Constricting and Extinguishing Jewish Life - Oxford Scholarship Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Jewish Daily Life in Germany, 1618-1945$

Marion A. Kaplan

Print publication date: 2005

Print ISBN-13: 9780195171648

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195171648.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: null; date: 26 August 2016

Constricting and Extinguishing Jewish Life

Constricting and Extinguishing Jewish Life

Chapter:
(p.346) 25 Constricting and Extinguishing Jewish Life
Source:
Jewish Daily Life in Germany, 1618-1945
Author(s):

Trude Maurer

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195171648.003.0026

Abstract and Keywords

This chapter shows how Jews were deliberately terrorized starting in 1933. As of summer 1938 more extreme persecutions peaked in the pogrom of November 9-10 and the arrest and internment of about 30,000 men in concentration camps. This made the defenselessness and isolation of the Jews clear-cut. Even at that time they received little help from non-Jews. Emigration seemed the only remaining option. But this option became virtually impossible once the war started and was finally prohibited entirely in October 1941. At the same time, forced labor and the withdrawal of almost all food stripped Jews of the material basis for survival and all psychological strength.

Keywords:   German Jews, Nazi regime, anti-Semitism, violence against Jews

The many massive restrictions in all areas starting in 1933 dramatically changed life as German Jews had known it. In addition, some new experiences became part of everyday life. The frequency and lasting nature of the problems made some new experiences into everyday occurrences. These included antisemitic violence, ranging from attacks against individuals to the November Pogrom and subsequent imprisonment in concentration camps; the unrelenting question whether, in view of the dwindling prospects for survival in Germany, to leave the country or eke out an existence there in spite of the circumstances; and finally, once the war started, becoming a prisoner in Germany, with forced labor, deportations to the extermination camps starting in 1941, and, for only a very few, a precarious chance to survive underground.

Antisemitic Violence

Immediately after the Nazis assumed power, their supporters took revenge on numerous opponents of the regime. In March, the SA beat a Jewish baker’s apprentice in Berlin to death because he had filed a police report after Nazis had attacked him a year earlier. At least 15 other Jews were murdered in the same year in the SA barracks, “unofficial” concentration camps, and the like.1 Some Jewish lawyers who had defended socialists or members of Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold, the Weimar Coalition security force, were physically assaulted and murdered or driven to suicide.

Nor did the violence remain limited to political adversaries. Early on, the manager of the United Breslau Theaters was kidnapped and abused by men in SA uniforms; a Jewish moneylender in lower Bavaria was abducted from his (p.347) home and murdered; on March 8, a hotel in Magdeburg patronized predominantly by Jews was attacked, and the guests were injured with knives and guns. The next day, Jews in the Scheunenviertel, the poor East European Jewish district in Berlin, were beaten bloody, and three Jews in Worms were dragged to an SA meeting place, where they were beaten and forced to “whip each other.”2 Moreover, there were two firebomb attacks on March 9 against Jewish businesses in Königsberg. There, the police chief promised the representative of the Centralverein to provide protection for the Jewish shops, but two days later he asked the Jewish representative and his family to leave the city, since he could no longer guarantee their safety. Three days later numerous Jews were assaulted in Königsberg, one of whom died from his injuries.3

There were also many instances of violence in connection with the boycott on April 1,1933. After Reichsmarshal Göring refused to order police to protect Jewish stores on March 11, attacks began in mid-March in a number of southwest German cities.4 When the boycott was decided on March 26 and publicized in the press thereafter, rioting started as early as March 28. In Göttingen, five Jewish businessmen were even forced through the streets on a cattle truck.5 In Frankfurt, SS men broke up a meeting of Jewish retailers who were discussing a possible joint response to the boycott and brought between 80 and 100 participants to police headquarters.6 The Jews were

chased at double time through the main streets of the city. … It was a horrendous sight for the eye not yet accustomed to such scenes to see these honorable, mostly already gray and often ailing men tormented in such a degrading and torturous way, some of them chased to the point of utter exhaustion, and then finally released by the police.

Onlookers remained “totally passive, silent, shaking their heads from the sidewalks and at the windows. Only very few dared to express their outrage. A few smiled sympathetically—was it meant for the tormenters or the tormented? There was no loud applause or open agreement.”7

Despite the order not to enter Jewish stores or touch the owners, there were also attacks on the day of the boycott.8 Even after it officially ended, the boycott continued into the summer, as did the terror against Jews.9 When the buildings and assets of the B’nai B’rith were confiscated in various cities in August, SA men in Nuremberg abducted members of the lodge, as well as other Jews, in the early morning hours, brought them to two sports fields, and forced them to perform useless tasks such as loading and unloading bricks. They even had to pull out grass with their teeth.10 Over the next few years, synagogues were vandalized, antisemitic slogans painted on shop windows, and windows shattered during the night.11 Damages were by no means limited to property. In Treuchtlingen (in central Franconia), during December 1934, for example, members of the Hitler Youth beat and knifed a Jewish man at home, demolishing his furniture.12 Nor did the Hitler Youth shy away from hurting children and teenagers.13

Many Jews and non-Jews alike reassured each other after the Nazis took power that the regime would not last long. Moreover, many Jews felt secure on (p.348) the basis of their integrity and their participation in World War I.14 Every time non-Jews mentioned public discontent, it was interpreted as a confirmation of the regime’s fleeting nature. In spring 1933 a Frankfurt wholesale businessman was stealthily approached by his former servant, who told him, “things are seething; the people will revolt”; it immediately raised his hopes again, which were then reinforced by the “indignation abroad.”15 Such false confidence was renewed again and again; for example, many Jews viewed the Röhm Purge as the beginning of the end of the Nazi regime.16

But the Jews were virtually at the mercy of the Nazis, since control measures and informants continually offered pretexts for “punishments.”17 Cantor Levy reported from Frankfurt:

Over the course of the years there were individual arrests almost daily on ridiculous charges or sometimes anonymous denunciations—at any time of day or night.… No Jew could be certain of living a peaceful, undisturbed life. The most innocent, harmless citizen could be accused of any offence or crime.… Jail, prison, concentration camp, at the very least weeks of pretrial detention without any court hearing, frequently involving rough treatment, threatened all of us.

And some businesses were already destroyed or “Aryanized” while their owners were in police custody.18 Even trivial reasons and denunciations led to arrests, and the investigations and searches after the fact were for the purpose of collecting or fabricating incriminating evidence.19

As president of a Jewish lodge, Cantor Levy of Frankfurt had to reckon with the Nazis’ searching his home. In order to assure they would not find anything incriminating, Levy destroyed all of his newspaper clippings referring to his actions against antisemitism prior to 1933: “And my caution proved to be justified.”20 In early 1938 Jews in Berlin, as in Frankfurt, had to assume that there could be police searches in spontaneous raids in cafés or restaurants:

Anyone who did not have identity papers with them (in normal times that was not common), was arrested and given trouble. And all Jews (around early 1938) had to hand in their passports without receiving any substitute identification card. I was able to avoid such a sudden arrest only because I could show the certificate for my Hindenburg Cross for war veterans.21

Local riots and expulsions as well as centrally organized actions against Jews became more frequent throughout Germany in the summer of 1938. Within the scope of actions against so-called asocials, a total of 10,000 people were sent to concentration camps under the guise of “criminal police preventive detention,” including 1,500 Jews. The edict underlying the actions expressly targeted Jews who had previously served a jail sentence of more than a month. Jewish organizations became aware of this by chance. Initially neither those arrested nor their lawyers could make rhyme or reason of the mass arrests. Some of the detainees fulfilled their sentences by paying a fine; some were even exempted by the amnesty declared a month earlier; most had long since served (p.349) their sentences: “Traffic and tax offenders; people who had bought food during the war without a ration coupon; doctors who had prescribed morphine; verbal harassers; people who had violated the foreign currency laws, often only with gross negligence.”22 Knowing that even minor previous offenses could serve as a pretext for mass arrests, Jewish institutions started issuing warnings for the most trivial of everyday actions. For example, in some cities they urged hospital visitors to use the shortest direct route crossing the street when leaving, because two hidden police officers were stationed there for the sole purpose of issuing tickets for jaywalking. Since the fine for Jews was 30 Reichs-marks (as compared with 5 Reichsmarks for non-Jews), they were considered to have a police record.23

Arrested Jews brought to Buchenwald (near Weimar) and Sachsenhausen (about 20 miles north of Berlin) concentration camps had to perform such heavy labor that even the strongest among them could barely survive. Within only a few weeks there were about a hundred deaths; murders were justified as “shot while attempting to escape,” even when doctor’s certificates confirmed otherwise.24 Prisoners were released primarily if they could credibly show their intention to emigrate. At that time some of them might have been so broken that that was hardly possible.25 The extent to which these mass arrests preoccupied all Jews is shown by the reaction to a teacher’s comments about Goethe’s life: “’He was born in Frankfurt and died in Weimar.’ ‘In the camp?’ asked a Jewish child.”26

In addition to the never-ending terror measures against individual Jews, in May and June 1938, antisemitic actions increased again in various major cities. In Berlin, Magdeburg, and Frankfurt, synagogues were damaged; slogans were painted on Jewish stores; store windows were smashed; and the owners were sometimes physically assaulted. Propaganda Minister Goebbels even gave police orders “to go out of their way to constantly intervene against Jews.”27 Jewish residents of several villages in the Hunsrück region fled to nearby cities in September after they were attacked. Nazi Party members in Franconia drove Jews out during the High Holidays, forcing them to leave their homes and sell even the synagogues at ridiculously low prices.28 Legal pretexts were offered early on, in the summer of 1938, to tear down major synagogues in Munich and Nuremberg, for “traffic and road development reasons” and to “re-create the historical city,” respectively.29

The first major deportation from Germany took place in late October. A new Polish law made it possible to revoke the Polish citizenship of persons who were out of the country for an extended period of time; on top of that, a one-time inspection of passports issued by Polish missions abroad was authorized in the fall. Consequently, on October 27–28, Nazi Germany took roughly 17,000 Jews with Polish citizenship into custody prior to deporting them. The authorities feared that Poland would want to prevent the return of its Jewish citizens. This affected largely people who had been born in the German Empire.30 The deportation caught them totally unaware and was carried out ruthlessly, even brutally, in many places: “Many women and children collapsed and were left lying on the ground.”31

(p.350) Jewish Communities everywhere tried to help those designated for deportation during their departure by giving them food for the journey. Even those who had previously been very distant toward or even rejecting of the East European Jews showed solidarity. A Zionist from Frankfurt said: “On this day all contrasts and social differences disappeared entirely. The Community was extraordinarily active and coordinated support at the train station. Even those in assimilated circles … understood that this was a dress rehearsal.”32 In some cases it proved possible to have the sick and elderly deferred from deportation.33 After the action was concluded on October 29, all those who were still on German territory could return to their place of residence. Again helpers from the Jewish Community greeted them; and again an emotional bond formed between the two groups. “I myself knew only a few, but when the first distraught people came toward me I opened my arms wide and stroked and kissed whoever I could reach.”34

The misery of the deportees and of those who spent days camping in the no-man’s-land between Germany and Poland spurred the son of one of the deported families to assassinate a German diplomat in Paris on November 7, 1938. The Nazis used this event to justify the pogrom. Many Jews had feared an “annihilating strike” for a long time.35 Despite this anticipation and the rioting of previous years, the pogrom carried out by Nazi organizations that began on the evening of November 9,1938, and continued until the next evening was a radical consciousness-raising experience. Until that time most of the personal violence had targeted individuals and was frequently not known beyond the small towns where it took place. This was a sudden, staged, and centralized action of unprecedented proportions. Throughout Germany Jews were attacked, their homes ravaged, synagogues set on fire or—where this was not possible without endangering adjacent buildings—largely destroyed. Almost 100 people died; about 27,000 Jewish men were taken to concentration camps, where hundreds of them died from exposure, abuse, and disease.

