Longerich Peter. Heinrich Himmler: A Life

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

129.Ho

hne, Mordsache Ro

hm, 224 ff.

130. Klaus-Ju

rgen Mu

ller, Das Heer und Hitler (Stuttgart, 1968), 106 f.

131. Sauer, ‘Mobilm achung’, 951.

132.Ho

hne, Mordsache Ro

hm, 226 f.

133. Ibid. 224 ff.; Herbert, Best, 141 f. Best was assigned SD-Oberabschnitt South

(Bavaria) and kept his existing function, Ober abschnitt South-West (Baden

und Wu

rttemberg).

134. BAB, NS 23/1, 16 May 1934.

135.Ho

hne, Mordsache Ro

hm, 228 f.

136. Vom Woyrsch, the then head of SS-Oberabschnitt South-East, was ordered

by Himmler to come to Berlin on 25 June; the head of SS-Abschnitts XXI

(Go

rlitz), Hildebrand, was also present at this interview. Himmler informed

the two SS-Fu

hrer that an SA revolt was expected and that Silesia was the

main centre of the trouble. See IfZ, GM 07.06, Statement by Udo vom

Woyrsch, 12 July 1949; charge issued by the public prosecutor at the Osnab-

ck state court, 21 April 1956; Judgment, 2 August 1957;

also

Sauer, ‘Mo-

bilmachung’, 955. The date of 28 June 1934 as contained in Herbert, Best,is

only based on Best’s statements.

137. Sauer, ‘Mobilm achung’, 956.

138. Ro

hm was shot by the commandant of KZ Dachau, Eicke, and his deputy.

Gregor Strasser was murdered by an SS man in a cell in the Gestapo prison in

Berlin; see Ho

hne, Mordsache Ro

hm, 294 ff.

139. Herbert, Best, 156 .

140. Vo

lkischer Beobachter, 26 July 1934.

141. See the summary in Herbert, Best, 146.

142. Browder, Foundations, 148 ff.

143. GStA, Rep 90 P 1,H.1,Go

ring to Frick, 5 July 1934. On the same day

ring informed all Oberpra

sidenten and Regierungspra

sidenten in a radio

message that this edict did not apply to the Prussian Gestapo (ibid.); see.

Aronson, Heydrich, 217 f.

144. GStA, Rep 90P 1,H. 1, 4 July 1934.

145.

Ibid.

also in BAB, R 58/239.

146. Ibid. letter from Frick dated 7 July 1934, published in Gu

nter Plum, ‘Staat-

spolizei und innere Verwaltung 1934–1936’, Vierteljahrshefte fu

r Zeitgeschicht e,

13 (1965), 191–224, doc. no. 2. In his reply of 9 July 1934 (GStA, Rep 90 P 1,

H. 1)Go

ring welcomed the new arrangement without referring to the basic

question raised by Frick of the position of the ‘specia l political police’. T here

are more toughly worded drafts in this ﬁle; the ﬁnal version is published in

Plum, ‘Staatspolizei’, doc. no. 3. See Aronson, Heydrich, 219.

147. GStA, Rep 90 P 1,H.1, Frick to Go

ring, 13 July 1934; Frick to the Ober- and

Regierungspra

sidenten, 16 July 1934, published in Plum, ‘Staatspolizei’, doc.

no. 4; see Aronson, Heydrich, 219 f.

790 endnotes

148. On the Vienna July putsch see Gerhard Jagschitz, Der Putsch. Die Nationalso-

zialisten 1934 in O

sterreich (Graz, etc., 1976). For a summary see Sven Felix

Kellerhoff, ‘Schu

sse am Ballhausplatz. Der Put sch gegen O

sterreichs Kanzler

Dollfuß 1934’, in Alexander Demandt (ed.), Das Attentat in der Geschichte

(Cologne, etc., 1996), 345–60.

149. Jagschitz, Putsch, 74 ff.

150. Tagebu

cher Goebbels, 24 June 1934.

151. Jagschitz, Putsch, 81 f.

152. On the course of the putsch see ibid. 99 ff.

153. On the Dollfuss myth see ibid. 190 ff.

154. On the crushing of the putsc h see ibid. 130 ff.

155. Ibid. 145.

156. Ibid. 179 ff.

157. Ibid. 82 ff.

158. Ibid. 184.

159. A copy of the report is in BAB, NS 19/3633 and 3634 and published as Die

Erhebung der o

sterreichischen Nationalsozialisten im Juli 1934. Akten der Histor-

ischen Kommission des Reichsfu

hrers SS (Vienna, etc., 1965).

