The Impact of the Nazi Racial Decrees on the University of Heidelberg (Part C)
Source: Arye Carmon, Yad Vashem Studies XI (Jerusalem, 1976), pp. 131-163
While actions against students did not differ from those taken against faculty members in terms of timing, they differed in other respects. The students did not leave the legal status of their professors; discriminatory actions could therefore be taken without any fear of reprisal. Furthermore, the elimination of Jewish and leftist students from the university did not have a significant effect on the regular course of academic life. Given the fact that discriminatory actions against students stemmed from within the Studentenschaft itself, the victims had nowhere to turn for protection. In this sense, members of the teaching body enjoyed, at least for a short while and to a certain extent, the protection of their cathedrae; students, however, were completely exposed to persecution.
The Nazi attempt to camouflage these actions with a veneer of legality, and the facade of a nationalist Rechtsstaat which, in theory, entitled the victims to claim legal redress, in fact offered no protection and any appeal became simply another incentive for discriminatory actions. Indeed, after the decree of February 28, 1933 ("Verordnung des Reichspraesidenten") 50 , the way was opened for a flood of decrees against "the enemies of the Reich". Moreover, a legal cover for anti-Jewish actions was provided by the "Law against the Overcrowding of German Schools and Institutions of Higher Learning" (Gesetz gegen die Ueberfuellung deutscher Schulen und Hochschulen) of April 25, 1933 51 . This law stipulated that the number of "non-Aryan" students in each university should not exceed the percentage of non-Aryans within the entire German population, whose proportion is fixed uniformly for the whole Reich.' Exempted from this law (though temporarily) were "non-Aryans" whose fathers had fought for Germany or its Allies at the front during World War 1 or children whose parents were married before the enactment of this law, if the father or mother or two of the grandparents are of Aryan origin.'
A long campaign of the NSDStB to formally adopt a numerus clausus for Jews culminated in the law of April 25, 1933, which also marked the climax of the pressure that had been mounting in Heidelberg since the April 1, 1933 boycott against Jewish businesses. A series of anti-Semitic articles in the local Nazi newspaper, the Volksgemeinschaft, provided the appropriate background for the increasing pressures for a reduction in the number of Jewish students at the university 52 . On April 7, 1933, the day on which the government enacted "The Law for the Reestablishment of the Professional Civil Service," the office of the Student Union in Heidelberg (Deutsche Studentenschaft Heidelberg - DStH) conveyed an urgent letter to the Baden Ministry of Culture 53 . Signed by the leaders of the students' "Nationalist Bloc" and the NSDStB, it called for the immediate introduction of a numerus clausus in the university. The quota for Jewish students was to be established in proportion to their percentage in the population. Moreover, only in accordance with tills quota would Jewish students be able to take the State's examinations. Finally, the mentors of the Studentenschaft announced that Jewish students as well as "Marxists" would not be granted any financial aid.
The pressure from the Heidelberg Studentenschaft and the Volksgemeinschaft was perhaps responsible for a series of three decrees enacted by the Baden Ministry of Culture before the promulgation of the law against "overcrowding." 54 In these decrees the Commissar of the Baden Ministry of Culture ordered the university to note every "non-Aryan" name in the lists of the newly enrolled students 55 . Consequently, Baden was prepared for the law against "overcrowding" quite some time before it was issued. Following the law of April 25, the governments of the various Laender had to estimate the need for academic professionals and accordingly determine the number of new students who would be admitted to the university 56 . These were under no circumstances to include Jews. The definition of a "non-Aryan" was the one used in the April 7 "Law for the Reestablishment of the Professional Civil Service."