In places, Jews were spared some of these excesses.36 But the overall picture is marked by the combination of all forms of rioting. As with the boycott in 1933, it began with apparently “spontaneous” actions on the evening of November 7,37 but preparations had been made over a longer period. Jewish stores were required by the Berlin police in late June to post a sign identifying them as such:” ‘Pogrom Guide’ is what I had called it, and I was right.”38

To some extent synagogues were a symbol of German Jewry, and a Hitler Youth song had long incited people to set them afire.39 But the destruction also affected countless private apartments.40 In search of Jewish men to bring to concentration camps, SA and SS men had no qualms about attacking their families. In Göttingen, for example, women were also arrested and not released until the following morning.41 And when the Gestapo did not find the representative of the Centralverein in Leipzig at home, they took his wife and feverish son: “He’ll croak all the faster.”42 The arrested Jews were not deliberately killed, but at least some Nazis had reckoned with the possibility of Jewish deaths in the pogrom. As with the remark about the feverish child, the Nazis’ also showed their disdain for humanity toward patients in Jewish hospitals. All (p.351) Jews in Breslau hospitals whose body temperature was not above 98.6 degrees were ruthlessly discharged. A patient in Fürth was torn from his bed the day after an operation to be transported to Dachau. He died several minutes later of a heart attack. In Berlin clinics, however, no searches took place.43

The perpetrators came from all social classes and were almost all Nazis, many of whom had not joined the Party or other Nazi organizations until the Nazis took power.44 The widespread notion that the perpetrators carried out the pogrom in places where they were not known, however, does not seem to hold. Three models can be identified. In some towns local terror commandos coordinated and had sole responsibility for the actions; in others the rioters were nonlocals. The third category involved organization by nonlocal Nazi activists, but both local and nonlocal Party members carried them out. Some even attacked their next-door neighbors.45 In many places the activists also incited teenagers and even children. By no means did they limit themselves to practicing antisemitic chants. Schoolchildren also demolished apartments and threw stones through the windows of old-age homes. Schools remained closed on the morning of November 10 in many places, and sometimes the teachers even led their students in the violence.46 On the following days, Hitler Youth continued to terrorize individuals in their homes.47

In a village where Jews and non-Jews had previously lived together in relative harmony, where non-Jews had attended services on Yom Kippur and a young SA trooper even put one Jewish man under “house arrest” for his “own safety,” shocking scenes took place. After a while people in civilian clothing joined the SA: “Three men who had smashed the [Torah] Ark threw the [Torah] scrolls … to the screaming and shouting mass of people that filled the little synagogue. The people caught the scrolls as if they were amusing themselves with a ball game … until they reached the street outside. Women tore away the red and blue velvet, and everybody tried to snatch some of the silver adorning the scrolls. … It did not take long before the first heavy gray stones came tumbling down, and the children of the village amused themselves by flinging stones at the many-colored windows.”48 Torah scrolls and other ritual objects were ceremoniously burned on the University Square in Heidelberg a week later.49

A majority of the population did not participate in the riots, but the events attracted large crowds of onlookers. When those arrested in Frankfurt arrived at the festival hall in the western part of the city where they were locked up together pending deportation, “the masses had already started gathering on the street, receiving us with shouting and mean insults, with chants … the most well-known of which was ‘Juda verrecke!’ [Death to the Jews!]” And when those over 65 years old were released in the evening, they were “met with shouting and agitated insults: ‘Hang them! Let them face a firing squad! Why should these criminals be released?!’”50 In nearby Hanau, on the other hand, one of those arrested noticed on the way to the train station that “the people stood shoulder to shoulder and let us walk past them. Hardly anyone made any comments, few laughed; you could read sympathy and outrage on many of their faces.”51

(p.352) Criticism that was actually expressed pertained mostly to the destruction of things, which seemed especially absurd in view of Nazi attempts to reeducate the masses:

The same government that systematically … collected and ordered … the collection of every little piece of aluminum foil, every tube, every tin can, every crate, every cardboard box, every old newspaper, every little piece of paper—that same government ordered “destruction commissions” to carry out, under the slogan: “scot-free,” the senseless destruction of merchandise stocks, pieces of art, furnishings, expensive libraries, musical instruments, in short, to destroy, shatter, and smash items of infinite, inestimable worth.52

What a cultured Jew had expressed so eloquently could also be heard among ordinary Germans. But of course such criticism tended not to question the system per se. Moral objections also existed, as well as spontaneous expressions of sympathy, which soon faded away again, since they were not based on any fundamental sympathy for the Jewish “citizens.”53 Moreover, many onlookers got carried away and started looting.54 Some non-Jewish neighbors expressed criticism and spontaneous sympathy or even attempted to call for help or intervene themselves. But most helpers quickly withdrew as soon as the activists shouted at them, making it clear that this was a Nazi Party action.55

Some offered concrete assistance after the pogrom by taking Jews into their homes, helping them clean up the damage, lending neighbors dishes and clothing, and shopping for them. While general hospitals did not accept even injured Jews until checking with Nazi Party and police offices, there is evidence that some denominational hospitals offered their services, taking in entire families or residents of a Jewish old-age or rest home. Sometimes help even came from Party members or members of Nazi organizations.56 On several occasions older police officers warned Jews to get to safety and returned the valuables of those arrested to their families.57 All in all, offering help was more the exception than the rule.58 Jews seeking assistance were often turned away at the door,59 especially if they were asking for help regarding men in concentration camps: “I ran to Christian acquaintances, friends, and coworkers, but everywhere all they did was shrug their shoulders, shake their heads, and say no. And everyone was happy when I went away. I was treated like a leper, even by people who were well-disposed toward us.”60

The arrested Jewish men were herded together in jails and other public buildings and then brought to the Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, and Dachau concentration camps.61 When they arrived62 they had to endure the vilest insults and were driven so hard that there were numerous accidents with broken bones and, on occasion, even skulls. In subsequent weeks they were repeatedly ridiculed; SS harassment never ended. Given contradictory instructions, the inevitably “improper behavior” resulted in punishment for trivialities. Sometimes an entire block of 200 elderly men had to squat for two hours and “leap like frogs.”63 Diabetics, refused insulin or even placement in the hospital barracks, died agonizing deaths. One SS doctor said bluntly that he wanted to see (p.353) Jews only to issue their death certificates. Not until many had already died were Jews allowed to enter the infirmary.64

At work, prisoners were driven to the point of collapse.

Suddenly someone was totally worn-out. He was pale as death and stopped in his tracks; when the guard shouted at him he answered quietly and unemotionally, “Shoot me. I can’t take anymore.” To my surprise he wasn’t slapped around. The fellow answered slowly, weighing the options, “Yeah, shoot! You’d like that, wouldn’t you! Well it isn’t as easy as you think. Shoot? Keep walking, that’s what you’ll do!”65

This difficult, often senseless forced work went on for weeks without interruption: “We are living without Sundays and that means ‘living in a circle, living without end, thinking without end’; joylessness without end, injustice without end, toil without end—never-ending torture.”66

Advice and concrete aid from “career criminals,” “asocials,” and especially the political prisoners, who had already been in the concentration camps for a long time, was very important for Jewish prisoners. Whenever there was pork, one block leader insisted that an Orthodox rabbi eat bread and butter from the leader’s own provisions and did not let up “until the pious man was more or less full.” On the other hand, Jews judged other Jews who did not show solidarity with particular harshness. “Thefts of bread and other food” seemed “most sickening” within the “community of deprivation.”67

Despite some support and tactics of self-preservation, imprisonment in a concentration camp was intended to drive people to the brink of insanity or to suicide:

It is eerie when at night one’s sleep is disrupted and in the middle of the room, which is half-lit by the lights outside and by the circling of the searchlights, a figure arises and, mentally confused by all he has experienced, begins in a monotonous voice to recite Kaddish. … Or when in the washroom a desperate person … hanged himself.… Many a person to whom life here became an unbearable burden made use of the prohibition to put an end to himself by running out of the barrack into the fire of the machine-gun towers.68

Men were released from concentration camps almost only for the purpose of emigration, and under threat of reinternment in a camp if they returned. As of December 12,1938, men over 50 and sometimes former front-line soldiers were released, or people whose businesses had just been “Aryanized,” since they were needed for the necessary legal actions. On isolated occasions those with necessary skills, such as “legal consultants,” were released.69 In order to be discharged, prisoners had to sign a pledge that they had been treated properly and would not talk about camp conditions, a promise to which most of them felt bound. Rabbi Carlebach of Hamburg got them to speak when he invited them to his home for kiddush following his public blessing of rescue after their release. Since the pledge had been signed under utmost physical and psychological duress, he stressed that it was null and void.70

(p.354) Most of those released suffered long after their imprisonment: “The Jewish Hospital in Berlin can hardly comprehend the admissions: frostbite, sepsis, pneumonia. Some cannot stand the feeling of regained freedom and break down remembering the experience at Sachsenhausen.”71 In the hospital the patients still responded in a military-like manner, answering questions with yes or no. It took a long time until they got used to the fact that they were among Jews who wanted to help them.72

Non-Jews had different encounters with the prisoners. In Oranienburg, the nearest town to Sachsenhausen, where people must have recognized recently discharged prisoners by their shaved heads and ragged clothes, “the people indifferently and busily [went] … about their ways.”73 On the other hand, someone who returned to Berlin reported:

The Aryan neighbors on the street who had all known me for many years gave me an almost warm welcome. The mailman, the grocer, the druggist, all expressed their sympathy. Even our porter, the most brazen and shrewish lady in the district, told me in tears that she didn’t want to have anything to do with all this.74

That was a clear dissociation from the major atrocities of the Nazis but ultimately rather noncommittal with regard to the aid that would have been needed during the pogrom. And help for those released from concentration camps might well have been connected to a conviction that “the Führer knows nothing of this.”75

During this time women played a crucial role, since virtually all males from some towns were in concentration camps. They showed great courage in the face of fear, in helping those being looked for and those already arrested. Many Jews hid with single women, since the search commandos were not looking for women.76 Individual women went to speak to the Gestapo or even a camp commander about the release of loved ones.77 Many took care of business affairs and moved heaven and earth to find options for emigration; all the while running the household and perhaps caring for an elderly family member.78 Dealing with emigration matters took not only resourcefulness and endurance but also nerves of steel.

Hour after hour in travel agencies, day after day at the emigration advice center and the Gestapo … countless women stand and wait until they drop from exhaustion. Finally Eva [Reichmann] managed to get a visa for Paraguay. She had to beg for it and with great skill had booked the passage, made telephone calls and sent telegrams all over the world, didn’t shun anything that promised a lead, sought out “gangsters” whose “excellent connections” would free me in a couple of days.79

When the men were discharged they found the world had totally changed: “There was no Jewish life anymore. There was nothing but a crowd of frightened and hunted people.”80 All that mattered now was getting out.81

(p.355) The Difficult Decision: Emigration from Germany

With emigration the sole escape, even those who had been reluctant or had previously rejected the idea made plans to leave the country. In 1933, 37,000 Jews left Germany, but the number of emigrants dropped in the following years (to between 21,000 and 25,000) and did not rise again until 1938, to 40,000. In 1939 the number even reached 78,000.82 In the aftermath of the pogrom, the British government allowed Jewish aid organizations to arrange the immigration of children under seventeen and have them cared for by English foster parents. In total, these “Kindertransports” saved close to 10,000 Jewish children from Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Many of them never saw their parents again.83

A long and difficult decision-making process preceded every emigration. The Görlitz lawyer Paul Mühsam emigrated in the fall of 1933. For him,

the inner struggle [went on] … for weeks, and I was torn between conflicting feelings. One moment emigration seemed perfectly natural to me and the only possible solution; the next moment I was asking myself if I was so crazy to even consider leaving my homeland and all that was familiar, and to face an uncertain future at such an advanced age.… But the thought of turning my back on the inhospitable country that had become so foreign to us and was certainly no longer the same as our beloved homeland was not dictated by insanity but by reason, and so it gradually … gained the upper hand.84

The drawn-out process of deciding “to stay or to go” involved not only the problems of finding a host country and a secure livelihood, which for some were almost insurmountable, but also the emotional difficulty of leaving their homeland. And so the decision was often put off for years. Alongside family connections and obligations, it was also a matter of identity. German Jews saw themselves as Germans. To now view themselves first and foremost as Jews challenged their long-held interpretations of their position in Germany and, ultimately, the very foundation of their lives.85 In addition, simply feeling rooted in a place was very important for many.86 Some actually went on farewell journeys before emigrating.87

Aside from ties to Germany, a series of other reservations and obstacles also surfaced. Many became uncertain when considering emigration, since friends and relatives already overseas had advised against it.88 Around New Year’s Day 1938, German Jews might have still received warnings from friends: “Stay where you are; over here it is not easy either.”89 In addition, non-Jews kept giving potential emigrants signs that the worst was over. And many let themselves “all too willingly … be advised and comforted” against their better judgment.90 As long as they were not personally in danger, they rejected the thought of emigrating: “Beatings that other people go through are quickly forgotten.” Furthermore, reason conflicted with emotions.91

On top of everything came fear of being a “nobody” abroad: “Here we still (p.356) have a roof over our heads, but abroad we shall just be beggars.”92 Even an emigration counselor rejected the idea of his own emigration after the November Pogrom. Others were at risk and had to emigrate, but he himself was still needed, and so he considered himself protected. What resulted was “a dangerous separation of personal prospects for the future and general developments,”93 until it was too late.

