkeiten mit der Resistenz,ΓÇ¥ Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 22 (1996), pp. 409-416.
37.Wolf Gruner, Der Geschlossene Arbeitseinsatz deutscher Juden, Berlin, 1997, p. 319.