160. Erhebung, 69.

chapter 8

1. On the diplomatic and domestic background to Himmler’s appointment as

Chief of the German Police see Browder, Foundations, 166 f.

2. BAB, BDC, Research Ordner 425; see Koehl, Black Corps, 109 ff.

3. Published in Paul Hausser, Soldaten wie andere auch. Der Weg der Waffen-SS

(Osnabru

ck, 1967), 232 ff. The edict also stated that up to 25,000 men could

be recruited to bolster the political police.

4. Details in Wegner, Politische Soldaten, 94 f.

5. Ibid. 89.

6. Ibid. 90.

7.Ibid.91; Klaus-Ju

rgen Mu

ller, General Ludwig Beck. Studien u. Dokumente zur

politisch-milita

rischen Vorstellungswelt und Ta

tigkeit des Generalstabschefs des deutschen

Heeres 1933–1938 (Boppard a. Rh., 1980), 68; remarks by the RFSS to the head of

the Truppenamt on 10 October 1934, ibid. doc. no. 14a, 372 ff.

8.Mu

ller, Beck, 68 ff.

9. Wegner, Politische Soldaten, 92 f.

10. BAB, NS 15/35.

11.

BAB,

NS 31/70, RFSS order of 14 January 1935.

12. Schulte, Zwangsarbeit, 62 ff. On the development of the Administration Ofﬁce

within the SS Main Ofﬁce see ibid. 45 ff.

endnotes 791

13. Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 159 ff.; Karin Orth, Das System der nationalsozialis-

tischen Konzentrationslager. Eine politische Organisationsgeschichte (Hamburg,

1999), 31 ff.; on the camp see Stefanie Endlich, ‘Die Lichtenburg 1933–1939.

Haftort politischer Prominenz und Frauen-KZ’, in Wolfgang Benz and Bar-

bara Distel (eds), Herrschaft und Gewalt. Fru

he Konzentrationslager 1933–1939

(Berlin, 2002), 11–64.

14. Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 184 ff.

15. Ibid. 187 ff.; Dirk Lu

erssen, ‘“Moorsoldaten” in Esterwegen, Bu

rgermoor,

Neusustrum. Die fru

hen Konzentrationslager im Emsland 1933 bis 1936 ’, in

Wolfgang Benz and Barbara Distel (eds), Herrschaft und Gewalt. Fru

he Konzen-

trationslager 1933–1939 (Berlin, 2002), 157–210, here 182 ff.

16. Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 192 ff.; Carina Baganz, Erziehung zur ‘Volksge-

meinschaft’. Die fru

hen Konzentrationslager in Sachsen 1933–34/ 37 (Berlin, 2005),

251 ff.

17. Kurt Schilde, ‘Vom Tempelhofer Feld-Gefa

ngnis zum Schutzhaftlager: Das

“Columbia-Haus” in Berlin’, in Wolfgang Benz and Barbara Distel (eds),

Herrschaft und Gewalt. Fru

he Konzentrationslager 1933–1939 (Berlin, 2002), 65–81;

Wohlfeld, ‘Im Hotel “Zum Großherzog”. Das Konzentrationslager Bad

Sulza 1933–1937’, in Wolfgang Benz and Barbara Distel (eds), Instrumentarium der

Macht. Fru

he Konzentrationslager 1933–1937 (Berlin, 2003), 263–75.

18. BAB, NS 19/1447, and GStA, Rep 90 P 13,H.1, Himmler to the Prussian

Finance Minister (referring to the conversation), quoted in Tuchel, Konzen-

trationslager, 309 f., who comments extensively on the document.

19. BAB, NS 19/4002, speech by Himmler to ofﬁcials and employees of the Secret

State Police Ofﬁce on 11 October 1934.

20. BAB, NS 19/4003, speech by the RFSS to the Prussian State Councillors, 5

March 1936: ‘I believe that few people are more aware of just how inadequate

the organization of the Secret State Police Ofﬁce was during the years 1933/ 34

and still was at the beginning of 1935 than the Prime Minister and I.’

21. Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 160.

22. GStA, Rep 90 P 1,H.1, letter from Go

ring dated 15 October 1934, Procedural

instructions for the Secret State Police, also in BAB, R 58/239;

see Aronson,

Hey

drich, 222 f.

23. GStA, Rep 90P 1,H.2, 20 November 1934; see Aronson, Heydrich, 239.

24. GStA, Rep 90P 1,H.2, circular order from Go

ring, 20 November 1934, also in

BAB, R 58/239; see Aronson, Heydrich, 223.