Aside from these psychological factors, there were also material reservations and concrete obstacles. “As long as the business was still going,” some people continued to scorn emigration.94 For someone dismissed from the civil service, even receiving half his salary as a pension seemed like “security … that I would not find abroad all that easily.”95 And emigration meant sacrificing part, and later almost all, of hard-earned savings that many families had built up over several generations. The 25 percent Reichsfluchtsteuer, an emigration tax introduced by the Brüning government, initially applied only to assets above 200,000 Reichsmarks, but from 1934 it was levied starting at 50,000 Reichsmarks. Soon people leaving the country were allowed to take only part of their assets with them; the rest was treated as a blocked account. And in the end Jews could exchange their money for foreign currency only through the Deutsche Golddiskontbank, at a loss of 92–94 percent.96

For people who were less well off, the cost of emigration was prohibitively high.97 Moreover, after the November Pogrom the ship’s passage had to be paid for in foreign currency.98 Obtaining a visa also posed problems; many documents had to be presented, and a medical examination was required. Not only latent tuberculosis but even a mother’s presumed hereditary nervous disorder could thwart a daughter’s plans.99

Entry into the United States required relatives or friends living there to stand surety, insofar as the immigrants did not have enough assets to secure their own livelihoods. This all-important affidavit had to include information pertaining to occupation, income, and assets of the guarantor. It was up to the discretion of the office issuing the visa whether or not this would be recognized as sufficient. The Berlin physician Hermann Pineas obtained several affidavits, but the consulate found none of them satisfactory.100 Some immigration efforts had to be supplemented by bribes. And if it became necessary to leave the country faster than originally planned, perhaps another visa could be obtained on the black market. That was very expensive, but for people who had the money, in the spring of 1939 the price was irrelevant.101

Meanwhile, the immigration requirements in a number of countries had been tightened. Once passports of Jews were marked with a J, it became next to impossible to immigrate, even to countries not requiring a visa.102 Even before the mass onslaught at the foreign consulates in the wake of the November Pogrom, Julius Moses had written regarding the emigration of his second son: “The whole world is boarded and nailed shut; the only possibility for getting out was Shanghai, and he’ll try to move on farther from there.”103

The lack of help from abroad posed grave problems for some. The English chief rabbi arranged for some German rabbis to enter England in November 1938, but Joseph Carlebach declined. Carlebach’s permit was still valid in 1939, (p.357) but it guaranteed support only for a few months and only for him. His children received just an entry permit. Since he had a permit for England he had been stricken from the list of those to be admitted into Palestine. Without his knowledge, his wife wrote to four dignitaries asking for help, but no one replied.104

The situation was all the more bitter when one’s own relatives did not think they could help.105 A Hamburg couple was too embarrassed to write to their son-in-law in Palestine but then finally demanded “in no uncertain terms” that their daughter file a “request” that her parents join them. Although the young couple lacked funds and the son-in-law did not see any income possibilities for the father, the man applied for the certificate for his in-laws in order “not to blame himself” later on.106 Correspondence between family members who already emigrated and those still in Germany clearly reflect the complexity of the decision-making process. It elucidates the wish to be reunited, the possible reservations of those who already emigrated, the wish of those left behind not to be a burden on others, and above all the effort to maintain the correspondence, and thus family ties, despite differing perceptions and priorities. The reversal of existing roles made it even more difficult, since parents often became dependent on children.107 The reasons to decide in favor of emigration were in the end the same for everyone, despite individual details: the destruction of their economic base, the psychological burden of discrimination and exclusion, and the attempt to reunite the family after emigration.108

It was usually women who pushed for emigration, due to the burdens on their children, whereas men could often not imagine how they could possibly “really leave all this behind to enter nothingness.” This objection by a Dortmund rabbi came during a conversation among friends about a doctor who fled; the men condemned the escape while the women favored it. This conversation was only one of many that this couple had, in which the husband’s and wife’s opinions were always split along gender lines. Even pressure from the children did not help. Not until both parents were arrested in connection with the action against the B’nai B’rith did the family flee to Holland and then to the United States.109 Women generally assessed the situation far more critically than did men, who refused to emigrate as long as they still had ways to earn an income, or made themselves believe they did. In addition, women were prepared to accept a lower standard of living for the sake of safety. In most cases, the man won out.110 But such disagreements could place a lasting burden on family relations.111

However, circumstances particular to women also put obstacles in their path. Unmarried women often could not consider emigration since they did not know “how they would feed and especially care for their mothers in the be ginning, until they could send money. In the same families the sons went their own ways without a second thought.”112 Gertrud Kolmar’s sister was already active in Switzerland trying to find a way for her to get to England. However, in late November 1938, after the house had just been sold, the housekeeper also decided she wanted “to retire.” Gertrud Kolmar did not want to leave her father alone. The plan that she would go on ahead and he would move into a guest-house (p.358) and join her later no longer seemed feasible in February 1939.113 Ultimately they were both deported, the father in 1942 to Theresienstadt and Gertrud Kolmar in 1943 to Auschwitz. Other women recognized that after the November Pogrom their men were at much higher risk than they, and they persuaded their husbands to emigrate alone while they tied up loose ends in Germany and then hoped to rejoin their husbands. But the war brought an end to their escape plans.114

The paper chase for the necessary documents was always connected with harassment. Individuals reported long waits, and then right before it was their turn the window would suddenly be closed and no one would be processed until the next day. Just to apply for an ID card for domestic use only, the Frankfurt Cantor Joseph Levy had to wait 10 hours; he had to wait just as long for his passport and then again for his Police Certification of Good Conduct, which the United States Consulate required. That was followed by visits to tax consultants, taxation agencies, the foreign exchange office, and the customs office. A visit to one agency often meant getting sent from office to office, requiring up to five or six tries. It was obvious to those involved that this was “systematic torture,” since one office clerk rejected certified copies because of “invented errors” and the next one said “That wasn’t even necessary.”115

On top of this arduous process came blackmail. Before one emigrant’s application was approved, he had to pay past taxes for something that had been officially resolved 12 years earlier. “At least every second office worker could be bribed. He took money and expected it before he would start processing a case. Sometimes it was possible to speed up your case in this way; sometimes it was simply a further instance of private blackmail.”116

The German civil service has been infected with the corruption bug.… “Magicians” offer to prepare lists of Jewish assets such that the surcharge for the Golddiskont Bank is insignificant. Or they want to find a well-meaning valuator for the assets you’re taking with you, or they let you give them a few hundred Marks to speed up the processing of your case. The referral would be worth it … who knows if a new regulation will appear tomorrow prohibiting you from taking certain goods with you that are still allowed today.117

Having their accounts blocked caused major problems for emigrants. For every payment that had to be made, it was now necessary to obtain special authorization.118 And some people might not have had enough cash to live on. Consequently, many emigrants sold their furniture and goods, driving prices down.119 In the summer of 1938 Julius Moses estimated that his son would receive only 10 percent of the value for his state-of-the-art radiology equipment.120 A former publishing house editor learned the extent to which non-Jews tried to profit from the emigration of their neighbors: “’Why don’t you give me your tuxedo; what will you do with it as an emigrant abroad?’ ‘Oh, sell me your bookcase. I’ll pay ten Marks for it!’ (It was worth fifty times that amount.) That’s how the morality of the government rubbed off on the people.”121

(p.359) Since it was illegal to take foreign currency out of the country, Jews bought expensive items such as cameras, typewriters, silverware, china, and rugs so they could sell them in their new country for startup capital.122 These items could be stored along with the assets they were taking with them in large wooden containers, which people referred to as “Jews’ crates.” But some of the official valuators, insurance people, and shippers took advantage of their clients’ situation.123 Even packing provided opportunities for blackmail, although for some packers it was a matter of honor not to see things that were not permitted, or even to repack those items more securely themselves.124

After all formalities and practical preparations, the last and perhaps most difficult problem was saying goodbye. Erwin Moses found that “it is too much to stand; it is simply impossible to withstand that last handshake and kiss without the most severe emotional shock.” That is why he told his brother of his departure in a letter and asked him to visit their parents for the upcoming holidays. Their father, Julius Moses, approved of this way of doing it: “Certainly it was painful for us, at that first moment, that you left without saying goodbye. But after thinking about it calmly I would have to say, it was good that way!” As difficult as he found such farewells, when his sister emigrated in the fall of 1934 and his second son in the fall of 1938 it became clear that “the poor human heart has to break little by little. Ever since we knew what threat we were facing I had myself well under control, and I controlled myself until the very last moment. But then, when the train started moving, that was the end of my control.” Only a month later, however, after the November Pogrom, everything appeared in a new light: “And then there was an overwhelming feeling of happiness to know that the two boys were abroad. And both grandsons too!”125

Emigration separated families, often leaving only the elderly parents behind. In other cases individual family members went to different countries, perhaps the parents to the United States and the children to Palestine. Obituaries sometimes mentioned as many different countries as there were bereaved.126 For some people the thought of separation was so painful that when a young man asked for the hand of his bride, his father-in-law made him promise—as late as 1937—not to make any plans to emigrate.127 Others, who understood the necessity of emigration, nevertheless feared alienation, that the members of the family “would ‘grow apart’ all too much, and that is the worst thing I could imagine.” For this reason writing and receiving letters became a central focus of life.128 Yet here there were individual limitations, as well as those caused by persecution and censorship. A woman in Hamburg was disappointed that the letters of her son offered “only the sign of life that you are obligated to give your parents. The things we are going through here cannot be written down and how strong we must stay!”129

Letters could also serve to build communities beyond the actual writer and addressee. They were often circulated among relatives and offered those who remained in Germany something to talk about.130 That brought those left behind closer together. And it might have counteracted to some extent the shrinking of one’s circle of friends.131 It could take a long time “until you get closer to someone again.” And new contacts were precarious from the outset. (p.360) “That’s how it is all the time now. If you happen to get to know someone nice, for sure he is already’getting ready’!”132

Trapped in Germany: Forced Labor—Deportation—Illegality

Between the start of the war and the final halt to emigration in October 1941, very few Jews succeeded in emigrating. In September 1939 roughly 185,000 so-called Jews by faith were still living in the Altreich;133 these people, already stripped of their life insurance134 and precious metals,135 became further impoverished due to the “punitive payment” for the damages of the pogrom, which was collected as a personal property levy.136

Since predominantly young people and men emigrated, the remaining Jewish population was elderly, and every age group (except for those under 15) was disproportionately female. Only 16 percent of those who stayed were wage earners, and even including those in training and only people of working age (age 15–59), the employment rate still reached only 31 percent. Aside from the loss of their assets and lack of income sources, the constant uncertainty and expectations of continued harassment were a heavy burden.137

Once the war started, many restrictions followed in quick succession. A curfew was declared, and Jews could not leave their homes after 8 p.m. in the winter and 9 p.m. in the summer (September 1,1939). Soon Jews could not own a radio (September 20,1939) or a telephone (July 19,1940), or use a pay telephone (December 12,1941). Later they could not buy newspapers (February 17, 1942) or use public transportation (April 24,1942).138 Jews were systematically isolated and cut off from information. Contact to relatives abroad, often their own children, was largely prevented. Communication to most countries (and the British Mandate for Palestine) amounted at most to telegram-style signs of life, with a maximum of 25 words, conveyed through the Red Cross.139 And it was letters that were “more important than bread in these hard times.”140

Jews were also isolated through forced labor, which more and more were pressed into starting around New Year’s Day 1939. Three weeks before the pogrom the regime initiated a separate (that is, segregated) assignment of Jews registered as unemployed and intensified this secret decree two months later. In December 1938 Jews were also banned from entering the regular offices of the Berlin employment bureau. A separate office had been established for them on Fontane Promenade in the Kreuzberg district, which they soon started calling “Harassment Promenade.” With an eye toward the impending war, all able-bodied male Jews from 18 to 55 were registered in August 1939. Not only people receiving unemployment benefits but all the needy were to be included. In October 1939 the Jewish Cultural Association was forced to reduce its personnel; everyone who had been laid off became available for the general Arbeitseinsatz, or “labor deployment.” Starting in the fall of 1940, all Jews could ultimately be mustered for forced labor. The age limit, especially in Berlin, was raised to 65 for men and 60 for women. Jews were used in early 1939 for very heavy physical labor in road building and construction as well as at garbage (p.361) dumps, and up to the spring of 1940, especially for short-term (owing to the vague “relocation plans”) harvesting, snow clearing, and transportation services. As long-term workers, they were used primarily in industry. At first classified as unskilled workers, some were later even trained for skilled positions. In villages they were used for municipal jobs or assigned to individual farmers as farmhands. By the end of July 1941 roughly 90 percent of all able-bodied Jews were included in the “labor deployment.” For that purpose, different types of work camps, separate from the concentration camps, were set up within the Altreich, starting in 1939. The labor deployment did not protect any forced workers from being deported later; instead it served as a temporary deferment until February 1943, when all remaining Jews were picked up for deportation in the so-called Factory Action. Those protected through a mixed marriage and exempted from deportation until shortly before the end of the war were again employed in unskilled labor.141

