Thomas L. Gertzen: Should the “Lagarde House” be renamed? ‘Germanic Ideology’ in the History of Egyptology*
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 In an open letter dated July 25, 2017 the student representative board (Allgemeiner Studierendenausschuss, AStA) of the Georg August University, Göttingen demanded: “No tribute to anti-Semites!” The students referred to the Oriental scholar and theologian, Paul de Lagarde (1827–1891) and criticized that the University, as well as the Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities were trivializing his role as one of the leading anti-Semites of the 19th century. The Egyptological Seminar was singled out in particular, because a link to the history of Egyptology and Coptic Studies on its homepage limited itself to referring to the cultural pessimism in Lagarde’s writings. This was somewhat unjust – first and foremost, because the Egyptological Seminar had tried for more than a decade to establish a research project which would ultimately lead to the digitization and historical analysis of the papers and personal documents of Paul de Lagarde, kept in the State and University Library, Göttingen. Moreover, the director, Heike Behlmer, had herself published extensively on Paul de Lagarde and his role in the history of the discipline.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 The AStA considers Egyptology and other Oriental studies responsible for providing a critical analysis of Lagarde’s biography and his role in scholarly history – and rightly so. I would endorse this assessment and add that Oriental scholars are, moreover, those most competent to do so. That is not to say that Lagarde should only be “judged by his peers”, but that in order to understand the subtleties and far-reaching implications of his writings, extensive research, rather than snap judgments and political positioning, is necessary.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 The open letter also includes the demand to rename the “Lagarde House” in Göttingen, following the example of the city of Göttingen, which, 60 years ago, had renamed “Lagarde Square” “Werner Heisenberg Square” while at least a year earlier Munich had changed “Paul Lagarde-Street” to “Ilse Weber Street”. – These cases though, seem to show differences to the present situation, since the “Lagarde House”, once the residence of the scholar, forms part of Lagarde’s bequest to the Göttingen Academy and houses mostly projects related to the study of the Septuagint, Lagarde’s lifetime project. The name does not officially honor its former owner but is rather an informal reference to this bequest. For this as well as other reasons put forward in the following, the present contribution argues against an official renaming of the building. The basis for this argument are the results of recent research in the disciplinary history of German Oriental Studies and the firm conviction that a damnatio memoriae is an unsuitable, or possibly even dangerous means to counter anti-Semitism.
Politics of Cultural Despair?
Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0
In his groundbreaking study the German-American historian Fritz Stern, who coined the term “Germanic Ideology”, stated:
Lagarde’s scholarly contributions to philology and religious history, important though they were, have been largely superseded.
Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0
Concerning Lagarde’s political writings, however, he added:
Germanic critics [like Lagarde] anticipate the type of malcontent who, in the 1920’s found a haven in the idealism of the Hitler movement.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 Not surprisingly, Oriental scholars and theologians, when dealing with the history of their respective disciplines, embraced this binary concept of ‘Lagarde, the Oriental scholar’ and ‘Lagarde, the political writer’ or ‘Germanic critic’. This enabled delegating the responsibility of dealing with Lagarde’s political ideas, as well as his anti-Semitism, to historians, whereas scholarship could carry on unencumbered by this burden. Suzanne Marchand, adding the fitting subtitle “Religion, Race and Scholarship” to her monograph on “German Orientalism,” pointed out that this approach is doomed to failure, at least within the context of disciplinary history:
¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 Lagarde’s popular political and religious writings have been scrutinized by many historians; far fewer however, have been willing to tackle his philological work, […]. For our purposes, however, we must try to understand Lagarde the philologist and exegete, and to appreciate the fact that, misanthrope and ideologue that he was, he did earn respect for his work in oriental philology.
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 This does not necessarily contradict Stern’s first assumption, but I would argue that too much compartmentalization in assessing Lagarde’s personality, profession, and politics must be avoided. Referring to Stern’s second thesis I would like to cite Lagarde’s biographer Ulrich Sieg, whose choice of subtitle clearly recognized the “origins of modern anti-Semitism” in Lagarde’s writings while asserting:
¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 Teleological explanations should be avoided in any case. Once again, let me reiterate that in my view this is not outright contradictory to Stern’s assessment, but rather a necessary clarification of a complex subject. Lagarde’s anti-Semitism, when compared with National-Socialist ideology, was ‘cultural’, not ‘racial’, notwithstanding numerous biologistic metaphors and references to ‘race’ in his writings – comparing Jews to “trichinae” and “bacilli” or his suggestion that German Jews be resettled on the island of Madagascar.
¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 Nevertheless, Lagarde truly believed that through education – at least some – Jews could become Germans, provided they were willing to give up and renounce Judaism.
“To become German and nothing but German”
¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 As one example of this belief, I would like to discuss the results of a research project conducted by Susanne Voss and Dietrich Raue at the Egyptological Institute in Leipzig focusing on Georg Steindorff (1861–1951) and the history of Germany Egyptology during the 20th century.
¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 Steindorff came from a wealthy, liberal Jewish family of merchants in the city of Dessau. In 1882, he began his studies with Adolf Erman (1854–1937) in Berlin who introduced him to Paul de Lagarde. Erman himself was an admirer of Lagarde’s writings and took no offence when Lagarde questioned him about his Jewish ancestry. Lagarde maintained contact, even after Erman had told him, that he was proud of his “Semitic blood”. Lagarde also welcomed Erman’s student Steindorff warmly to his home, as did his wife Anna. When Steindorff obtained his doctorate in 1884 with Lagarde, the professor informed his student:
¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 In Germany your descent is an obstacle; you should not delude yourself about that. The Jewish element is too pervasive among us, that the attempt should not be made to reject it, wherever possible. In these circumstances, even a Jew whose person is above reproach, as in your case, must suffer.
¶ 17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 Lagarde advised Steindorff to convert to Protestant Christianity and offered himself as godfather. When in 1885 his student followed the advice Lagarde did assume the latter role – although some of Steindorff’s co-students substituted for him during the actual ceremony in Berlin. Shortly thereafter, an opportunity arose for Steindorff to prove his loyalty to his new religion, simultaneously distancing himself once and for all from Judaism. He wrote to his Doktorvater commenting on one of the numerous academic disputes involving his teacher:
¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 What shall I say about the attacks from the Semite chauvinists? I whose most ardent desire it was to become German and nothing but German, who even earlier, without knowing, was disgusted by this fanaticism, always witnessed the battle with heartfelt joy. You struck a wasp’s nest; the rabbis will hardly ever forgive you for offending the honour of their greatest scholarly hero, […] but their days are numbered.
¶ 19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 This comment must be seen in relation to the Lagarde/Zunz controversy. The issue arose when the doctoral thesis of Lagarde’s pupil Ludwig Techen was severely criticised for his disregard of the works of Leopold Zunz. Since Lagarde himself felt attacked, at least indirectly, he issued a challenge with his treatise “Lipman Zunz und seine Verehrer” [~Lipman Zunz and his admirers], already indicating by using a Jewish-sounding first name, that Zunz was not sufficiently ‘assimilated’. Since the latter had passed away at an early stage of the dispute, the battle against Lagarde, as described by Mirjam Thulin, was waged by the representatives of Wissenschaft des Judentums headed by David Kaufmann.
¶ 20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 Steindorff’s cheers for Lagarde’s strike against “the greatest scholarly hero” of “Semite Chauvinists” confronts the reader with the question: why did a former Jewish Orientalist declare his solidarity with his teacher’s decidedly anti-Semitic polemics?
¶ 21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 At the end of the nineteenth century, shortly before Steindorff began his studies, Berlin and Germany had witnessed a “wave of anti-Semitism”: In 1879 court-chaplain Adolph Stoecker gave his address “Unsere Forderungen an das moderne Judentum”. Shortly after that, Wilhelm Marr founded the “Antisemitenliga”. In the very same year, the historian Heinrich von Treitschke triggered what became known as the “Antisemitismusstreit” and in 1884, the “Antisemitenbund” was established. So, apparently, Lagarde simply stated a fact when he told his student that his Jewish background could constitute an obstacle for his advancement in an academic career.
“They are not after me”
Leave a comment on paragraph 23 0
After his conversion, Steindorff entered upon an extremely successful career in Egyptology. He was appointed professor in Leipzig, elected member of the Royal Saxon Academy and even became Rektor of Leipzig University. He was editor-in-chief of the internationally renowned Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde and numerous other journals and periodicals. During the 1920s, he tried to reshape Egyptology as a “völkische” discipline, based on anthropological or racial studies. When the National Socialists took over power in Germany, at first he felt quite safe: “Die meinen gar nicht mich.” After he had suffered from racist persecution and been stripped of almost all his former honors and positions, he was shocked and depressed:
I was proud to be able to say ‘civis germanus sum’
and I cannot bear the thought of being cooped up together with my Russian and Galician Rassegenossen [~racial comrades].
Leave a comment on paragraph 24 0
This statement clearly reflects the dilemma of many German Jews at the time and also a certain strategy employed by German-Jewish scientists and scholars, who were particularly keen to contribute to the racial discourse during the inter-war-period in order to define the scientific parameters and to attempt to assume control of the discussion as a defensive measure against anti-Semitic assaults. This attitude should not be confused with alleged ‘Jewish self-hatred’ but rather be understood as a means of social distinction as well as self-preservation. It is of no use to isolate single quotations and thereby to isolate anti-Semitism as a separate social phenomenon. The Israeli historian Shulamit Volkov proposed the concept of anti-Semitism as a “cultural code”:
By the end of the nineteenth century it had become a ‘cultural code.’ Professing antisemitism became a sign of cultural identity, of belonging to a specific cultural camp. […]. Contemporaries living and acting in Imperial Germany learned to decode the message.
