1 Gooch, G. P., History and Historians in the Nineteenth Century (New York, 1913; 2nd ed.)Google Scholar; Barnes, H. E., A History of Historical Writing (Norman, Okla., 1937)Google Scholar.

2 Gooch, , op. cit., 424Google Scholar; Barnes, , op. cit., 259–60Google Scholar.

3 Rust, Bernhard and Krieck, Ernst, Das nationalsozialistische Deuischland uni die Wissenschaft (Hamburg, 1936)Google Scholar, with Foreword by Walter Frank; translated into English as National Socialist Germany and the Pursuit of Learning (no place or date of publication). (In this and the following notes all publications in the series Schriftenreihe des Reichsinstituts für Ceschichle des neuen Deutschlands are marked with an asterisk).

4 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 1 (7)Google Scholar. (Page references in parenthesis are to the German original).

5 E.g., in News in Brief, IV (07 31, 1936), 189–94Google Scholar; and Hochschuk und Ausland, XIV (08, 1936), 679–98Google Scholar.

6 See Frank's, W.“Foreword” to Rust and Krieck, op. cit., 2(7)Google Scholar; also his Historie und Leben (Hamburg, 1937), 36Google Scholar.

7 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 5–6(11)Google Scholar.

8 Ibid., 6–8 (12–13). Not counting Austria, 1,145 university teachers (not including assistants and several other classifications) have been dismissed of whom 60 had been teaching history, or between 15 and 21 per cent of the total university teaching staff. Hundreds of others have been “transferred” to other universities. Data taken from Hartshorne, Edward Y. Jr., The German Universities and National Socialism (London, 1937), 93, 98–99, 100Google Scholar. See also his “The German Universities and the Government,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CC (11, 1938, 210–34Google Scholar.

9 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 8 (13–14)Google Scholar.

10 Hartshorne, Edward Y. Jr., “The German Universities and the Government,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CC (11, 1938) 212Google Scholar.

11 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 8(14)Google Scholar. Rosenberg, Alfred, Blut und Ehre (Munich, 1936), 256–63Google Scholar; same, “Freiheit der Wissenschaft,” Völkischer Beobachter, Jan. 30, 1936.

12 Hartshorne, , op. cit., 212, 216–17Google Scholar.

13 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 8, 12, 15 (14, 18, 21–22)Google Scholar.

14 Ibid., 22 (33).

15 For a brief examination of modern freedom of teaching and research from historical and philosophical points of view by a German scholar now in the United States see Ulich, Robert, “Libertas Philosophandi,” Harvard Educational Review, VII (01, 1937), 36–51Google Scholar. See further Cheyney, Edward P. (ed.), “Freedom of Inquiry andjt Expression,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CC (11, 1938)Google Scholar. The attitude of 1,284 American scientists from 167 universities and research institutes is declared in a “manifesto assailing the Nazi conception of science as destructive of genuine scientific thought and progress and summoning scientists to take active part in the defense of democracy as the sole means of preserving intellectual freedom and insuring scientific advance,” New York Times, December 11, 1938.

16 Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 25, 1935; Hislorische Zeitschrift, CLIII (1934), 220–23Google Scholar.

17 Frank, is author of Hofprediger Adolf Stoecker (Hamburg, 1928)Google Scholar, Nationalismus und Demokratie im Frankreich der dritten Republik (Hamburg, 1933)Google Scholar and other works. For an analysis of Frank's book on French Democracy which sets into clear relief his strength as a historical writer (fascinating narrative, industry, and extensive knowledge of sources) and his weakness (unhistorical black-white painting, too much dependence on external symptoms rather than essential characteristics; and above all, a desire to prove a thesis with the help of isolated facts) see Georg, Hans, “Playdoyer oder Geschichtsschreibung?” Hochland, XXXI (06, 1934), pp. 273–276Google Scholar. Georg, concludes “The book is most valuable not as a historical work but as testimony for the political mentality of a generation which was so repulsed by the parliamentarism which it experienced that it was no longer able to see it as a historical fact of the nineteenth century or as a special result of French political and social development” (p. 276)Google Scholar. He was given the title “Professor” by Hitler, in 05, 1935Google Scholar, in “recognition of his scientific merits”; see editorial note in Völkischer Beobachter, Sept. 25, 1935.