The working conditions of the Jewish forced laborers varied from site to site, from “untenable and harassing” to “bearable and proper.”142 Nonetheless, they were characterized everywhere by segregation in special Jewish divisions or work gangs, jobs in areas foreign to their training, minimal payment, insufficient or nonexistent social security, and restricted freedom.143 The Jews faced extremely harsh working conditions and financial discrimination—the lack of all usual bonuses and the imposition of a 15 percent “social compensation tax”144 from 1940 on. Nevertheless, the hardest thing to cope with was the deprivation of personal liberty, which is why Jews deliberately used the term “forced labor” rather than the official term.145

Elisabeth Freund’s and Victor Klemperer’s experiences represent different forms of forced labor. Despite their individual reactions, similar characteristics come to light. With her degree in economics, Elisabeth Freund first had to work in an industrial laundry, initially at a steam press and later in the shipping department. She collapsed twice and finally—although a physician from the company’s health insurance plan gave her a clean bill of health—got certification from a supervising physician prohibiting her from working in heat and carrying heavy loads.146 She was then transferred to an electrical factory. Her working conditions were typical in that medication was denied for Jews,147 she received a minimal wage of about 12 Reichsmarks per week (approximately half the wages of a non-Jewish unskilled worker and in any case barely the rent of a furnished back room in the western part of Berlin),148 she was excluded from the cafeteria,149 and she was segregated from non-Jews, down to separate toilets.150 The long commutes from home to work were also typical. It took about an hour and a half to get to the first factory (that is, three hours per day) and only 45 minutes to the second, but the special routes required of Jews on the company grounds increased the time to 80 minutes.151

When increased workloads made it impossible to continue separate shifts for Jews and non-Jews, wooden partitions were set up around the steam presses where the Jewish women worked.152 Non-Jewish workers occasionally showed some compassion,153 and Elisabeth Freund once noted that on one day two supervisors treated her properly and even looked at her. But these incidents (p.362) stood out harshly against the usual harassment, spiteful comments, and baiting and were carefully recorded for that reason.154 Non-Jewish workers blamed all mistakes on the Jews and delegated the hardest work to them.155

The forced workers attempted to form small groups among themselves for the journey to and from their shift and even for continued education. A group of former kindergarten and nursery school teachers met regularly to read Pestalozzi and Montessori.156 In addition, the women tried to help each other, despite severe criticism by their bosses. The labor was very hard, carrying heavy cartons, for example, and this was only possible if the women worked together. If they failed to finish the work or were considered antagonistic due to “insubordination,” they could be sent to a concentration camp.157

In addition to forming groups and helping each other, some women recited poetry, a coping strategy to make time go faster while doing monotonous work. Elisabeth Freund’s repertoire lasted two hours, and a very young nursery school teacher also recited poems.158 One woman wrote poems and thought up stories, secretly making stenographic notes about them.159 An individual reaction (yet certainly not an isolated case) was to make the forced work into a personal task: “then the forced labor lost its sting. At least we hope it will!”160 The poet Gertrud Kolmar responded similarly, wanting to view “the factory work not only as a harsh necessity, as coercion, but as a kind of lesson, to learn as much as possible.” Coping with this situation gave her a stronger sense of herself, and she ultimately developed “a feeling of home” in the factory that she no longer had in her apartment.161 Such reactions were, however, rare. For many Jews the forced labor marked the start “of concentration camps,” when the “foremen … bossed them around like slaves and harassed them according to their whims.”162

Victor Klemperer was not mustered for forced labor until 1942, at first only temporarily, to spend weeks clearing snow. His coworkers were all over 60, with some even over 70. Most of the others were not Klemperer’s intellectual equals, and he mentioned their penchant for jokes with sexual innuendoes several times, but he also noted: “One feels close to the whole group, not much work is done, the day passes.” One of them even gave him half a cigarillo and a liverwurst sandwich.163 Klemperer repeatedly dealt with non-Jewish supervisors who protected the old men and gave them “humane and courteous” treatment.164 Passersby behaved in totally contradictory ways. While a young women saw the torture of the old men as a disgrace for Germany, one young man expressed obvious enjoyment at their suffering.165

Gradually, more and more young people were conscripted into forced labor. A young man was sent to a Jewish work camp, immediately after having completed his apprenticeship in March 1939, to do drainage work. He lived with 50 others in a shack and was allowed to visit his family only once a month, provided that his work quota had been fulfilled. In August 1939 he was allowed to return home because of severe stomach trouble.166 Elisabeth Freund assessed the situation facing young people as “the worst,” despite her own breakdowns. In the second factory she worked at, there were many young people, even 14-year-olds. Worse than the hard work and the insufficient care (p.363) was the sheer “hopelessness,” since they did not even learn any practical skills. When going on outings on the weekends they had to reckon with attacks by Hitler Youth.167 Protection for young people was “expressly annulled” for Jews;168 and totally ignored for women. Whereas work on the heavy lathes was normally prohibited for women, Jewish women assigned to such work did not even receive the usual leather aprons and consequently suffered constant bruises on their hipbones.169

Starting in April 1943, after almost all Jews had been deported and there were only “60 wearers of the star” in Dresden,170 Victor Klemperer had to do permanent forced labor, first in a company for medicinal baths and herbal teas and, after it was closed, in a paper factory. In both he did strenuous machine work and worked only with Jews, who, like himself, lived in mixed marriages. Again and again individuals were arrested and faced virtually certain death. The companies even arranged for the National Socialist Welfare to supply food for the forced workers, which would have been quite a relief for Klemperer. But at first he could not take advantage of it, since in addition to payment it also required “3 1/2 ounces of meat coupons … Jewish meat coupons in my name.” Since he lived in a nonprivileged mixed marriage, he had no coupons and went away empty-handed.171 At his second forced labor job the workers received food “gratis and in all secrecy.” Sometimes someone from the non-Jewish staff gave him a piece of fruit and asked about the treatment of the Jews or the fate of a worker who had been picked up. But Klemperer could not feel good about such concern: “Evidently [Frau Loewe] is just as fearful and as anti-Nazi as I am. But I am repeatedly gripped by the suspicion that she could be acting as an informer. Or repeat something out of foolishness.”172

Even before the introduction of the yellow star, Jewish forced laborers were visibly marked at their work places.173 Identification through special names had already been decreed in the summer of 1938. Jewish newborns could receive first names only as laid down in the guidelines of the Reich Ministry of the Interior and publicized in, for example, the Berliner Tageblatt. Jews having other first names had to supplement their name with “Israel” or “Sara.”174 Very few people considered the supplementary name to be an “honor,” as Joseph Levy did,175 although Jewish newspapers attempted to suggest this through the explanation that Israel meant “one who wrestled with God” and Sara “princess”: “The purpose and intention of this name-giving remained irrefutably to mark Jews as inferior and defame them.”176 On the other hand, some individuals always found ways of avoiding the stigmatization. Klemperer’s neighbor altered her signature in such a way that others read “Lore” instead of “Sara,” which enabled her to maintain her health insurance for years.177 Tactful non-Jews sometimes chose to ignore the supplementary names even during the war. The roads inspector who had to pay Klemperer and other forced workers simply left these names off their wage packets.178

Plans to make Jews wear some kind of identifying patch were quashed by Hitler right after the November Pogrom.179 When the yellow star was introduced in September 1941, “every star-bearing Jew carried his own Ghetto with him like a snail its shell.”180 The stigmatizing effect was increased when another, (p.364) protective distinguishing feature, namely the yellow armband for blind and disabled people, was prohibited for Jews as of summer 1942.181 The mood after the yellow patch was announced, but before it went into use, was described by Klemperer in his diary: “Since the Star of David, which is due to rise on Friday, 19th September, things are very bad. Everyone’s attitude changing by turns, mine included: I shall go out proud and dignified—I shall shut myself in and not leave the house again. Eva plans as far as possible to be the ‘Sabbath goy.’ ”182

The stars marked even Jews who did not have what non-Jews (and often they themselves) considered “Jewish” looks. All felt its impact: “Wearing the Jewish Star forced me to walk with a bowed head and looking down. I did not want to see other people’s reactions. The star made me feel afraid of attracting attention, a feeling of rejection. It isolated me from the others.”183 Even hearing that in Berlin passersby sympathized with wearers of the star did not comfort Klemperer.184 After Mussolini’s death in 1943 a worker wanted to encourage him with the sentence “One of the swine … is gone now,” but Klemperer answered: “But the children on the street torment me more than before.”185 On the one hand, the already meager contact with non-Jews was now almost totally prohibited. On the other hand, Jews kept noting shows of sympathy from strangers: a man jumped from his bicycle to assure someone wearing a star that he disapproved of the measure;186 others offered their seats in the streetcar or sneaked an apple or a newspaper to a star wearer.187

Jews kept trying to hide the star. They turned the collars of their coats over it, covered their left breast with a bag or carried an open umbrella, even if the rain had stopped. But a police officer might reprimand someone with an open coat because the star was not clearly visible, and some even checked with a pencil that the star was securely fastened.188 In smaller towns hiding the star did not offer any protection; in larger ones it was dangerous and was soon punishable with deportation.189

After the Nazis started systematically deporting Jews out of Germany in October 1941, any violation of anti-Jewish laws and decrees or any dissatisfaction expressed by supervisors at forced laborers could mean that even those who had previously not appeared on the “lists” could be assigned to the next “transport.” Of course, during the first few months the true meaning of euphemisms such as “transport,” “migration,” “relocation,” and “evacuation” were not yet known—and beyond the conceivable.190

In the subsequent months, horrific expectations were still held in check by considerations of efficiency: “We imagined forced resettlement or internment in work camps in the East, where we would have to work under harsh and difficult conditions for the war machinery of the Third Reich, but we would remain alive.”191 Victor Klemperer too still tried to calm himself and others at the start of the deportations from Dresden in January 1942: “They will not treat much-needed workers all that badly … there is obviously a tremendous shortage of labor, and what work can a dead Jew do?”192 Jews already living in forced labor camps interpreted “information such as ‘agricultural work program in Poland,’ ‘being housed in work camps,’ or ‘working for farmers’ (p.365) …for the mere sake of self-preservation as a chance to leave the oppressive camp situation.”193

Receiving no news from deportees, sometimes for weeks, though unsettling, did not initially give rise to, “despite all previous experience … the simply unthinkable” fear of murder.194 Theodor Tuch recorded on December 22,1941, that his housemate, who had been deported on October 24, “still had not written or was not allowed to write a decent letter.” When asked for money two days later, he responded with a certain lack of understanding, and when receipt of the money was confirmed, he wondered why she “did not write any more.” On January 7 he noted that no news had been received about later “transports,” not even their destination. On January 16 he received a postcard that had been sent to Litzmannstadt (Lodz) marked “’Return. Presently no mail delivery on the street of the recipient.’ That says a lot.” In late January it was known that later “transports” had gone to Riga and Minsk, but still no news had been received from there.195 In July 1942, when the Tuchs received their deportation notices, the mother wrote her daughter living abroad: “It is terrible to go into banishment and give up everything. We will be brought to a camp and have to do without any and all comfort.” It cannot be determined for sure whether the question at the bottom, “When will you receive this letter, will we still be alive?”196 suggests a premonition of the deportees’ true destination or refers simply to the advanced age of the couple and the uncertainty regarding the duration of the war.