Leave a comment on paragraph 25 0
and, particularly relevant for the case of Steindorff, she further elaborated:
But for millions of Germans and the majority of German Jews it [i.e., antisemitism] remained a cultural signal. Decoding it, they felt secure, although often uneasy, within a familiar cluster of views and attitudes. They were unaware that the language had changed and that they were no longer in a position to decipher the message.
Leave a comment on paragraph 26 0
This becomes apparent after the end of World War II, when Steindorff was living in Exile in the United States, surviving but leading a rather modest existence, dependent on the support of his family and American colleagues following the murder of his sister Lucie by the Nazis. When the American occupation forces conducted the denazification process – also of German Egyptology – Steindorff volunteered to provide incriminating information about some of his former colleagues. When his criticism was challenged, he invoked an unexpected moral guide:
I hope that you understand the frankness of my letter. My unforgettable teacher and friend Paul de Lagarde once said: How can anyone be astonished if I call hypocrites ‘hypocrites’ and liars ‘liars’!
¶ 28 Leave a comment on paragraph 28 0 The complexity of Steindorff’s case is no singularity in the history of German-speaking Egyptology, and there are many variants: Wilhelm Spiegelberg (1870–1930), translator of the first hieroglyphic reference to the toponym of “Israel”, also converted to Protestant Christianity, but rather out of convenience than real necessity. He became the first Egyptologist to fall victim to anti-Semitic assaults by the Nazis in 1923 when he was appointed professor in Munich. Steindorff’s teacher, Adolf Erman, still proudly mentioned his Jewish grandmother when he was excluded from the faculty in 1934. At the end of the nineteenth century, however he had joked with his teacher Georg Ebers (1837–1898) about their “Semitic blood” and still claimed in his autobiography, published in 1929, that “Jewish urchins” would have degraded the French School Erman attended in his youth. The same Ebers, whom Suzanne Marchand recently described as a “Sympathetic Egyptologist”, used his Professorenromane, situated in ancient Egypt, to distinguish between ugly Jews and handsome Hebrews or to give the Persian King of Kings the opportunity to warn a delegation from Jerusalem against arrogance and ostentation, a warning which had a very contemporary ring to it.
¶ 29 Leave a comment on paragraph 29 0 But even the biographies of those Egyptologists who remained Jewish represent rather complex case studies. Ludwig Borchardt (1863–1938), director of the first German Institute for Egyptian Archaeology in Cairo, opposed the immigration of Ostjuden to Berlin and, in an address to the convention of the Verband der nationaldeutschen Juden, denied them the right to vote in congregational elections. Since he considered “Protestantism as the only rightful representative of Germanness abroad”, it was a logical consequence for him to oppose alleged Catholic influence and state: “one has to fight Zionism, wherever encountered.” Walter Wreszinski (1880–1935), while teaching at Königsberg, suffered so badly from Nazi persecution that he died of a heart failure. Hans Jakob Polotsky’s (1905–1991) family emigrated from Russia to Germany. He studied in Göttingen and was able to leave the country shortly before the Nazi takeover of power, accepting a post at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. He became the founder of the ‘Jerusalem School’, adopting and promoting the scholarly tradition of the ‘Berlin School’.
¶ 30 Leave a comment on paragraph 30 0 At the beginning of the 1920s, Nathaniel Julius Reich (1876–1943) fled the rising anti-Semitism in Vienna, only to be questioned initially by his American colleagues whether he would exhibit physiognomic “Jewish” features, known from caricatures. Hilde Zaloscer (1903–1999), born in Bosnia (then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), survived the Shoah in Egypt, even obtaining Egyptian citizenship but was forced to return to Austria in 1967 after the Six Day War. – The last two examples clearly illustrate that anti-Semitism is a transnational phenomenon and has to be analyzed accordingly.
Re-naming and shaming?
¶ 31 Leave a comment on paragraph 31 0 What conclusions could be drawn for the disciplinary history of Oriental studies, and particularly with respect to the AStA demands concerning the “Lagarde House” in Göttingen?
- ¶ 33 Leave a comment on paragraph 33 0
- Paul de Lagarde certainly was an anti-Semite, whose ultimate goal was the exclusion of Jews from the German nation; hence, he propagated a ‘Germanic Ideology’.
- Neither his individual biography and his academic career, nor his scholarly publications can be separated from his political writings.
- He defined the ‘cultural code’ of anti-Semitism and contributed to National Socialist ideology – if only in some aspects and as one of many variants.
- He offered the opportunity to embrace ‘Germanic culture’ and to renounce Judaism to Georg Steindorff (and others) as a means of total integration into German society, but also as a means of totally annihilating anything Jewish in it.