18 According to Frank's, “Foreword” to , Rust and , Krieck, op. cit., 1(5)Google Scholar.

19. Völkischer Beobachter, September 25, 1935.

20 Historische Zeilschrift, CLIII (1934), 223Google Scholar.

21 See “Neugestaltete Geschichtswissenschaft,” Völkischer Beobacher, Sept. 26, 1935; somewhat reserved editorials “Geschichte in Front” and “Geschichte aus dem Volk” in the Catholic daily Germania, Oct. 8 and 20, 1935, respectively.

22 Frank, W., Zunft und Nation (Hamburg, 1935), 29Google Scholar; reprinted in Hislorische Zeitschrift, CLIII (1934), 6–23. The now defunct Reichskommission was accused of being under the influence of Jews. See Grau, Wilhelm, Die Judenfrage als Aufgabe der neuen Geschichteforschung (Hamburg, 1935, 2nd ed.) 32, n. 10Google Scholar. In 1931, its members were: Friedrich Meinecke (Berlin), Chairman; Oncken, Berlin; Brandenburg, Leipsig; Brackmann, Berlin; Finke, Freiburg i. Br.; Goetr, Leipzig; Hansen, Cologne; Hartung, Berlin; Herkner, Berlin; Hintze, Berlin; Otto Hoetzsch, Berlin; Gustav Mayer, Berlin; Erich Marcks, Berlin; Ritter Mertz von Quirnheim, Potsdam; Karl Alexander von Miiller, Munich; Riedner, Munich; Prelate G. Schreiber, Münster in Westf; Alois Schulte, Bonn; Schumacher, Berlin; Triepel, Berlin; see list of names and positions in Handbuch für das Deutsche Reich 1931 (Berlin, 1931), p. 173Google Scholar.

23 Frank, W., Deutsche Wissenschaft and die Judenfrage (Hamburg, 1937), 39Google Scholar;

24 See n. 22.

25 (Hamburg, 1934). This publication preceded the Schriftenreihe (see n. 3) but fundamentally belongs to it.

26 In the same category belong Grau, op. cit., and Grunsky, Hans Alfred, Die Freiheit des Geistes (Hamburg, 1935)Google Scholar.

27 Frank, W., Zunft und Nation, 25–26Google Scholar.

28 Ibid; 22–23; Historische Zeitschrift, CLIII (1934), 220–23Google Scholar.

29 Frank, W., Historie und Leben 24–25Google Scholar.

30 Ibid., 26. Frank explained that “in an age when…. forty year old ones seized the supreme power over great nations…. it would have been an absurdity to allow the Historical Commissions to continue as a monopoly of sexagenarians”; the young men “are especially to do the active historical writing of this Institute,” see his Zunft und Nation, 24, 31; see also his Historic und Leben 26–27 and Deutsche Wissenschaft und die Judenfrage, 11, 40 See n. 59.

31 Frank, W., Zunft und Nation, 27–28Google Scholar.

32 Ibid., 28–30. These topics were “chosen” by the young men and “not ordered from above.” New projects dealing with German political leadership during the World War, Austria's role in German history of the 19th and 20th century and others have been added since; see Frank, , Historie und Leben, 26–27Google Scholar. The Institute now has a special division, “The Jewish Question,” see Grau, op. cit., and Stapel, Wilhelm, Die literarische Vorherrschaft der Juden in Deutschland 1918 bis 1933 (Hamburg, 2nd ed., 1937)Google Scholar.

33 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 34Google Scholar.

34 Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 2(7)Google Scholar.