In early 1942 information sometimes trickled out, at first giving rise to the worst possible fears and ultimately offering some people the certainty that had been lacking.197 Victor Klemperer’s diaries clearly depict the process. Despite his sharp powers of observation and his being unusually well informed, they nevertheless contain some incorrect information and continuing uncertainty and hopes. On the same day he wrote his reassuring thoughts on the need for workers, he also noted the fears of a forced worker in railway construction “that Jewish transports would be shot down on arrival.”198 When, after tough negotiations between the Nazi Party and Zeiss-Ikon, 20 forced workers were deported, Klemperer said he “also no longer feel[s] safe.”199 On March 1,1942, he came to the conclusion that “concentration camp is now evidently identical with a death sentence. The death of the person transported is notified after a few days.”200 Two weeks later what has ever since symbolized the epitome of horror got its name: “In the last few days I heard Auschwitz (or something like it), near Königshütte in Upper Silesia, mentioned as the most dreadful concentration camp. Work in a mine[!], death within a few days.”201 Then in April 1942 a “driver for the military police” told Frau Klemperer about the mass murders of Jews in Kiev.202 The staff of the Jewish Hospital in Hamburg heard about them in a similar way. A sobbing German soldier turned to them as “the only place … where he could let it all out” and reported that he had to shoot women and children.203 Others heard of extermination plans in Berlin starting in early 1942 and heard through foreign radio stations of massacres of Jews.204 Such reports still evoked skepticism: “In November 1942 we learned about the gassings and executions for the first time via the BBC. We could not and did (p.366) not want to believe it.”205 A Jewish underground group finally obtained “certainty” “through news passed on to [them] in July 1943 directly from the extermination camps.”206

The first deportations had already fundamentally changed the situation of all Jews and further diminished their strength to cope with life under constant persecution. Whereas the job of the director of a Jewish orphanage had previously been to provide distraction from the worries, she was now so overwhelmed by them that she “could not get anything decent” done anymore.207 On the other hand, people gradually got used to the situation, though fearful panic kept breaking through. Klemperer noted in October 1942 that

with all of that, I myself have only the feeling, the sensation of increasing tension and, more strongly, the apprehension of mortal fear.… The strangest thing: it always only shakes me for a few minutes: then I enjoy food, reading, work, again; everything goes on comme si de rien n’était. But the weight on one’s soul is always there.208

Perhaps some people felt the way young Gerhard Beck did, when his friends received their deportation notices: “The first reaction was always to give them courage. Then you’d repress in your mind the question of if and when your turn would come.”209 In the end every new loss of friends intensified the waiting for one’s own deportation: “It was a constant state of saying goodbye and every parting was final. Everyone we were attached to went away and we suffered terribly. Besides, you always saw your own fate vividly, since the Gestapo reminded us from time to time that they had not forgotten us.”210 Some remaining Jews had to decide about the fate of other Jews. Doctors at the Jewish Hospital, for example, first examined elderly, sick, and weak Jews to see if they were fit for “transport.” They could issue temporary deferments, but since a total was set for each deportation, someone had to replace every deferment.211 It was such a terrible burden for those involved that one doctor who was working as a nurse, for example, could later not remember if she had had the final word.212

At the same time, various “hospital wards were ‘combed through’ by the Gestapo to see if anyone tried to avoid deportation to the East by being admitted into a hospital.” Finally, Nazi authorities virtually searched for pretexts for the “migration”:

If someone crossed the street at an angle rather than perpendicular, had not darkened their windows properly, had referred to the profession of “doctor” rather than “practitioner,” had forgotten “Israel” or “Sara” or the supplement “Jew” in their signatures, had violated the curfew, had gone outside without the Jewish Star, or had even attempted suicide!213

This suggests another reaction to the persecution: the determination of one’s own form and (within a very small latitude) time of death. Nevertheless, this step gained a new quality, since it was a way of escaping the persecutors. In the Weimar Republic, Jewish suicides had increased significantly,214 but this occurred with more and more frequency in 1933.215 It continued in the subsequent (p.367) years, often after a long personal struggle.216 In November 1938 Walter Tausk even said that “most [German Jews] would kill themselves with morphine or cyanide if only they had it or could get it.” Since he had no prospects of emigration after the November Pogrom, taking his own life seemed to him the best alternative. When summoned by the Gestapo in January 1939, he put two razor blades in his shoe so that in the worst case he could “put an end to it.”217 During the deportations, some Jews always had enough pills with them to be able to commit suicide at any moment, and this gave them great comfort. At the time Jews were willing to pay 1,000 Reichsmarks for 30 Veronal barbiturate tablets.218

The number of suicides corresponds closely to the most radical measures in the persecution of the Jews. An abrupt rise in suicides occurred during the boycott in 1933, the annexation of Austria, and after the November Pogrom. There was an unprecedented high during the deportations.219 In Berlin this led to waits as long as two weeks for funerals in the Weissensee cemetery.220 From 1941 to 1943,1,279 Jews who had committed suicide were buried there. In all, the number of Berlin Jews who killed themselves during the time of the deportations is estimated at 2,000 to 3,000.221

There was a growing acceptance of suicide at this time, fostered by the increasing deadening of emotions. In the Jewish Hospital in Hamburg, three staff members ate their dinner together and were aware that one of them, about to be deported the next day, would take her life that evening. It was respected that these people wanted to end their lives, yet there was also nothing available with which to save them.222 A young woman living illegally later reported that one of her “coworkers” at her forced labor job “sold her Persian carpet and bought sleeping pills with the money. When she received her [deportation] list, she was not agitated at all. … When she did not appear the next day in the factory, we all knew that she had found her own solution.”223 Some people took this step deliberately, with dignity and composure.224 Others got scared at the last moment. The Neumanns had resolved several times to commit suicide, and then the husband decided against it. His wife wandered “despairingly” through the streets after he had already been picked up, “but something inexplicable in me refused to let me take my own life.”225

Others freely accompanied the deportees. Gerhard Beck, disguised as a member of the Hitler Youth, rescued his friend from the predeportation assembly camp, but the friend returned because he did not want to abandon his family.226 In some cases the Gestapo allowed people to join deportees; in other cases they refused.227

The Zionist youth movement held various positions with respect to deportation. The leadership of the German pioneer organization felt that especially the halutzim (pioneers) had the “sacred duty” to accompany the elderly, sick, and weak. Edith Wolff, on the other hand, actively supported others in assuming an “illegal” existence, though she herself could hardly manage the necessary disguising actions such as the Nazi salute. Wolff reported to the Gestapo when summoned and ended up spending two years suffering her way through 17 prisons and camps. Her stance was that Zionist Jews especially had to survive for the sake of Israel.228

(p.368) Yet even with this goal in mind, some people could not imagine going underground: “At first I decidedly rejected this idea, since it was absolutely incomprehensible for me—a Jew raised according to Prussian principles—to walk around with false papers and hide myself, living lies and deception.” Jizchak Schwersenz started getting used to the idea of taking on an illegal existence after his father received his deportation notice and was rescued from the predeportation assembly camp at the last minute by his boss at the forced labor job; but he did not decide for certain until he had received the deportation notice himself.229 Many Jews did not resolve to give up their “ ‘legal’ existence”230 until they had received hints, warnings, or actual reports that the deportations were not to work camps; until they faced imminent “transport”; and mostly not until they were the last in their family and no longer had to consider anyone else. In Dortmund, for example, a policeman’s warning about the gas vans that he had personally seen in Poland persuaded the Spiegel family to prepare to assume an “illegal” existence in 1942.231 Some were even encouraged to take the step at their forced labor job.232 The decision was easier for some Jews since acquaintances offered their assistance, and most of them also decided based on knowledge or suspicions about the true purpose of the deportations.233

To the extent that Jews living “illegally” did not spend all their time in hiding but sometimes dared to go onto the streets or even led open lives as “Aryans,” they had to take care not to be recognized. Thus they had to avoid areas where they used to live.234 Some felt a disguise was advisable. Schwersenz went to a Berlin suburb on the day he took on an illegal identity, took off the yellow star, and put on a German Labor Front pin. After dark he returned to Berlin and took his “first trial stroll through the city streets to get used to the ‘role’ of a free, average citizen without the Jewish star.” He also grew a moustache and wore different glasses. He cut his “revealing black hair” very short and always had his head covered on the street. He even bought himself a tie, which he had never worn as a member of the youth movement. He complemented his appearance with a Nazi newspaper he carried, the Nazi salute, and upright posture. Later he even started limping, on recommendation of a non-Jew, to appear as a disabled veteran during raids to find deserters.235 Some women dyed their hair blond.236

In addition to the constant danger of being recognized and possibly denounced, food and housing were the most urgent problems. After going underground, Jews were usually dependent on what they could get on the black market or whatever their helpers gave them.237 If they did not live totally in hiding, they could take on work for food or payment in kind.238 Others sought jobs in order to support themselves and so keep off the streets during the day.239

Perhaps the most difficult problem was finding housing. Hardly anyone living “illegally” could stay in one place until the war ended. Most had to change quarters regularly.240 Inge Deutschkron and her mother had to leave the lodgings someone offered them after only a month because of their host’s curious neighbors. Then they slept in a tiny room behind the storefront of the (p.369) lending library where she later worked. After that they found quarters with a non-Jew whose Jewish husband had been killed in a concentration camp. After having lost a variety of other hiding places due to bombings, one of her last quarters was a small, unheated stone hut outside of Potsdam that had once served as a goat shed. A young teacher, who first hid as a charwoman in Mecklenburg but then had to return to Berlin after her host had been denounced, evidently had several cleaning jobs and places where she could take turns staying.241 The last refuge for some “illegals” was the Jewish cemetery in Berlin-Weissensee, where a mausoleum could provide a roof over their heads.242

Married couples and families generally lived separately. Herta Pineas could stay only ten days in the Berlin quarters that were supposed to be permanent; in the next quarters, only eight; and after that she changed lodgings every three days before finally finding a place in southern German parish houses. Her husband accepted an offer from a former patient in Vienna; after conditions there proved too problematic, he spent several weeks in hotels in Linz and St. Pölten, and then also found lodgings with various hosts of the Confessing Church. For a time the couple even managed to live together.243

Frau Spiegel assumed a false identity and lived openly on a farm with her five-year-old daughter in Westphalia: “My husband wanted to go totally into hiding and become invisible, but me? I had a small child! You can’t hide a child for years without it making itself known.” She repeatedly had to move into alternative lodgings for several weeks at a time. Her husband had to abandon his first quarters after only two weeks because the hosts got frightened. In the next one, where he spent about seven months, a boy doing his compulsory year’s service on the farm discovered him. He was able to stay in his third accommodations for more than a year.244

Like the Deutschkrons, other “illegals” and their hosts in large cities lost their lodgings through Allied bombing. The number of places available even just for a single night continued to decline due to bombings, curious neighbors, or informers, leaving many to occasionally spend a night in the open. Whereas young men could spend summer nights in the forests around Berlin, in winter they had to deal not only with the rigors of bad weather but especially the danger of being discovered. Between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., when Berlin’s public transportation shut down, it was possible to get warmed up on the trains set up for workers in businesses deemed necessary for the war effort. Some spent nights in front of the box offices of the State Opera House; since tickets for the entire week went on sale on Sunday mornings, the “illegal” Jews could join the lines that started on Saturday evening and feel inconspicuously “safe.”245

When checked for identification, at first young people could show their work identity cards from the companies where they were doing forced labor; others had photo IDs from other people, used at the post office; some even showed monthly passes for the public transportation system. But it soon became necessary to show a state-issued identity card and a work certificate.246 A few obtained papers by taking them from people on the streets who had died in the bombing.247 More frequently Jews used the services of forgers. This was (p.370) not only expensive but also risky, since there were swindlers working in the “business.” The Rewald couple lost all their money to a con man, so they finally turned to the husband’s former boss. He took their photographs and obtained two German Railway IDs for them at no charge. Herr Rewald had now become “Erich Treptow … in the service of the German State Railway,” and Frau Rewald got all the information she needed about Frau Treptow by visiting her and saying she was from the employment office.248

Men soon faced another problem: the search for deserters. If they were of military age they needed military papers in addition to their regular identity card.249 When Schwersenz was preparing his escape to Switzerland, he paid 4,000 Reichsmarks for a military ID to help him on the long journey to the German border. It had been forged by a noncommissioned Wehrmacht officer who issued such service papers officially as well as for illegal purposes. At least these papers identified real, existing officers, which promised “great security” in case questions arose. He justified the price “quite convincingly,” saying that he had to make sure his family would be taken care of should he be arrested.250 Ernst Ludwig Ehrlich, who took the same trip with the forged service identity card of a Reich ministry, even “ordered” the police officer who checked his identification to “show him to an officer’s compartment.”251 Ehrlich’s presence of mind in slipping into the role of his new identity strengthened the impact of the ID card and thus increased his security.