- ¶ 35 Leave a comment on paragraph 35 0
- Many German Egyptologists – Jewish and Christian – eagerly adopted the conservative agenda of Lagarde and shared his feeling of cultural despair, as early as the end of the 19th
- With Lagarde, they embraced ‘Germanness’ or ‘Kultur’ as opposed to Western liberal ‘civilisation’ and ‘Asiatic’ barbarism, capitalism, modernism, urbanism, liberalism, socialism, Zionism etc.
- Some of the Jewish scholars relinquished their faith, others tried to develop viable alternatives; most, however, also distanced themselves from other Jews (particularly Ostjuden) – as a means of self-preservation, including by statements otherwise defined as anti-Semitic.
¶ 36 Leave a comment on paragraph 36 0 Adopting the concept of anti-Semitism as a social disease I would encourage colleagues to apply the method of ‘differential diagnosis’. It would start by collecting all available information and creating a list of symptoms; in the case of disciplinary history or Life Writing this means that as a first step we have to establish a comprehensive biography for a scholar, including not only parts of his works or personality but a holistic representation. After that, differential diagnosis lists all possible causes (candidate conditions) for certain symptoms. In the case of academic anti-Semitism – that is anti-Semitism, created and propagated by academics, as well as anti-Semitism allegedly based on research – whether in the natural sciences or the humanities – the possible causes must be scrutinized and related to social, economic, religious or political causes. Differential diagnosis can then rule out questionable causes, which is the most reliable way to establish, by a process of elimination, the background and reasons for anti-Semitism.
¶ 37 Leave a comment on paragraph 37 0 To detect or define anti-Semitism in the context of the history of Oriental studies is important, but it is worthwhile to discover the causes, and thus avoid a superficial positivist approach, which, in the long run, would only trivialize the problem and also foster the illusion that scholarly achievement could somehow be separated or ‘purified’ from Zeitgeist.
¶ 38 Leave a comment on paragraph 38 0 It is for this very reason that although I would endorse the AStA’s initiative to question and to scrutinize how Göttingen University and the Academy of Sciences have dealt with the legacy (intellectual, not material) of Paul de Lagarde, I would nonetheless strongly object to changing the name of the “Lagarde House”. First, because Lagardes’s anti-Semitism would continue to exist in spite of such a change. Secondly, because his former residence would remain exactly that – the former house of Paul de Lagarde. Thirdly, even fewer people would actually be confronted with Lagarde and the role he played in German intellectual history. Finally, it might very well turn out to be very difficult to find viable alternatives to replace the name of Lagarde.
¶ 39 Leave a comment on paragraph 39 0 When I presented the findings of my research in the framework of the Steindorff-Project at the Leipzig Egyptological Institute in 2014, I was publicly asked by the director whether the Institute should be re-named a second time, after it had just been named after “Georg Steindorff”. – Steindorff’s attitudes towards Jews and Judaism and his unwavering admiration for his Doktorvater Lagarde seemed somewhat unsettling to the Egyptologists. – I did not recommend a ‘re-re-naming’, but pointed out that by conducting a research project and providing a platform for exchange and discussion, the Institute would do the best it could in actually dealing with its past.
¶ 40 Leave a comment on paragraph 40 0 Naming buildings or institutions after scholars entails a certain risk; maybe it should not be perceived so much as a tribute but rather as a commitment to an ongoing confrontation with positive as well as negative scholarly legacies.
¶ 41 Leave a comment on paragraph 41 0 There is no shame in admitting to the dark(er) sides of the history of an academic discipline, but either to deny them altogether or to exclude or ‘ostracize’ individual scholars, based on superficial analysis for the sake of ‘political correctness’, seems indeed disgraceful. To do so would only play into the hands of those who want to silence history altogether.
¶ 42 Leave a comment on paragraph 42 0 *This contribution is based on preparatory work of the Egyptological Seminar at Göttingen University for an research-application to digitize and edit the correspondence of Paul de Lagarde.
¶ 43 Leave a comment on paragraph 43 0  Offener Brief: Keine Huldigung für Antisemiten an der Universität Göttingen: https://asta.uni-goettingen.de/offener-brief-keine-huldigung-fuer-antisemiten-an-der-universitaet-goettingen/, accessed May, 3 2018.
¶ 45 Leave a comment on paragraph 45 0  Although the director of the Seminar immediately responded to the open letter by E-mail, addressing the issues raised by the AStA, the Göttingen Egyptologists were not included in the subsequent discussion between the students and the representatives of the University and the Academy, and the press release afterwards was not coordinated with them; cf. Presseinformation: Zur politischen Einstellung von Paul Anton de Lagarde: https://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/135974.html?tid=596, accessed May, 3 2018.