35 Rust stated in his Heidelberg address: “In presenting this conviction that the development of science is inseparable from racial and national character we are asserting a fact, not imposing a demand from without” (his italics), Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 13 (19)Google Scholar. Professor Krieck added “…. every worthwhile achievement in the sphere of the natural sciences, no less than in the sciences of culture, has been intimately bound up with the fundamental racial characteristics of the people concerned, and with its historic task,” ibid., 21 (31–32). See further Gross, Walter, Rasse, Weltanschauung, Wissenschaft (Berlin, 1936)Google Scholar and Der Rassengedanke im neuen Geschichtsbild (Berlin, 1936)Google Scholar.

36 Professor Krieck in his address: “If…., the question arises as to the source and meaning of it all, we reply that scientific research is intimately bound up with the fundamental character of our people, their national individuality, and their historic mission,” Rust, and Krieck, , op. cit., 18 (26–27)Google Scholar. On “the freedom of the mind” under National Socialism see also Grunsky, op. cit., and Goebbels, Joseph, Wesen und Cesialt des Nalionalsozialismus (Berlin, 1934)Google Scholar.

37 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 8Google Scholar.

38 Frank, , Kämpfende Wissenschaft, 12–17Google Scholar. For other views of Treitschke see Meinecke, Friedrich, “Geleitwort zum 150. Bande der Historischen Zeitschrift und zum 100. Geburstag Heinrich von Treitschkes,” Historische Zeitschrift, CL (1934), 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Rudolf Craemer, “Uber die völkische Haltung Treitschkes,” ibid., CLVII (1938), 77–105.

39 Frank, , Historie und Leben, 27Google Scholar; see also Pleyer, Kleo, Die Kräte des Grenzkampfes in Ostmitteleuropa (Hamburg, 1937)Google Scholar. Pleyer is a Sudeten German. An amusing concept of patriotism is indicated in a review of the 3d edition of a historical work by Schuchhardt, Carl: “As compared with the 2nd edition, Alteuropa shows an increase in size from 307 to 355 pages. A more exacting look indicates, however, that this is merely the result of a change from Latin to Gothic (German) letters,” Historische Zeitschrift, CLIII (1935–1936), 565–67Google Scholar. A book Volk und Volkstum, edited by G. Schreiber, was criticized for not stressing the “community of the entire German people within her European neighbor nations,” ibid., CLVI (1937), 385.

40 Frank, , Zunft und Nation. 16–17Google Scholar.

41 For some comments on his history professors see his Kämpfende Wissenschafte 19, 20; Deutsche Wissenschaft und die Judenfrage 23, 27, 31, 39–40. For a defense of Hermann Oncken against Frank's sharp attacks, by Friednch Meinecke, see the latter's review of Frank's, Kämpfende Wissenschaft in Historische Zeitschrift, CLII (1935), 101–103Google Scholar. This was the second from the last issue of the Zeitschrift edited by Meinecke…. Frank's favorite teacher at Munich, Karl Alexander von Müller, became his successor as Editor. For his editorial program see his “Zum Geleit,” ibid., CLIII (1935), 1. Meinecke's defense of Oncken is in turn attacked by Krieck, Ernst, “Schöpferisches Epigonentum,” Völkischer Beobachter, 07 14, 1935Google Scholar. The termination of Meinecke's work as editor was preceded by the publication, under the general heading of “Miscellaneous” and without signature or comment, of “Tragebuchdiktate Leopold von Rankes aus dem Jahre 1881” in which Ranke protested against and regretted Antisemitism, praising the Jews as citizens, soldiers, and intellectuals; see Historische Zeitschrift, CLI (1935), 332–35Google Scholar. By contrast, by 1938 it was possible for the Jew baiter Julius Streicher to address the Reichsinstitut in a lecture lasting several hours and to have his speech reported in somewhat laudatory terms in the Historische Zeitschrift, CLIX (1938), 220–22Google Scholar, in a report of a conference of the Reichsinstitut. It should be added that a belated but extended and very favorable review of Meinecke's, book, Schiller und der lndividualitätsgedanke (Leipzig, 1937)Google Scholar appeared in the Historische Zeitschrift, CLX (1939), 359–63, which quoted in conclusion a praise of Meinecke's work by his successor as Editor of the Historische Zeitschrift, Karl Alexander von Miiller, which the latter had published in 1932.