Some Jews took advantage of the destruction of documents in the Hamburg district office of the Central Association of Jews in Germany (RVe) to go underground.252 In the same way, a woman claimed to have been bombed out in a district of Berlin where both the police and food ration offices had been destroyed. She obtained a “bomb victim certificate,” including a residence permit for another location and food ration coupons.253 Others claimed during the final months of the war to be refugees from the areas already occupied by Allied forces. Inge Deutschkron and her mother rode two hours eastward from Berlin and then returned as refugees “from Guben,” which was already Soviet occupied. Along with their “suitcase,” their identity papers were also “lost” while fleeing.254

In addition to these active “illegals,” who worked and constantly moved about in public, there were others who remained in hiding for two or two and a half years. When Siegmund Spiegel resurfaced after 27 months, during which he heard only whispers, he could not stand any loud voices and could hardly move normally. A young couple used the money left by the father to hide at a lathe operator’s home in a Berlin suburb. They spent 27 months in a small basement room behind covered windows, where they had to remain still to prevent being noticed by the few neighbors. They went up to the apartment only in the evenings to eat together with their host, and at most they grabbed some fresh air late in the evening.255

On top of the effort not to be discovered came the psychological burden: “Living underground—that is to say, illegally—means being condemned to solitude.”256 And yet the days had to be filled: Frau Besser knitted a dress “very, very slowly” only to later undo it and start all over again. Her husband helped (p.371) her roll the yarn into balls. He also read aloud: newspapers, “schmaltzy books,” and “a couple of crime novels.” They also tried to imagine what they would do after they survived, and they kept on talking about how they had met, which reinforced their will to hold out.257 Although they kept busy killing time, Joel König felt the “need to fill out his day with set activity.” First came the housework for himself and his two siblings doing forced labor, and then he read. He laid out a firm plan, and with the help of commentaries and dictionaries he read the Bible in the original Hebrew. His brother thought he was crazy and admonished him to think more about his survival. But a few months later he also went underground and started studying Hebrew.258

Joel König and his sister finally moved in with a shoemaker who had offered his help while their parents were still alive and took them in warmly. But after König had done all the small repairs he could find in the house, his idleness depressed him, as did the increasing dissatisfaction of the shoemaker. The relationship between the host and his guest in hiding got worse during the military leave of the shoemaker’s sons. Sometimes König avoided them during the day by going to the zoo, and later he was able to find work with a Hungarian Jew, with whom he could also live temporarily. With the help of another, non-Jewish employer he was ultimately able to escape to Hungary, where he survived the German invasion as an “ethnic German gardener.” The shoemaker parted with him on good terms but thought Joel took too much with him. The shoemaker evidently felt entitled to the property saved from König’s parents’ home.259

Just as typical as König’s positive experiences with many helpers while he was living “illegally” and during his escape260 were depressing experiences: even if the helpers—such as the Deutschkrons’ first host—did not openly demand that they change quarters, the “illegals” felt backed into a corner, again and again, with no way out. Sometimes someone, like the old Social Democrat who had already been in jail once shortly after the Nazis took power, might explicitly express his priorities. He found the suggestion to become an “illegal” “a great idea” and supported those underground as an expression of his opposition to the Nazis. But he also clearly marked the limits of his involvement:” ‘if something were to go wrong, you’d have to find another place. I have to survive. I have plans for the future.’” Inge Deutschkron noted he was convinced that he “was destined to play a role in a democratic post-Hitler Germany.” This is why Deutschkron also had to give up her job in his girlfriend’s store. When all women under 55 years of age had to work in munitions factories, Deutschkron’s presence at the store could call attention to him, and the risk seemed too great.261 Compared to such experiences, helpers who did not even want to accept favors, insisting instead upon paying their charges for the smallest of courier services, really stand out.262

The helpers who offered housing, donated meals, gave or sold food ration cards (or at least some coupons), or supported those underground financially263 were not only non-Jews. Especially in the beginning, many “illegals” seem to have been supported by mixed-marriage families or families made up of the remaining so-called Mischlinge and non-Jews. Later, however, the (p.372) Gestapo looked for “illegals” precisely among such mixed families.264 The ability to help was pushed to the limit if more was needed than just room and board: “you couldn’t get sick! There was no way to call a doctor.”265

Most “illegals” were left to their own resources, and some thought they were the last remaining Jews in their city. It seems all the more remarkable that a group formed in the spring of 1943 maintained a modicum of community life despite the daily changes of lodgings for some members. The Chug Chaluzi (Circle of Pioneers)266 was led by Jizchak Schwersenz. He first received a monthly stipend from the Hehalutz and later went underground with its approval. The group was initially made up of six “illegals” and five who were “treated as Jews,” or Mischlinge, and grew to about 20, at times as many as 40, members. It had a regular weekly program: except for Friday, they met at least once daily. They organized Sabbath celebrations and Sunday outings, which would not be conspicuous among the normal weekend travel and by taking certain security measures. Even after going underground, Schwersenz, a former teacher in the school of the Youth Aliyah, continued Jewish educational work. When meeting in a private apartment they practiced extreme caution, arriving only in twos, at 15-minute intervals, and humming Hebrew songs without lyrics. Also, the young people disguised the covers of the Hebrew books that could have given them away so easily. They went to the theater and opera and prepared by reading the pieces together. After Schwersenz’s escape to Switzerland in early 1944, Gerhard Beck took over leadership of the Chug until he was arrested in early March 1945. But at that time the educational and religious activities had been shifted to the background in favor of helping people escape.267

Those who lived “illegally” had to be on guard constantly, not only when visiting other Jews, to hide the lack of the star rather than its presence,268 or because the doormen in large apartment buildings in Berlin watched over everything and often also served as “block wardens.”269 In addition to being discovered by chance, there was also a fear of informers. When Lotte Strauss visited relatives, their (Jewish) friends and landlord threatened to report her to the Jewish Community if she did not leave the apartment immediately. The non-Jewish administrator of her uncle’s “Aryanized” company (an old girlfriend of her mother) threatened her, saying she did not have a chance anyway and should turn herself in. Finally, a woman who had helped her and two other Jews tried to denounce her fiancé for irrational, personal reasons.270 These examples, even more than the constant danger of being denounced by strangers or fleeting contacts, clearly show how uncertain daily life was for every “illegal.”

On top of this, there were also Jewish “snatchers” who were hired or blackmailed by the Gestapo. Promising to save them or their families from deportation, the Gestapo got them to inform on Jews living “illegally.” The most notorious and feared of them was the blond Stella, who had herself been living “illegally” and was caught by a Jewish informer. On a single weekend, Stella told the Gestapo about 62 “illegal” Jews. She carried out her searches in theaters and the opera; the security that members of the Chug Chaluzi felt in such (p.373) places was, in fact, deceptive. A resistance group of Jews and non-Jews even planned to murder Stella. They sent her a “death sentence” as a warning but then were unable to carry out their plan.271

Life in “illegality” revealed a new gender disparity. Whereas more men than women could be saved through emigration and more women thus suffered deportation, female “illegals” had better chances of survival. Perhaps this had something to do with their individual relationships with the helpers. The same shoemaker who observed Joel König suspiciously and finally kicked him out willingly continued to house his sister, since she ran the household. More significantly, only men were subject to constant searches for war deserters and, as soon as they were arrested, could be identified as Jews by the fact that they had been circumcised. Many “illegals” were found; some died of undernourishment or in Allied bombing; and isolated individuals who could not stand the hunger and extreme stress turned themselves in to the Gestapo in hopes of ending up in a work camp.272

Conclusion

Starting in 1933, Jews were deliberately terrorized. As of summer 1938 more extreme persecutions peaked in the pogrom of November 9–10 and the arrest and internment of about 30,000 men in concentration camps. This made the defenselessness and isolation of the Jews clear-cut. Even at that time they received little help from non-Jews. Emigration seemed the only remaining option. But this option became virtually impossible once the war started and was finally prohibited entirely in October 1941. At the same time, forced labor and the withdrawal of almost all food stripped Jews of the material basis for survival and all psychological strength. Still, they became accustomed to each stage to a certain extent, without which it would have been impossible to survive. Of the few who dared to resist deportation once individual reports of murder trickled in, only about one in four survived. In Berlin, the center of Jewish life, where 160,564 Jews still lived in the summer of 1933, 1,402 Jews resurfaced from “illegality” after liberation.273 (p.374)

Notes:

(1.) Burkert, Matußek, and Wippermann, “Machtergreifung,” 113. Regarding Munich, see also Klugmann, memoir, LBI, 20 ff., 56.

(2.) Schwarzbuch, 493, 501 (lawyers), 495ff. (theater manager), 496 (moneylender), 497 (Scheunenviertel), 498 (Worms), citing the Manchester Guardian.

(3.) Sabatzky, memoir, LBI, 2off. Contrary to Sabatzky’s statement, reference is made to political and economic motives in Schüler-Springorum, Königsberg, 297.

(4.) Weckbecker, Heidelberg, 98 (Karlsruhe, Speyer, Worms).

(5.) Wilhelm, Göttingen, 41–46; Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, 60–63; on Westphalian cities, see Faassen and Hartmann, “Dennoch Menschen,” 82.

(6.) See the report in the Frankfurter Zeitung (March 31, 1933), in Dokumente zur Geschichte der Frankfurter Juden, iiii.

(7.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 33ff.

(8.) See, for example, Blau, memoir, LBI, 17.

(9.) On Westphalia, for example, see Faassen and Hartmann, “Dennoch Menschen,” 83.

(10.) Bing, “Mein Leben,” 196.

(11.) Wildt, “Boycott Campaign,” 56–57. For examples, see Meynert, “Endlösung,” 87; Selz, interview, Hamburg, 15,3.

(12.) Wildt, “Gewalt,” 62.

(13.) Iggers, “Kindheit,” 8; see also Weiss, Wege, 29; Schüler-Springorum, Königsberg, 338.

(14.) See, for example, Pineas, memoir, LBI, 1; Blyton, interview, Hamburg, 10; Beck, Underground Life, 16–17; Scheftelowitz, Spree, 23S.; Laqueur, Thursday’s Child Has Far To Go, 112; Spiegel, Retter, 15.

(15.) Bamberger, memoir, JMF, 14.

(16.) G. Salzberger, memoir, JMF, 3.

(17.) On a case in which 17 non-Jews contested the accusations, see Sabatzky, memoir, LBI, 25.

(18.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 35. For conjectures on pressure placed on business people, see also Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 71.

(19.) Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 71.

(20.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 7 n. On fear of spies at a private security company, see also Klemperer, Witness, 321 (August 10,1938).

(21.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 35ff. (Frankfurt); for Berlin, see Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 54.

(22.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 74, 85. On “offenses” caused by the Nazis them selves, see Fliedner, Verfolgung, 2:246ff

(23.) Ostrowski, “Schicksal,” 346ff.

(24.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 86,92,93ff.

(25.) For an example of a totally shattered giant of a man, see Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 87; on emigration, 91.

(26.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 94.

(27.) Wildt, “Gewalt,” 68.

(28.) Wildt, “Boycott Campaign,” 69. (Hunsrück); Wildt, “Gewalt,” 69ff. (Franconia).

(29.) Quotes cited in Hanke, München, 201, and Zapf, Tübinger Juden, 79 n. 13; see also Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 82.

(30.) On this, see Maurer, “Background”; Milton, “Grenzen.”

(31.) Tausk, Breslauer Tagebuch, 167–177, quotation: 170; comparison with the “sadistic Middle Ages,” 176 (October 30,1938). For a comparison with the expulsion of Jews from Spain, see B. J. Perlmann in a letter to M. Perlmann (October 30,1938), in Lorenz and Bohn-Strauss, Verfolgung, 139. On deportation during the Sabbath, see Schorsch II, memoir, LBI, 6, and Mainz, memoir, JMF, 17.

(32.) Pomeranz, memoir, JMF, 8; see also Rosenthal, memoir, JMF, 65.

(33.) Sabatzky, For Leipzig, see also Sabatzky, in Richarz, 1918–1945,298.

(34.) Stein-Pick, memoir, LBI, 35.

(35.) G. Salzberger, memoir, JMF, 9; see also n. 39 hereafter.

(36.) Zapf Tübinger Juden82-85. With respect to Tübingen, for example, see Zapf, Tübinger Juden, 82–85.

(37.) Döscher, “Reichskristallnacht,” JJ; Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 67–71; Sabelleck, Nienburg, 350.

(38.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 113.

(39.) Tausk, Breslauer Tagebuch, 182 (November 12,1938).

(40.) See, for example, the recollections of Irene Mierzynski in Buchholz, “Reichs kristallnacht” in Hannover, 13off.

(41.) Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, 98.

(42.) Sabatzky, memoir, LBI, 37. On an SA man in a Munich home for the aged, see alsoBehrend-Rosenfeld, Behrend-Rosenfeld, Erlebnisse, 68.

(43.) Ostrowski, “Schicksal,” 342ff; on Breslau, see alsoTausk, Breslauer Tagebuch, 188 (November 12–13, 1938); on Fürth, see Bing, “Mein Leben,” 207; on Frankfurt, see Pomeranz, memoir, JMF, 8; for the example of a Jew from Worms who hid in a Mannheim hospital, see Miriam Gerber,Miriam Gerber in Richarz, Life, 428 n. 1.

(44.) Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 67–71; for an example, see Fliedner,Fliedner, Judenver-folgung, 1:201.

(45.) For an example in East Westphalia, seeMeynert, “Endlösung,” 211–214; for a meticulously and critically reconstructed example of external organization combined with cheering and participation by town residents, see the Lower Franconia town of Gaukönigshofen inMichel, Gaukönigshofen, 503–529.

(46.) Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 263–270;

(47.) See, for example, N. Salzberger, memoir, JMF, 4.

(48.) Lucas, Sovereigns, 137–138; see also Michel, Gaukönigshofen, 511.

(49.) Weckbecker, Heidelberg, 190.

(50.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 70, 72. Some other cities even brought the elderly to the concentration camp; see Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 187.

(51.) Schwabe, memoir, LBI, 74. See also Max Mayer, cited in Haumann and Schadek, Von der badischen Herrschaft, 333.

(52.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 67ff.

(53.) Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 338–343; on criticism of the destruction of objects, see alsoMichel, Michel, Gaukönigshofen, 520ff.

(54.) Obst, Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 335ff, 354; see alsoMichel, Gaukönigshofen, 5i8ff, 523.