According to the new quota system, the number of Jewish students was not to exceed 1.5% of the total student body 57 . Yet the Nazi educational agencies had ruled that the percentage of "non-Aryan" students enrolled in the universities before April 25 could equal 5% of the total. In the 1933 summer semester 4.8% of the students in Heidelberg were Jewish (in absolute numbers 177 out of 3,687). As mentioned above, their number dropped drastically from this semester to the next by 43%. In the winter semester of 1933-34 the percentage of Jewish students in Heidelberg was 2.2% (in absolute numbers 75 out of 3,480). The following table compares the decline in the number of "non-Aryan" students according to faculties 58 :
Summer Semester 1933
Winter Semester 1933-34
Change In Percentage
Theology
1
Law
28
11
-39.3
Medicine
100
33
-33
Philosophy
37
15
-40.5
Natural Sciences
11
17
+54.5
Total
177
76
It is quite difficult to determine flow many "non-Aryan" students completed their studies during the 1933 summer Semester and thus to assess accurately to what extent graduation or racial pressure was the reason for their leaving. However, the overall drop of 43% and likewise the decline in inch of the three faculties in the number of the students was proportionately much higher than the total number of students who left Heidelberg during that period. In the winter semester of 1932-33, 28.7 %, or 964 of the students enrolled for 1933-34, left Heidelberg. In the summer semester of 1934, 35.4%, or 1,304 out of the 3,687 enrolled Students, left the university 59 . The increase in the latter case may be accounted for by the general decline in the student population of the universities between 1933 and 1935 60 . We do not know the reason for the increase in the number of Jewish students in the Faculty of Natural Sciences. Nonetheless, given the facts that in the 1934-35 winter semester their number dropped sharply to four (a decline of over 76 %), and that in the 1summer semester the number dropped to one, the above increase seems to be insignificant.
In the final analysis it may be assumed that racial pressure at Heidelberg was a factor in the departure of "non-Aryan" students. Although numerical comparisons might not be fully sufficient to support this assessment, it is corroborated by several factual events.
On March 30, 1933, the last elected Rector of the University, Professor Willy Andreas, informed the Baden Ministry of the Interior that one of his foreign students, an Afghani, had complained to him that he had been attacked on several occasions. The racial type of the Afghani,' commented Andreas, as well as of Persians and Italians, resembles that of the Jews.' 61 A week later the Baden Ministry of the Interior issued letters to the police directors in Heidelberg, Freiburg, and Karlsruhe (the three cities of Baden in which there were institutions of higher learning) describing the incident in Heidelberg, and concluding: Since there is a danger that these foreign students will quit their studies in Germany and continue them abroad, I urge you to explain to the people in charge that undesirable cultural-political and economic consequences must be avoided.' 62 The Afghani student was probably attacked because he was thought to be a Jew, and therefore the intention of the Ministry's reply was to reassure other dark-complexioned students that they need not fear being mistaken for Jews. The above incident provides a clear insight into the racist atmosphere, which prevailed in Heidelberg before the enactment of April 25 law against "overcrowding."
Another incident, which occurred six months later, indicates the growing intensity of the anti-Jewish agitation. On October 13, 1933, a landlady informed Professor Wilhelm Groh, who had recently been appointed by the Nazis as Rector of the University of Heidelberg, that a student named Erika Anders had left her rented room without paying the rent. Moreover she had also allegedly made comments against Hitler in 1932, read "Jewish books," and brought Jewish professors to her room 63 . The Rector, who informed the police of the case, received a letter from Miss Anders on March 10, 1934. She demanded an explanation from him as to why her possessions in Heidelberg had been examined without her authorisation. As a result of the Rector's demand, which was approved by the Baden Ministry of Culture, the Gestapo arrested her in Munich and interrogated her "unpleasantly." Denying all the accusations, she pointed out that she was a baptised Catholic.
A central event in the life of the Heidelberg Studentenschaft (and probably of other German universities) was "the burning of Jewish writings." 64 Initiated by the "Chief Office for Press and Propaganda" of the DSt in Berlin, this move was more significant than the usual anti-Jewish activities, yet, compared with the revolutionary aspirations of the students at that time, the action was ludicrous. Nevertheless, it may be seen as an outlet for aggressions deriving from growing feelings of frustration and disappointment. In the absence of a solid framework for the creation of an ideal Nazi university, in the book-burning, a flagrantly anti-intellectual action, became the symbol of vulgarised intellectualism itself, and the university, the fortress of intellectualism, could do nothing about it. This action, held in Heidelberg on Wednesday, May 18, 1933 65 , strongly reinforced the anti-Jewish atmosphere. In fact, it was regarded in May 1933 as part of the revolutionary elan of the nationalist Studentenschaft, which sought to transform a "deteriorated civilised university" into a Nazi school for German Kultur.