¶ 46 Leave a comment on paragraph 46 0  In January 2018 the Seminar, jointly with the Moses Mendelssohn Centre for European-Jewish Studies, Potsdam, organised a workshop on the Lagarde papers; cf. the conference report: Tagungsbericht: Workshop zur wissenschaftsgeschichtlichen Erschließung des Nachlasses Paul de Lagardes in Göttingen, 15.01.2018–16.01.2018, in: H-Soz-Kult, May 7 2018, www.hsozkult.de/conferencereport/id/tagungsberichte-7588 (May, 3 2018). The workshop had been planned before the open letter arrived. The Proceedings will be published as Der Nachlass Paul de Lagarde. Orientalistische Netzwerke und antisemitische Verflechtungen, H. Behlmer et al., eds (Berlin: degruyter, forthcoming).
¶ 47 Leave a comment on paragraph 47 0  H. Behlmer, “‘…As safe as in the British Museum’: Paul de Lagarde and His Borrowing of Manuscripts from the Collection of Robert Curzon”, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 89 (2003): 231–238; “Schenute, Besa und Lagarde – Eine unbekannte Episode der Forschungsgeschichte”, Journal of Coptic Studies 5 (2003): 55–66; “Ein neo-koptischer Brief Adolf Ermans an Paul de Lagarde – Zeugnis für eine wissenschaftsgeschichtliche Wende in der Erforschung des Koptischen”, Lingua Aegyptia 11 (2003): 1–12; “Paul de Lagarde and the Coptic New Testament: A Short Note on Archival Material in the Lagarde Papers”, ARC, The Journal of the Faculty of Religious Studies, McGill 33 (2005): 23–31; “Adolf Erman und Paul de Lagarde”, in Ägyptologie als Wissenschaft. Adolf Erman (1854–1937) in seiner Zeit, B. U. Schipper, ed. (Berlin: degruyter, 2006), 276–293; “Paul de Lagarde und die ‘Aegyptische Altertumskunde und Koptische Sprache’ in Göttingen”, in jn.t dr.w – Festschrift für Friedrich Junge, G. Moers et al., eds (Göttingen: Seminar für Ägyptologie und Koptologie, 2006), 89–107; “A Neo-Bohairic Letter from the Correspondence of Paul de Lagarde in Göttingen University Library”, in Liber amicorum – Jürgen Horn zum Dank, Antonia Giewekemeyer et al., eds (Göttingen: Seminar für Ägyptologie und Koptologie, 2009), 17–24; “Ägyptologie und Koptologie in Göttingen – zur Geschichte einer (nicht immer) wunderbaren Freundschaft”, Jahrbuch der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Vol. 2 (2012): 249–258.
¶ 48 Leave a comment on paragraph 48 0  The AStA does not mention the commemorative plaque on the building which reads: “Mit seiner zwar noch nicht rassisch begründeten, aber äußerst aggressiv vertretenen Judenfeindschaft wurde er zum Repräsentanten eines menschenverachtenden Antisemitismus. Seinen 1886 erschienenen ‘Deutschen Schriften’ war eine ebenso nachhaltige wie problematische Wirkungsgeschichte im frühen 20. Jahrhundert beschieden.” This text is now also published on the homepage of the Academy: Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Septuaginta Unternehmen, last modified August 28, 2017: https://adw-goe.de/forschung/abgeschlossene-forschungsprojekte/akademienprogramm/septuaginta-unternehmen/, accessed May 3, 2018. This plaque is not to be confused with the “Göttinger Gedenktafel”, traditionally stating only the name and period of residence of a famous scholar, also in place on the building; cf. S. Schütz and W. Nissen, Göttinger Gedenktafeln. Ein biografischer Wegweiser (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 131.
¶ 49 Leave a comment on paragraph 49 0  Münchener Wochenanzeiger, Tuesday, May 17, 2016: “Alte Straße, neuer Name. Paul Lagarde-Straße wird umbenannt”: https://www.wochenanzeiger-muenchen.de/laim/alte-strasse-neuer-name,80921.html, accessed May 3, 2018.
¶ 50 Leave a comment on paragraph 50 0  The “Septuaginta-Forschungsstelle”, the “Qumran-Wörterbuch” and the “Digital Edition and Translation of the Coptic-Sahidic Old Testament”: https://adw-goe.de/en/research/research-projects-within-the-academies-programme/koptisches-altes-testament/, accessed May 7, 2018.
¶ 51 Leave a comment on paragraph 51 0  For the term cf. D. Gange, “Interdisciplinary Measures. Beyond Disciplinary Histories of Egyptology”, in Histories of Egyptology. Interdisciplinary Measures, W. Carruthers, ed. (London: Routledge, 2015), 64–80.
¶ 52 Leave a comment on paragraph 52 0  F. Stern, The Politics of Cultural Despair: A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology (Berkeley: 1974), 4. Lagarde’s contribution to Oriental studies had been earlier critically assessed in the 1940s; cf. H. H. Schaeder, “Paul de Lagarde als Orientforscher. Zu seinem Gedenken am 22. Dezember 1941” in Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 45.1/2 (1942): 1–13.