(55.) Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”:Ursachen, 319–325.

(56.) Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 325–332; regarding an old age home see Levy, memoir, LBI, 78; on providing food in Munich, see Behrend-Rosenfeld, Erlebnisse, 65 (“as a rule!”), and Hanke, München, 218; on taking in Jews, see also Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 136.

(57.) For several examples of warnings, seeOstrowski, “Schicksal,” 341; on valuables, see the personal account inLauber,Judenpogrom, 106.

(58.) For East Westphalia, see Meynert, “Endlösung,” 222.

(59.) Bruns-Wüstefeld,, Lohnende Geschäfte, 99.

(60.) Stein-Pick, memoir, LBI, 41.

(61.) On the special regulation for East Prussia, seeSchüler-Springorum,, Königsberg, 349.

(62.) On the following, see the vivid report on his internment in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 120–238.

(63.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 235.

(64.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 180.

(65.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 167.

(66.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 229.

(67.) Schwerin, inRicharz, Life, 398; see also Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 123, i7of£, i88f£, 226.

(68.) Schwerin, in Richarz, Life, 399.

(69.) Reichmann, Deutscher Burger, 239f£, 220,202.

(70.) Gillis-Carlebach, Jedes Kind, 199. For other reports, see Strauss, Hügel, 120; Klemperer, Witness, 341 (December 6,1938); HechtHecht, Invisible, 59.

(71.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 246.

(72.) Ostrowski Ostrowski, “Schicksal,” 349.

(73.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 241.

(74.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 61.

(75.) Hecht, Invisible, 59. On aid for an agricultural training camp, see Obst, “Reichskristallnacht”: Ursachen, 330.

(76.) Ostrowski, “Schicksal,” 340.

(77.) Quack,Amerika, 70 (Gestapo); Abraham, memoir, LBI, 2, 4 (camp); Stein-Pick, memoir, LBI, 41. On 1937, see also Appel, memoir, LBI, 508–513.

(78.) Schwabe, memoir, LBI, 84–86; see also Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 61.

(79.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 242.

(80.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 61.

(81.) On those spared the concentration camp, see, for example, Klemperer, Witness, 341 (December 6,1938); see also 336 (November 27,1938).

(82.) Strauss, “Emigration,” 1:326.

(83.) See Göpfert,Göpfert, Kindertransporte.

(84.) Mühsam,Mensch, 240. See also Mühsam,Mühsam, Mein Weg, 167 (diary entry June 6, 1933).

(85.) “My grandfather Cibulski always said, I’ll be on the last train to leave the Fatherland. And he was born in Poland” (Feiner, interview, Hamburg, 26). If an East European-Jewish immigrant had developed such ties to Germany, then how much stronger must the ties have been for German Jews! On the meaning of identity in deciding whether or not to emigrate, see alsoMeynert,“Endlösung,” 203.

(86.) Interview with Heinz Baum inRuch, Stimmen, 31–37, especially 34.

(87.) Gerber, memoir, LBI, 20, 26; Müller, Rulf 51; Julius Moses to Erwin Moses, n.d. (late October 1938), inFricke, Berlin, 558.

(88.) Blau, memoir, LBI, 25ff. (Arthur Ruppin’s advice against it!); see also Schwabe, memoir, LBI, 54; Bamberger, memoir, JMF, 15.

(89.) Nathorff, Tagebuch, 102 (January 4,1938). And she commented: “I believe them and yet they have been gone too long to understand how unbearable it has become here.”

(90.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 4iff; on the futile attempt by neighbors in DeutschKrone (West Prussia), a school principal in Berlin, and clerks in the tax agency to get him not to emigrate, see Landau, memoir, LBI, 49, 52.

(91.) Bamberger, memoir, JMF, 15,25.

(92.) Lucas, Sovereigns, 136.

(93.) Meynert, “Endlösung,” 203.

(94.) Angress about his parents, manuscript of forthcoming book on his life, chapter on family. See also Rülf, Ströme, 138S.

(95.) Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 75.

(96.) Fricke, Berlin, 140; Weckbecker, Heidelberg, 5off.

(97.) Edith Königsberg, in Rosenstrauch, Nachbarn, 161ff.

(98.) Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, 106.

(99.) Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, 106; Heldenmuth, interview, Hamburg (mentioned by the sister C. H.); see also Edith Königsberg, inyRosenstrauch, Rosenstrauch, Nachbarn, 161.

(100.) Wetzel, “Auswanderung,” 485–488; Weckbecker, Heidelberg, 54; photograph of an affidavit in Haumann, “Lebensweg,” 58; Pineas, memoir, LBI, 7.

(101.) Petsch, interview I, Hamburg, introductory biography and 23.

(102.) Heim,“Land ohne Zukunft,” 56.

(103.) Julius Moses to Erwin Moses, n.d. (late October 1938), in Fricke, Berlin, 558.

(104.) Gillis-Carlebach, Jedes Kind, 233, 249, 279 (letters of L. Carlebach to various addressees: February 9,1939; n.d. [earlyApril 1939]; n.d. [August 1939]).

(105.) See, for example, Nathorff, Tagebuch, 95 (Easter 1937).

(106.) Letters by E. Perlmann (July 15, 1938; August 24, 1938; September 2, 1938), inLorenz and Bohn-StraussBohn-Strauss, Verfolgung, 124,129 (quotation), 132 (quotation).

(107.) On this, see the communication analysis by Unverfehrt, Gehen.

(108.) For a summary, seeMühsam, Mein Weg, 167ff. (July 8,1933). On destruction of livelihood, see, for example, E. Moses in a letter to Rudi Moser (May 27,1933), in Fricke, Berlin, 71ff.; Pineas, memoir, LBI, 7; and Harrison, interview, Hamburg, 40–42. On the psychological causes, see E. Moses to Rudi Moser (May 27,1933), in Fricke, Berlin, 71S., and Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 24; Julius Moses to Erwin Moses (August 17, 1936), in Fricke, Berlin, 466 (about R. Moser).

(109.) Appel, in Richarz, Life, 356 (quotation); for other evidence, see the unpublished memoirs of Appel, memoir, LBI, 227, 290,332–334,364ff, 390, 409, 444–470, 477. Counterexamples (i.e., women who refused to emigrate) are rare and confirm the significance of career as the raison d’être; on this, see Nathorff, Tagebuch, 42 (May 1,1933), 51 (August 30,1933), 56 (Easter 1934), 60 (August 20,1934), 85 (June 23,1936), 87 (August 12, 1936), 95 (Easter 1937), 102 (January 4,1938).

(110.) For examples, see Kaplan, Kaplan, “Daily Life,” 421; on the woman’s complaint about the man’s reluctance to emigrate and his self-soothing with regard to his income potential, see E. and B. J. Perlmann to M. Perlmann (July 22,1938), in Lorenz and Bohn-Strauss, Verfolgung, 127, 128 (July 22, 1938); for other examples of the contrast between men and women, seeKönig, David, 70; Frank, Schalom, 22; Quack, Amerika, 63; Susi Grelet, interview, in Ruch, Stimmen, 55–65, especially 63; for many examples, seeMeynert,“Endlösung,” 201 n. 94.

(111.) Strauss, memoir, JMF, “Happy Childhood” chapter, 41, 44.

(112.) BJFB 13, 4 (1937), 5.

(113.) G. Kolmar to H. Wenzel (November 24, 1938; February 15, 1939; September 10, 1939), in Kolmar,Briefe, 25,27,37.

(114.) Bamberger, memoir, JMF, 38.

(115.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 85ff.

(116.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 58.

(117.) Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 259ff; see also Bing,Bing, “Mein Leben,” 193.

(118.) Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 79.

(119.) Sylvia Cohn to her sister Hilde (June 27,1939), facsimile in Ruch, Familie Cohn, 99. On easing financial concerns through sales to former patients, see Rosenthal, memoir, JMF, 66–68; to former neighbors: Selz, interview, Hamburg, 30; see also Schwabe, memoir, LBI, 88ff.

(120.) Julius Moses to Erwin Moses (August 17,1938), in Fricke, Berlin, 553ff.

(121.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 59.

(122.) Strauss, memoir, JMF, “Happy Childhood” chapter, 39;Strauss, Hügel, 50.

(123.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 59.

(124.) Stein-Pick, memoir, LBI, 5iff. On the matter of honor, see also Fliedner, Judenver-folgung, 1:195.

(125.) E. Moses to R. Moser (May 27,1933); J. Moses to E. Moses (May 30,1933; October 14–20,1934; n.d. [late October 1938]; November 27, 1938), in Fricke, Berlin, 71 (quotation), 73 (quotation), 249, 558 (quotation), 563ff. (quotation). See also Strauss, memoir, JMF, “Not by Choice” chapter, iff.; Lessler, memoir, LBI, 34ff.

(126.) On elderly parents, see Hirschfeld, Altersheime, 37; on separation by country, see Loewenberg, in Richarz, Life, 366–367; on obituaries, see Appel, memoir, LBI, 375.

(127.) Harrison, interview, Hamburg, 40.

(128.) Lotte Carlebach to her emigrated children, n.d., in Gillis-Carlebach, Jedes Kind, 245; on writing letters as a “necessity of life,” see also Julius Moses to Erwin Moses (November 16,1933; February 19,1935), in Fricke, Berlin, i23ff, 295; on receiving letters, seeHirschfeld, Hirschfeld, Altersheime, 77; Strauss, memoir, JMF, “Happy Childhood” chapter, 45: “I welcomed the postman like a friend.” For an example of alienation, see Myriam Cohn’s letter to her father, reprinted in Ruch, Familie Cohn, 11-jii.

(129.) E. Perlmann to M. Perlmann (August 21, 1939), in Lorenz and Bohn-Strauss, Verfolgung, 166.

(130.) J. Moses to E. Moses (April 27,1934; May 9,1934), in Fricke, Berlin, 160,164.

(131.) Schwabe, memoir, LBI, 56; Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 74.

(132.) L. Carlebach, July 17,1939, and August 8,1939, in Gillis-Carlebach, Jedes Kind, 274,277

(133.) These figures and the following breakdown cited from Maier, Deportation, 49ff.

(134.) For examples, see Gillis-Carlebach, Jedes Kind,2i8ff; Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, iO2ff.

(135.) See, for example, Pineas, memoir, LBI, 4; Levy, memoir, LBI, 88; Bamberger, memoir, JMF, 31.

(136.) At first 20 percent, then 25 percent of total assets.

(137.) On the anniversary of the November Pogrom, see Schwerin, memoir, LBI, 159–166;Tausk, 242ff. (November 12,1939).

(138.) Excerpt from the timeline of Nazi policies against the Jews inBenz, Juden 1933–1945, 739–754; on shopping restrictions and bans on certain food items, see chapter 19 herein.

(139.) For example, see B. J. Perlmann to M. Bertenthal (September 25,1941), in LorenzandBohn-Strauss,, Verfolgung, 172ff.

(140.) The words of a divorced mother in a mixed marriage in a letter to her two daughters in a Swiss boarding school (October 23,1941), in Feiner, Deportation, 92.

(141.) See especiallyGruner, Arbeitseinsatz, 337 (quotation); see also Maier, Deportation, and on villages,Michel, Gaukönigshofen, 570–573.

(142.) Sachse, “Einleitung,” 24; for two examples of rather humane treatment, seeWolf-fenstein, Erinnerungen, 44.

(143.) Maier, Deportation, 56.

(144.) To compensate for the fact that Jews did not make contributions for Nazi Party membership or Nazi welfare institutions.Kwiet, “Pogrom,” 577; Bruns-Wüstefeld, Lohnende Geschäfte, 110.

(145.) Sachse,“Einleitung,” 24; see also the title of Elisabeth Freund’s 1941 report, Zwangsarbeiterin, 37–153.

(146.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 99ff, 54. For examples of transfer to another workplace (p.470) achieved for health reasons, see also Wolffenstein, Erinnerungen, 35–44; Deutschkron, Outcast, 85–86.

(147.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 54; on a medical attendant’s refusal to treat Jews, see Wolffenstein, Erinnerungen, 44ff.

(148.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 57. See the wage data for Hamburg (12–15 Marks) and Munich (based on the pay rate for Polish civilian laborers). Lorenz, “Endlösung,” 231; Hanke, München, 287.

(149.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 52 (allowed to sit in empty cafeteria but could not buy anything), 108 (food delivered to place of work but not allowed to enter the cafeteria); see also Stillmann, Überleben, 173. Before the eyes of forced workers in Berlin-Zehlen- dorf, who peeled potatoes for 10 hours a day for the cafeteria, food scraps were discarded, while they received nothing to eat! Wolffenstein, Erinnerungen, 37.

(150.) Freund,Zwangsarbeiterin, 77, 117ff.

(151.) Freund,Zwangsarbeiterin, 77, 110ff.. On moving across the factory grounds under guard, see also Stillmann,Überleben, 173.