The "burning action" was held in the Universitaetsplatz, the centre of the old city of Heidelberg, surrounded by several bookstores, the university's administration building, the Neue Universitaet building with the credo Dem lebendigen Geist (to the living spirit) engraved above its gate, and the old library. On May 6, 1933, before the "burning," the Weiss'sche Universitaets-Buchhandlung store sent a letter to the Rector, informing him of a request by the Student Union to display its appeal for the burning of "subversive Jewish-Marxist works" in the store's front window 66 . On the same date, eleven of Heidelberg's bookstores and book dealers, including the above, notified the Student Union of their refusal to display the students' appeal in their front windows. Respect for the written word - which no longer existed in the libraries of the university - was retained in the shops of the booksellers!
The linking of Jewish and Marxist works was not accidental. It was closely connected with the "cleansing" process and as such served as yet another pretext to act against "enemy" students. Many Jewish students, it should lee noted, were indeed affiliated with leftist factions at Heidelberg, as elsewhere. The first action heralding the purge was the promulgation of a decree by the Baden Ministry of Culture on March 27, 1933, published by the Volksgemeinschaft in an article entitled "Jewish Money for the S.P.D. in Heidelberg." Regarding leftist students, the ministerial decree stipulated that on the basis of the law of February 28 "for the protection of the people and State" all Socialist, Communist, Marxist, and pacifist student groups were outlawed.
On June 19, 1933, the students' organ, Der Heidelberg Student, informed its readers that the Fuehrer of the Heidelberg DSt proposed that the Rector expel the 26 students known to be affiliated with the Communists from the university.' It was impossible to let Communist intellectuals obtain knowledge in the National Socialist State, the newspaper argued. Immediately thereafter, several of the 26 whose names had been published denied any connection with Communism. Some of them claimed that their alleged affiliation with Marxist groups might have resulted from their attending a meeting of one of these factions. They, however, did not see this as sufficient cause for expulsion from the university.
On July 8, 1933, at the last meeting it was to hold under Nazi rule, the Small Senate of the University discussed the matter 67 . Following this, on the same date, the Rector, Prof. Willy Andreas, issued a letter to the Baden of Culture Ministry 68 giving the Senate's decision. It was understood, he wrote, that Communist students, whether of "Aryan" origin or not, should be expelled from the university. These students, he further announced, would not be permitted to participate in examinations, and likewise their papers would not be corrected.
Three days later, in a letter entitled "The cleansing of the university's Communist students," the Ministry of Culture made it clear that students believed to be Communists were to be excluded from the university's rolls. They did not necessarily have to be members of the Communist Party. It would suffice for a student to have attended a single meeting of a Marxist group of any kind to make him liable for expulsion. In doubtful cases, the Fuehrer of the Studentenschaft was to be consulted 69 . By this letter the Baden educational office empowered the Fuehrer of the Studentenschaft to settle political and personal debts simply by labelling any student "a Communist." By the beginning of the 1933-1934 winter semester the gates of the university were closed to anyone alleged to be a Communist 70 .
The archives of the university contain several files pertaining to disciplinary procedures taken against alleged leftist students. In light of the law "for the protection of the people and State" and the authority given to the Studentenschaftsfuehrer to determine who was "a Communist", and given the fact that, since the spring of 1933, NSDStB students participated in the university's disciplinary court, it followed that whoever was brought before this court was doomed to be expelled from the university. Significantly, many of those accused were Jewish 71 . The disciplinary court, which in the past had protected "the academic customs and order of the university," relinquished its lofty principles in the very early stages of the Gleichschaltung.