¶ 56 Leave a comment on paragraph 56 0  Sieg, Deutschlands Prophet, 351: “Allerdings litt die Verbreitung Lagardescher Ideen an deren romantisch-idealistischer Färbung, wodurch sie mit dem Gedankengut des ‘wissenschaftlichen Rassismus’ nur begrenzt kompatibel waren.”; translation by TLG.
¶ 57 Leave a comment on paragraph 57 0  P. de Lagarde, Juden und Indogermanen (Göttingen: Diederichs’sche Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1888), 239: “Mit Trichinen und Bazillen wird nicht verhandelt, Trichinen und Bazillen werden auch nicht ‘erzogen’, sie werden so rasch und gründlich wie möglich unschädlich gemacht.”
¶ 59 Leave a comment on paragraph 59 0  T. L. Gertzen, “‘To become a German and nothing but a German…’ The role of Paul de Lagarde in the conversion of Egyptologist Georg Steindorff”, in Leo Baeck Institute Yearbook [LBI YB] 60 (2015), 79–89; “‘In Deutschland steht Ihnen Ihre Abstammung entgegen’ – zur Bedeutung von Judentum und Konfessionalismus für die wissenschaftliche Laufbahn G. Steindorffs und seiner Rolle innerhalb der École de Berlin”, in Georg Steindorff und die deutsche Ägyptologie im 20. Jahrhundert. Wissenshintergründe und Forschungstransfers, S. Voss and D. Raue, eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2016), 333–400.
¶ 60 Leave a comment on paragraph 60 0  T. L. Gertzen, École de Berlin und “Goldenes Zeitalter” (1882–1914) der Ägyptologie als Wissenschaft. Das Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis zwischen Ebers, Erman und Sethe (Berlin: degruyter, 2013), 93–153; Jean Pierre Adolphe Erman und die Begründung der Ägyptologie als Wissenschaft (Berlin: Hentrich&Hentrich, 2015).
¶ 61 Leave a comment on paragraph 61 0  Universitätsarchiv Göttingen [UAG], Lagarde 150:1160, Steindorff, Georg, 28 August 1884: “In Deutschland steht Ihnen Ihre Abstammung entgegen, darüber dürfen Sie sich keiner Täuschung hingeben. Das jüdische Element überwiegt uns zu sehr, als dass nicht der Versuch gemacht werden sollte, es abzulehnen wo es irgend abzulehnen ist. Unter dieser Lage der Dinge müssen dann auch diejenigen Juden leiden, gegen deren Person, wie das bei Ihnen der Fall ist, ein Einwand nicht erhoben werden darf.”; cf. Gertzen, “To become a German”, 80.
¶ 62 Leave a comment on paragraph 62 0  Archiv der Evangelischen Kirche in Berlin-Brandenburg, Taufkartei Alt-Berlin / Judenkartei, Seb-Szij, 1800-n, Jungen, 3457-1, with reference to Kirchenbuch der Neuen Kirche Gemeinde in Berlin, 1885, p. 57, no. 53; cf. Gertzen, “To become a German”, 86.
¶ 63 Leave a comment on paragraph 63 0  UAG, Lagarde 150:1160, Steindorff, Georg, 4 August 1886: “Was soll ich Ihnen von der Hauerei der semitischen Chauvinisten sagen? Ich, dessen sehnlichster Wunsch es ist, Deutscher und nichts als Deutscher zu werden, den schon früher, oft ohne dass ich es wusste, jenes fanatische Treiben angeekelt hat, ich habe dem Kampfe mit wahrer Herzensfreude zugeschaut. Sie haben in ein Wespennest gestochen; dass sie den Herren Rabbinern Ihren grössten wissenschaftlichen Heros angetastet haben, werden sie Ihnen schwerlich verzeihen; […], und Jener Tage sind gezählt.”; cf. Gertzen, “To become a German”, 87.
¶ 64 Leave a comment on paragraph 64 0  M. Thulin, Kaufmanns Nachrichtendienst. Ein jüdisches Gelehrtennetzwerk in 19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht: 2012), 254–282; “Wissenschaft und Vorurteil. Die Kontroverse zwischen David Kaufmann und Paul de Lagarde”, in Beschreibungsversuche der Judenfeindschaft. Zur Geschichte der Antisemitismusforschung vor 1944, H.-J. Hahn and O. Kistenmacher, eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2015), 121–148.
¶ 66 Leave a comment on paragraph 66 0  Cf. N. Hammerstein, Antisemitismus und deutsche Universitäten 1871–1933 (Frankfurt a.M.: Campus, 1995), 68–75; see also: B. Breslauer, Die Zurücksetzung der Juden an den Universitäten Deutschlands. Denkschrift im Auftrage des Verbandes der Deutschen Juden (Berlin: Berthold Levy, 1911); N. Kampe, “Jews and antisemites at universities in Imperial Germany (I). Jewish students: social history and social conflict”, in LBI YB 30 (1985): 357–394; “Jews and antisemites at universities in Imperial Germany (II). The Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität of Berlin: A case study on the students ‘Jewish Question’”, in LBI YB 32 (1987): 43–101.