42 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 19Google Scholar.

43 Ibid., 19, 20. Frank also speaks of “the old iron” which does not readily yield to hammering and, therefore, “must be broken into pieces and thrown in the corner,” Kämpfende Wissenschaft, 35. E. Y. Hartshorne reports in his book The German Universities and National Socialism that in 1935 the Rektor of the University of Berlin forbade faculty members “to write any articles for scientific journals without first submitting them to him” (op. cit., 171). The author adds: “Where a difference in opinion may calldown the retort of being a traitor to one's people complicated pedagogical institution like the Seminar…. lose all point’ ibid., 171. Speaking of the suspected ‘intellectuals.’ Frank seems to have in mind Meinecke's resignation from the Histroische Zeitschrift (see n. 41).

44 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 9–12Google Scholar.

45 Frank, , Historie und Leben, 15–16Google Scholar; the English text of the quotation is taken from Nietzsche, FriedrichThus Spake Zaralhustra (translated by Common, Thomas) (New York, no date), 136Google Scholar.

47 Frank, , Kämpfende Wissenschaft, 18–21Google Scholar.

46 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 10Google Scholar.

48 Frank, , Zunft und Nation 12–16Google Scholar.

49 Frank, , Historie und Leben 29–30Google Scholar. Frank ordered for the anteroom of the Reichsinstitut a carved “Sword and Lyre” as a “symbol” of its work; ibid., 30.

50 Ibid.

51 Frank, , Kämpfende Wissenschaft, 33Google Scholar.

52 See Barnes, , op. cit., 246Google Scholar.

53 There is, of course, much disagreement as to whether this is possible for any historian; see Barnes, op. cit., 266–76 and 392–97 and his references, especially to Beard, Charles A.. Hartung, Fritz in his “Staatsgefüge und Zusammenbruch des zweiten Reiches,” Historische Zeitschrift (1934–1936), 528–44Google Scholar, states cogently that Ranke's demand for objectivity “in no way implies giving up one's own, necessarily subjective judgment; rather it constitutes an endeavor to understand the men of the past, their thoughts, deeds and omissions out of the conditions of their time, not to criticize them in accordance with the political requirements of our time.”

54 Gooch, , op. cit, 78Google Scholar.

55 Gooch, G. P., in Cambridge Modern History, (New York, 1910, vol. XII), 824Google Scholar.

56 Quoted in Hartshorne, , op. cit., 116 n. 1Google Scholar, citing Die Europäische Revue, 1927.

57 Frank, , Zunft und Nation, 33–34Google Scholar. Frank refers to the Reichsinstitut as “the first army corps” for German's, “march in the future,” in Deutsche Wissenschaft und die Judenfrage, 37Google Scholar.

58 Quoted in Gooch, , Historic and Historians in the Nineteenth Century, 78Google Scholar.

59 Frank admits that at the first Historical Convention under National Socialist auspices in Erfurt, summer of 1937, “many historians were seen who were not present,” including “the overwhelming part of the liberal and clerical opposition.” The convention was well attended, however, by newspapermen, government officials, high military officers, and especially by the “young generation,” see his Historie und Leben, 5–6. The Convention is reported at length in Historische Zeitschrift, CLVI (1937), 659–67Google Scholar. Frank gives examples of the resistance of pre-Nazi historians in his Deutsche Wissemchaft und die Judenfrage, 30–34. The Historische Zeiischrift had Jewish reviewers of books on the Jewish question as late as March, 1935 (the last issue edited by F. Meinecke), according to Grau, , op. cit., 14Google Scholar.