Towards the end of 1934 all Jewish students were to be subject to the quota system. Whereas the initial law of April 25, 1933 had stipulated that "non-Aryan" students whose fathers had fought in World War I and/or had one "Aryan" parent or two "Aryan" grandparents would not be included in the numerus clausus quota, these provisions were now eliminated. By May 1933 the Rector was ordered to set up a special registration committee, which would decide on the acceptance of new students according to the availability of academic posts. An admission of Jewish students, therefore, was to be carefully regulated according to a newly defined numerus relativus (which, unlike the first quota of 5 %, was set at 1.5 %) 72 . On November 13, 1934, the Baden Ministry of Culture issued two separate decrees. The first 73 stipulated that admission to the university was to be determined according to personal and academic qualifications, which would contribute to the German Volk. The second 74 stipulated that "non-Aryan" students would be admitted to "academic examinations" only if their fathers had been front-line soldiers during World War I and/or if they had one parent or two Grandparents of "Aryan" descent and if they were within the numerus relatives quota. Both decrees meant a reduction of the former 5% quota, and a worsening of the situation of Jewish students, who could now no longer be admitted to the university or complete their academic education.
In fact, the University of Heidelberg was hardly in need of these decrees since Jews had already been refused admission before November 1934. On September 7, 1934 Miss Irene Kahn addressed a letter to the university, asking to be admitted to the Faculty of Philosophy in the 1934-35 winter semester, after having completed five semesters at the University of Frankfurt, one in Berlin, and two in Paris 75 . The secretariat of the university replied that her application could be considered only if sire had a father who had fought at the front during World War I or one grandparent or two great-grandparents of "Aryan" descent. If she did not fulfil any of these preconditions, she was to be admitted only if one of the currently enrolled Jewish students was to drop out of school before completing his studies 76 .
On November 6, 1934 the Ministry of Culture forwarded a letter from the "Central Union of German Citizens of Jewish Faith" (Central-Verein deutscher Staatsbuerger juedischen Glaubens - C.V .) to the Rector Professor Groh inquiring as to whether Jewish students at Heidelberg had reached the percentage requited by the new Nazi quota system and, if not, whether it was possible for Jewish students to be admitted to this university 77 . Without any formal greetings, the Rector replied: The number of non-Aryan students in Heidelberg is precisely according to the required percentage and hence the answer to your question is negative.' 78 Since the percentage of the quota for Jewish students Gas vaguely formulated, it is difficult to judge the accuracy of Professor Groh's answer.
The Rector's severity did not apply only to the admission of new Jewish students. Students already enrolled were also affected, as is illustrated by the following example. On November 20, 1934 the Dean of the Law Faculty informed the Rector that measures were being taken in order to comply with the November 13 regulations regarding Jewish doctoral candidates 79 . The Dean mentioned, however, that there were a number of Jewish doctoral candidates, who, while not falling into the category of the new November 13 regulation, met the requirements in effect up to that date. Not only were these students in the final stages of their work, they had also already incurred expenses in the course of their studies at Heidelberg. It seemed to the Dean that full compliance with the new regulations would cause severe hardship to these students, and he wondered whether exceptions could be made for them. The Rector's answer, short and simple, was that exceptions were made for the Jewish students who had handed in their dissertations before November 20, 1934 (the day of the Dean's letter to him) and were waiting for their oral examinations. We do not know if this was the only exception made for Jewish students, but we do know that five-and-a-half years later, on June 19, 1940, on the basis of the "Law concerning the Revocation of Naturalisation and the Deprivation of German Citizenship" (Gesetz ueber den Widerruf von Einbuergerungen und die Aberkennung der deutschen Staatsangehoerigkeit), the University of Heidelberg revoked the doctorates which it had granted to 42 Jewish students between 1903 and 1936.