¶ 67 Leave a comment on paragraph 67 0  T. L. Gertzen, “Brennpunkt ZÄS. Die redaktionelle Korrespondenz ihres Gründers H. Brugsch und die Bedeutung von Fachzeitschriften für die Genese der Ägyptologie in Deutschland”, in Ägyptologen und Ägyptologie(n) zwischen Kaiserreich und der Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten. Jubiläumsband zum 150–jährigen Erscheinen der Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, S. Bickel et al., eds (Berlin: degryuter, 2013), 63–112.
¶ 69 Leave a comment on paragraph 69 0  S. Voss, “Wissenshintergründe … – die Ägyptologie als ‘völkische’ Wissenschaft entlang des Nachlasses Georg Steindorffs von der Weimarer Republik über die NS- bis zur Nachkriegszeit”, in Georg Steindorff und die deutsche Ägyptologie im 20. Jahrhundert. Wissenshintergründe und Forschungstransfer, S. Voss and D. Raue, eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2016), 401–486.
¶ 70 Leave a comment on paragraph 70 0  Bremer Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Nachlass Adolf Erman, Steindorff-Erman, September 20, 1935: “Ich war stolz darauf, sagen zu können, ‘civis Germanus sum’, und kann es nicht ertragen, mit russischen und galizischen Rassegenossen in ein Ghetto gesperrt zu werden.”; cf. Gertzen, “To become a German”, 88; see also: J. Wertheimer, “The unwanted element. East European Jews in Imperial Germany”, in LBI YB 26 (1981), 23–46.
¶ 72 Leave a comment on paragraph 72 0  S. Volkov, “Antisemitism as a cultural code. Reflections on the history and historiography of antisemitism in Imperial Germany”, in LBI YB 23 (1978), 34–35.
¶ 74 Leave a comment on paragraph 74 0  She was murdered in the gas chambers of the Tötungsanstalt Bernburg; cf. D. Raue, “Der J’accuse-Brief an J. D. Wilson. Drei Ansichten von Georg Steindorff”, in Ägyptologen und Ägyptologie(n) zwischen Kaiserreich und der Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten. Jubiläumsband zum 150–jährigen Erscheinen der Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Susanne Bickel et al., eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2013), 351.
¶ 75 Leave a comment on paragraph 75 0  Cf. Henning Franzmeier and Anke Weber, “‘Anderseits finde ich, dass man jetzt nicht so tun soll, als wäre nichts gewesen.’ Die deutsche Ägyptologie in den Jahren 1945–1949 im Spiegel der Korrespondenz mit dem Verlag J. C. Hinrichs,’” in Ägyptologen und Ägyptologien zwischen Kaiserreich und der Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten. Jubiläumsband zum 150–jährigen Erscheinen der Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Susanne Bickel et al., eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2013), 123: “Ich hoffe, dass Sie die Offenheit meines Briefes verstehen. Mein unvergesslicher Lehrer und Freund Paul de Lagarde hat einmal gesagt: Wie darf man sich darüber wundern, wenn ich Heuchler ‘Heuchler’ Lügner ‘Lügner’ nenne!”
¶ 76 Leave a comment on paragraph 76 0  For an overview and all examples cited below, cf. T. L. Gertzen, Judentum und Konfession in der Geschichte der deutschsprachigen Ägyptologie (Berlin: degruyter, 2017).
¶ 77 Leave a comment on paragraph 77 0  T. L. Gertzen, Wilhelm Leeser Spiegelberg (1870–1930). The Egyptologist behind Thomas Mann’s Joseph and his brothers (Vaterstetten: Patrick Brose, 2018, forthcoming).
¶ 80 Leave a comment on paragraph 80 0  S. Marchand, “Georg Ebers, Sympathetic Egyptologist”, in For the Sake of Learning. Essays in Honor of Anthony Grafton, Vol. 2, A. Blair and A.-S. Goeing, eds (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 917–932.
¶ 81 Leave a comment on paragraph 81 0  T. L. Gertzen, “Judenbilder im populären Ägypten- und Orientroman bei Georg Ebers – ein Vergleich mit den Werken von Gustav Flaubert und Karl May”, Zeitschrift für Religion und Geistesgeschichte 71.1 (2019), forthcoming.
¶ 82 Leave a comment on paragraph 82 0  C. v. Pilgrim, “Ludwig Borchardt und sein Institut für ägyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde in Kairo”, in Ägyptologen und Ägyptologien zwischen Kaiserreich und der Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten. Jubiläumsband zum 150–jährigen Erscheinen der Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Susanne Bickel et al., eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2013), 243–266.
¶ 83 Leave a comment on paragraph 83 0  Cf. Gertzen, Judentum und Konfession, 67; for general background: M. Hambrock, Die Etablierung der Außenseiter. Der Verband nationaldeutscher Juden 1921–1935 (Köln: Böhlau, 2003), 381–382.