(152.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 101. On the segregation of Jewish cafeteria workers (in the basement) from non-Jews (outdoors) at the Zeiss-Ikon-Goertz plant, see Wolffen stein, Erinnerungen, 37.

(153.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 122,124;. see also Rewald, Berliner, 2, and n. 172 below.

(154.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 107, 88,90..

(155.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin,87, 67ff, 78,101.

(156.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 49, 50, 81,52.

(157.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 90–92, quotation: 91..

(158.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 118, 80.

(159.) Rewald, Berliner, 2.

(160.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin,68.

(161.) G. Kolmar to H. Wenzel (July 19, 1942), in Kolmar, Briefe, 132. Note the same Schiller quotation here and in Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin,68.

(162.) Spiegel, Retter, 13. For further examples ranging from harassment to personal abuse, see Wolffenstein, Erinnerungen, 35ff. (spiteful comments of the German master craftsman and maltreatment by a Polish forewoman);KwietandEschwege, Widerstand, 254ff. (and n. 119); andKwiet, Kwiet, “Pogrom,” 581 (chief inspector of the railway). On special harassment while recruiting forced laborers as they left the synagogue, see also Hanke,München, 287.

(163.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 15,21,23–24, quotation: 19 (February 15,1942; February 22, 1942; February 25,1942; February 16,1942).

(164.) Klemperer, Bitter End, i9ff, quotation: 28 (February 18,1942; March 6,1942). For another example of clearing snow, see H. Feiner in a letter to her daughter Inge (February 6,1941), in Feiner, Deportation, 78.

(165.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 20 (February 18,1942; February 19,1942).

(166.) Rosenberg, Jahre, 12.

(167.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 115ff.

(168.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 57 (May 3,1942).

(169.) Sachse, “Einleitung,” 26ff. (from an interview with a former forced worker for Siemens). A pregnant woman who suffered a miscarriage after two shifts of very hard labor even had to pay for the ambulance and a portion of the hospital costs herself, since the health insurance refused to cover these costs for Jews.Freund, Zwangsarbei terin, 89, 99.

(170.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 261–262 (April 18,1943); number: 290 (June 12,1943). On (p.471) the visible marking of Jews, see hereafter. Jews (like Klemperer) living in nonprivileged mixed marriages had to wear the star; those in privileged marriages did not.

(171.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 307–308 (August 14,1943), 275 (May 5,1943).

(172.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 336 (December 11,1943, quotation), 334 (December 5,1943, fruit), 366 (February 28,1944, quotation).

(173.) On the assignment of special license plate numbers and the resulting higher fines for traffic violations for Jews in Berlin, which later, in the 1938 June Action, could have been grounds for imprisonment in a concentration camp, see Reichmann, Deutscher Bürger, 81.

(174.) Adam, Judenpolitik, 17ff.; Berliner Tageblatt, 397–398 (August 24,1938), cited in Fricke, Berlin, 555 n. 9.

(175.) Levy, memoir, LBI, 86ff.

(176.) Schwerin, memoir, 117; for an example of feeling offended, seePetsch, interview II, Hamburg, 35. On verification of proper usage of the forced names in Breslau by pre senting one’s food ration card, see Tausk, Breslauer Tagebuch, 238 (October 22,1939).

(177.) Klemperer, Witness, 536 (October 7,1941).

(178.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 21 (February 22,1942).

(179.) Heim, “Land ohne Zukunft,” 81 n. 101.

(180.) Klemperer, LTI, 168.

(181.) Adler-Rudel, Jüdische Selbsthilfe, 174.

(182.) Klemperer, Witness, 528 (September 17,1941).

(183.) Winterberg, “Aufwachsen,” 291.

(184.) Klemperer, Witness, 531 (September 22,1941).

(185.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 311 (August 23, 1943). See also Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 145; Levi, memoir, JMF, 4.

(186.) Levi, memoir, JMF, 4(bicyclist); Beck, Underground Life, 57 (shake heads or smile).

(187.) Freund, Zwangsarbeiterin, 145 (seat); Stillmann, Überleben, 175 (seat; frequent secret presents).

(188.) Klemperer, Witness, 536 (October 7, 1941) (turning back the coat; umbrella); Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 83 (pencil); Petsch, interview II, Hamburg, 22(brief case);Deutschkron, Outcast, 213 (briefcase); König, David, 155 (handbag).

(189.) In general, see Meynert, “Endlösung,” 225; on being sent to the Ravensbrück concentration camp and from there being transferred to Auschwitz, for example, see Klem perer, Bitter End, 196 (October 30,1942); as an explanation of one’s own behavior, see Strauss, Hügel, 67.

(190.) See Ellisabeth Freund’s reaction, Zwangsarbeiterin, 145, to the warning of a soldier on guard at a concentration camp shortly before the start of the deportations.

(191.) Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 89; see also Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 51; and Petsch, Report, Hamburg, 5.

(192.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 7 (January 17,1942).

(193.) Meynert, “Endlösung,” 244; see also 257.

(194.) Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 89.

(195.) Tuch, “Tochter,” 7 (twice), 8,10,11,13.

(196.) Tuch, “Tochter,” 29ff.

(197.) In addition to the references that follow, see, for example, Rewald, Berliner, 6 (general comment about 1942 without noting the month), and Seligmann, “Illegal Way,” 343.

(198.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 7 (January 17,1942).

(199.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 8 (January 18,1942) on the negotiations and 9 (January 19, 1942) on the event (quotation).

(200.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 26 (March 1,1942).

(201.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 34 (March 16,1942).

(202.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 50 (April 19,1942).

(203.) Petsch, interview I, Hamburg, 34. A short time later she added: “In ′43 we knew everything.”

(204.) Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 89. See alsoBeck, Underground Life, 60–61; Neu mann I, memoir, LBI, 11.

(205.) Deutschkron, Outcast, 124.

(206.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 51ff; Kroh, David kämpft, 175–182.

(207.) Letters of November 2, 1941, and November 12, 1941, cited in Randt, “Waisen- häuser,” 62.

(208.) Klemperer, Bitter End, 197 (October 30,1942); see also 155–156 (August 20,1942).

(209.) Beck, Underground Life, 60.

(210.) Neumann I, memoir, LBI, 12.

(211.) Pineas, memoir, LBI, 20.

(212.) Petsch, Report, Hamburg, 5; Petsch, interview II, Hamburg, 15.

(213.) Pineas, memoir, LBI, 2ff.

(214.) Niewyk, Jews, 20; Kwiet andEschwege, Widerstand, 196–198.

(215.) Mühsam, Mein Weg, 169 (diary entry August 23,1933); Selz, interview, Hamburg, 11; Neumann I, memoir, LBI, 1.

(216.) Goldberg, memoir, LBI, 47 (about the author Ludwig Fulda); for a number of examples, see Loewenberg, memoir, LBI, 7off.

(217.) He nevertheless decided against taking that step. See Tausk, Breslauer Tagebuch, 180 (November 12,1938) (quotation), 206 (December 3,1938), 214 (quotation), and 2i7ff. (January 25,1939).

(218.) Petsch, interview I, Hamburg, 37 (comfort); on the price, see Camilla Neumann, in Richarz, Life, 439.

(219.) Diagram in Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 199.

(220.) Klemperer, Tagebücher, 1942–1945 (February 5,1942). This passage was edited out of the English translation.

(221.) Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 205.

(222.) Petsch, Report, Hamburg, 5ff. It seems that among doctors opinions varied whether attempts should be made to “save” these patients. For examples, see Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 207.

(223.) Use Rewald, cited in Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 214.

(224.) Heinrich Mugdan (see Käte Mugdan), in Richarz, Life, 429(assistance for his grandmother to die); Edith Wolff, cited in Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 215(about an elderly couple).

(225.) Neumann II, memoir, LBI, 2.

(226.) Beck, Underground Life, 70; see also Rosenberg, Jahre, 15–17.

(227.) Neumann I, memoir, LBI, 11 (permission for a Mischling); on a forced laborer of the railway being prohibited, seeRewald, Berliner, 4.

(228.) Beck, Underground Life, 62 (about Edith Wolff); see alsoSchwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 89; and also her self-presentation in a 1983 interview, where she said this was only one motive in a more complex explanation, in Wolff, “deportieren,” 114ff; on the initially divided opinions among the leadership and their later agreement, see Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 54,57.

(229.) Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 90ff. (quotation), 93; see also 62; on Lotte Strauss’s futile attempt to get her parents to go underground, see Strauss, Hügel, 65.

(230.) Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 153.

(231.) Spiegel, Retter, 56. On encoded messages on postcards (!) from friends from Holland, see Pineas, memoir, LBI, 10.

(232.) Rewald, Berliner, 8(by a German railway inspector); Besser, “Überleben,” 239ff. (by German air force officers).

(233.) Spiegel, Retter, 16; Deutschkron, Outcast, 128.

(234.) Rewald, Berliner, 10ff.

(235.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 59 (quote “role”), 76, 81 (limp); Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 122(hair and tie).

(236.) See examples in Kaplan, Dignity and Despair, 206.

(237.) For example, see Besser, “Überleben,” 243, 245.

(238.) Rewald Rewald, Berliner, 7, 8; Deutschkron, Outcast, 133,135–136.

(239.) Deutschkron, Outcast, 205–209.

(240.) Of Seligmann’s 65 cases, 17 had only one main residence, 48 at least two, and almost all had alternative quarters for emergencies. “Illegal Way,” 349ff.

(241.) Deutschkron, Outcast, 142–143,162–163, 179ff; Sello, “Tagebuchblatt,” 124ff.

(242.) Benz, “Überleben,” 697.

(243.) On Herta Pineas’s frequent change of quarters, see Benz, “Überleben,” 677ff; Hermann Pineas, in Richarz, Life, 448–460, especially 454–456; see also Rewald, Berliner, 7–10.

(244.) Spiegel, Retter, 17 (quotation), 23,29,35; see also the lists of quarters of a family of three who lived mostly apart, in Benz, “Überleben,” 666.

(245.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 62, 70–72.

(246.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 73ff.

(247.) For example, see Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 156.

(248.) Rewald, Berliner, 8ff.

(249.) Rewald, Berliner, 13; Deutschkron Deutschkron, Outcast, 185.

(250.) Schwersenz and Wolff Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 93ff.

(251.) Excerpts from a report in Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 146.

(252.) Lorenz, “Endlösung,” 255.

(253.) See the excerpts from Charlotte Joseph’s report and the case of a family of three who left Berlin with such a certificate, in Benz, “Überleben,” 662, 667.

(254.) Deutschkron, Outcast, 217–219, 225–226; for the western part of the country, see Spiegel, Retter, 61–66.

(255.) Spiegel, Retter, 71; Besser, “Überleben,” 242–244. For an impressive report, see König, David,187ff.

(256.) König, David, 173.

(257.) Besser, “Überleben,” 243,245,246.

(258.) König, David, 189–193.

(259.) König, David, passim, especially 199 (getting taken in), 206 (repairs), 214–216 (dissatisfaction), 248–251 (museum and zoo), 257–266 (temporary work), 264–266 (plan for escape), 269–274 (boss’s help), 276 (left shoemaker), 282 (gardener). On zoos as a safe place, see also Strauss, Hügel, 94,139.

(260.) König, David, xii; Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 151ff; particularly impressive through her doubt whether she would have had so much courage if the tables had been turned, see SpiegelSpiegel, Retter, 48ff.

(261.) Deutschkron, Outcast, 6 (arrest); 129 (“great”); 147 (quotation); 192 (women under 55).

(262.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 66.

(263.) This typology of helpers was cited from Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 61.

(264.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 60ff, 68, and Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 102, noff; Rewald, Berliner, 6; Deutschkron, Outcast, l62ff.

(265.) Besser Besser, “Überleben,” 244ff. (with quotation); Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 63. See also Deutschkron, Outcast, 159. But on a birth in the underground with the help of a doctor, seeSchwersenz and Wolff Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 81.

(266.) For the most comprehensive acknowledgment (based largely on writing and oral testimony of members of the group), see Zahn, “Nicht mitgehen”; for a brief description, see Kaplan, Dignity and Despair, 212ff; for member accounts, see Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 78–89; Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 97–102,129–140; Beck, “Organisator” (with documents), 150–162.

(267.) Schwersenz, Versteckte Gruppe, 151; Beck, Underground Life, 80ff.

(268.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 77. See also König, David, 166,181.

(269.) Schwersenz and Wolff, “Untergrund,” 61.

(270.) Strauss, Hügel, 87,96,123.

(271.) Kroh, David kämpft, 163–174 (with documents); Kaplan, Dignity and Despair, 210; for the most extensive report, including interviews with Stella from the 1980s, see Wyden, Stella.

(272.) On the last-named group, see Simon, “Berliner Juden,” 255.

(273.) On those who resurfaced, see Kwiet and Eschwege, Widerstand, 150.