There was no legal or factual connection between the decisions of Professor Wilhelm Groh in 1934 and Professor Paul Schmitthenner's revocation of doctoral titles in 1940. Nevertheless, the preference given at Heidelberg to anti-intellectual criteria over academic rules provided the link between these events: During the Nazi period there was no way for Jewish students to obtain an academic education at the University of Heidelberg. The process of eliminating Jewish students, which began in 1933 when they were admitted to Heidelberg on the basis of the quota system, subsequently developed to the point where Jewish students could no longer enrol at the university and those already enrolled were denied the right to take examinations prior to their graduation (Staatsexamen). 80 Doctoral candidates had difficulties completing their doctorates and thus were denied academic careers, not only in Germany but also abroad. The process finally reached the point where the University of Heidelberg retroactively revoked the doctoral degrees of Jewish scholars who had completed their academic studies long before the Nazi era.
The dismissal of professors and the expulsion of students were part of the same process. It should also be noted that while the transformation of the Studentenschaft and enforcement of the Fuehrerprenzip were gradual processes, which did not start before the fall of 1933, most of "the enemies of the Reich," faculty members and students, were eliminated from the Heidelberg academic community before the other processes had started. Paradoxically, because of this very distinction, the "cleansing" process was dialectically linked with the changes of the university as a whole. While the transformation of the Studentenschaft as well as the enforcement of a new institutional pattern were based on official directives, the university, at both its student and faculty levels, readily met the Nazis' racial demands in the "cleansing" process. Between April and September 1933, the last constitutionally elected Rector, senates, deans, and faculty forums continued to function. Though handicapped and apprehensive, their readiness to comply with National Socialist directives implicated them in the "cleansing process" carried out by the Nazis. Because of this same readiness, any degree of autonomy, which the university might have retained in the other processes of the Gleichschaltung was eliminated. This readiness became the thick noose, which bound together the historical events in Heidelberg from Fall Gumbel through the Gleichschaltung period.
References:
51.RGBl I, p. 83.
52. Ibid. , I, No. 225.
53.Articles in the Volksgemeinschaft on March 28, 1933; April 1, 4, 7, 11, 19, 22, 24, 1933.
54.April 4, 1933, UAHD, VII, 1, No. 133.
55.Albrecht Goetz von Olenhusen, 'Die nichtarischen Studenten an den deutschen Hochschulen,' Vierteljahreshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte , 14, 1966, p. 177.
56.Report in the Karlsruhe Zeitung , April 13, 1933.
57.Paragraph 2 of the April 25, 1933 Law.
58.Paragraph 4 of the April 25, 1933 Law.
59.The figures are taken from reports in UAHD, VII, No. 134.
60.These figures were taken from the Vorlesungsverzeichnis fuer das Winterhalbjahr 1932ΓÇô1933 (Heidelberg), and the same for the summer semester 1934.
61.For the general decline in the number of students in German universities, see Hartshorne, op. cit. , pp. 75ΓÇô80.
62.March 30, 1933, UAHD, X, 3, No. 12.
63.'Bekaempfung politischer Ausschreitungen,' April 8, 1933, ibid.
64.Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe , 235/30063.
65.Analysing the burning of 'Jewish writings' in terms of organisation, quantities, reactions of the academic authorities in general and the Universitaetsbibliothek in particular, was among the more difficult tasks of this research. The archive of the university does not have sufficient material pertaining to quantities and titles of books burned.
66. Der Heidelberger Student , June 1, 1933.
67.UAHD, X, 3, No. 12.
68.UAHD, I, 3, Vol. 261c.
69.UAHD, VII, 1, No. 93.
70.July 11, 1933, ibid.
71.November 7, 1933, ibid.
72.UAHD, No. 219, No. 294.
73.'Erlass des Baden Kultusministeriums,' May 24, 1933; UAHD, VII, 1, No. 133.
74.'Erlass des Baden Kultusministeriums,' November 11, 1934, UAHD, III, 1, No. 109; Olenhusen, op. cit. , p. 193.
75.'Zulassung nichtarischer Studierender zu akademischen Pruefungen,' November 13, 1934, UAHD, III, 1, No. 86.