¶ 84 Leave a comment on paragraph 84 0  Schweizerisches Institut für Ägyptische Bauforschung und Altertumskunde [SIK], Nl. L. Borchardt, L. Borchardt an W. Schubart, July 11, 1927: “Ich, und viele mit mir, halten aber das protestantische Element im Auslande als den gegebenen Vertreter des Deutschtums.”; cf. Gertzen, Judentum und Konfession, 94.
¶ 85 Leave a comment on paragraph 85 0  SIK, Nl. L. Borchardt, L. Borchardt an H. v. d. Bussche-Haddenhausen, June 2, 1926: “Man sollte den Zionismus bekämpfen, wo man ihn findet.” Cf. Gertzen, Judentum und Konfession, 102.
¶ 86 Leave a comment on paragraph 86 0  A. Schütze, “Ein Ägyptologe in Königsberg. Zur Entlassung Walter Wreszinskis”, in Ägyptologen und Ägyptologien zwischen Kaiserreich und der Gründung der beiden deutschen Staaten. Jubiläumsband zum 150–jährigen Erscheinen der Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, Susanne Bickel et al., eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2013), 333–344.
¶ 87 Leave a comment on paragraph 87 0  M. Müller, “Die Jerusalem School in Göttingen. Hans Jakob Polotskys Beitrag zur ägyptischen Sprachforschung in den Jahren von 1925 bis 1935”, in Steininschrift und Bibelwort. Ägyptologen und Koptologen in Niedersachsen, J. Arp-Neumann and T. L. Gertzen, eds (Rahden/Westf.: Marie Leidorf, forthcoming).
¶ 90 Leave a comment on paragraph 90 0  By a sham marriage to an Egyptian; cf. I. Messinger, “Schutz- und Scheinehen im Exilland Ägypten”, in Going East – Going South. Österreichisches Exil in Asien und Afrika, M. Franz and H. Halbrainer, eds (Graz: CLIO, 2014), 169–171.
¶ 92 Leave a comment on paragraph 92 0  Cf. M. Heine, “‘Shaming’ ist der Shitstorm gegen Wehrlose”, in DIE WELT, May 28, 2015, https://www.welt.de/kultur/article141592209/Shaming-ist-der-Shitstorm-gegen-Wehrlose.html, accessed May 7, 2018.
¶ 94 Leave a comment on paragraph 94 0  Cf. T. L. Gertzen, “A Plea for “Higher Criticism” in Disciplinary History Life Writing Sources in the History of German-speaking Egyptology”, in Life Writing in the History of Archaeology: Critical Perspectives, G. Moshenska and C. Lewis, eds (London: UCL Press, forthcoming), presenting yet another – if similar – paradigm.
¶ 95 Leave a comment on paragraph 95 0  As no one in Germany nowadays refers to the Parliament building – the former Reichstag – as “Plenarbereich Reichstagsgebäude”, which is the official designation.
¶ 96 Leave a comment on paragraph 96 0  T. L. Gertzen: “‘Judentum’ und ‘Deutschtum’ Georg Steindorffs – Versuch einer ‘De-Codierung’ im Rahmen des Leipziger Steindorff-Projekts”, 43. Neue Forschungen zur ägyptischen Kultur und Geschichte, May 22, 2014: https://www.saw-leipzig.de/de/aktuelles/43-neue-forschungen-zur-aegyptischen-kultur-und-geschichte-2, accessed May 7, 2018.
¶ 97 Leave a comment on paragraph 97 0  Following an amicable settlement with the Jewish Claims Conference and Steindorff’s grandson Thomas Hemer. The Institute also mounted a commemorative bronze plaque and agreed to conduct research into the biography of Steindorff and his role in the history of Egyptology, based on the extensive Nachlass material donated to the institute by Hemer. Cf. S. Richter, “Georg Steindorff, der neue Namenspatron der Leipziger Ägyptologie“, amun. Magazin für die Freunde der Ägyptischen Museen 37 (2008), 9–11; S. Richter, “Pionier-leistung im Niltal. Ägyptologisches Institut nach Georg Steindorff benannt”, Journal der Universität Leipzig (2008), 17; D. Raue and K. Seidel, “Verkauf einer Sammlung. Leipzig und Deutschland 1926–1937”, amun. Magazin für die Freunde der Ägyptischen Museen 44 (2012), 34–40; D. Raue, “Ein Jahr später“, amun. Magazin für die Freunde der Ägyptischen Museen 45 (2012), 32–34; K. Seidel, “Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart: Die Geschichte des Archivs am Ägyptologischen Institut/Ägyptologischen Museum der Universität Leipzig und der Nachlass Georg Steindorff”, in Georg Steindorff und die deutsche Ägyptologie im 20. Jahrhundert. Wissenshintergründe und Forschungstransfers, S. Voss and D. Raue, eds (Berlin: degruyter, 2016), 520–531.