25. Browder, Enforcers , 124 ff.

26. Aronson, Heydrich, 202 ff.

27. Browder, Enforcers , 127 and 132 ff.

28. On the Foreign Department at this time see Thorsten J. Querg, Spionage und

Terror. Das Amt VI des Reichssicherheitshauptamtes 1939–1945, Phil. Diss. Berlin

1997 [Microﬁche], 157 ff. According to Browder, Enforcers, 176, Department

792 endnotes

III had only 41 staff in 1937. On the early activities of the SD abroad see

hne, Orden, 210 ff. and 259 ff.

29. Browder, Foundations, 175.

30. Browder, Enforcers, 92.

31. Quoted in Aronson, Heydrich, 196 (from the dissolved Slg. Schumacher

[BAB]).

32. BAB, R 58/243, Police Institute Charlottenburg, Organization of the Secret

State Police. The service instruction is undated but was issued before Himm-

ler’s appointment as Chief of the German Police.

33. IfZ, Partei-Kanzlei, circular 24/36 of the Fu

hrer’s deputy, 14 February 1936,

which repeats the order of the head of the Security Main Ofﬁce of 8 December

1935.

34. Browder, Foundations, 179, quotes a summary which is in the BAM in Freiburg

under ﬁle no. Z 518z.

35. On the whole subject of the relations between military intelligence (the

Abwehr) and the Gestapo during the ﬁrst years of the regime see Browder,

Foundations, 172 ff.

36. BAB, R 58/242, minutes of the meeting dated 17 January 1935; see also

Browder, Foundations, 180 ff.

37. Browder, Foundations, 180 f.

38. Ibid. 181; GStA, Rep 90

1,H

.2, Blomberg to Pr. Finance Minister and to the

Reich and Pr. Interior Minister 22 January 1935, Minutes of the meeting dated

17 January 1935 enclosed; BAB, R 43 II/391, Blomberg’s letter of 1 July 1935.

39. Browder, Foundations, 183; Herbert, Best, 184; the agreement was made on 21

December 1936.

40. BAB, NS 19/3576; Martin Broszat, ‘Nationalsozialistische Konzentrationslager

1933–1945’, in Hans Buchheim et al., Anatomie des SS-Staates, 7th edn. (Mu-

nich, 1999), 321– 445, here 352; Tuchel, Konzentrationslage r, 108; Browder,

Foundations, 188.

41. Browder, Foundations, 192 f.

42. RVBl 1935, 577 f.; see Browder, Foundations, 194.

43. BAB, NS 19/1447; Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 108 f.

44. GStA, R ep. 90 P 10

also doc. PS-3751,inIMT, vol. 33 , pp. 56 ff.; see

Aronson, Heydrich, 235.

45. BAB, R 22/1462;Go

ring sent Himmler’s draft out on 3 May 1935.

46. GStA, Rep 90 P 2,H.3, meeting of 27 June 1935; see also BAB, R 22/1462,

rtner’s minute of 27 June 1935; see Gruchmann, ‘Justiz’, 553 f.

47. On the persecution of the KPD in this period, Horst Duhnke, Die KPD von

1933 bis 1945 (Cologne, 1972), 189 ff.; Klaus Mammach, Widerstand 1933–1939.

Geschichte der deutschen antifaschistischen Widerstandsbe wegung im Inland und in der

Emigration (Cologne, 1984), 84 ff. and 162 ff.; Allan Merson, Kommunistischer

Widerstand in Nazideutschland (Bonn, 1999), 82 ff.

endnotes 793

48. GStA, Rep 90 P 104; discussed by Browder, Foundations, 189 f., and Aronson,

Heydrich, 238 ff.

49. Duhnke, KPD, 190 f.; Merson, Widerstand, 157.

50. Duhnke, KPD, 199 f.

51. Detlev J. K. Peukert, Die KPD im Widerstand. Verfolgung und Untergrundarbeit an

Rhein und Ruhr 1933–1945 (Wuppe rtal, 1980), 144.

52. Mammach, Widerstand, 51.

53. Ibid.

54. Ibid. 53.

55. Mehringer, ‘KPD in Bayern’, 85 ff.

56. Ibid. 135.

57. BAB, R 58/22 71, Deputy Chief and Inspector of the Gestapo, 12 July 1935;

Johannes Tuchel, ‘Gest apa und Reichssicherheitshauptamt. Die Berliner Zen-

tralinstitutionen der Gestapo’, in Gerhard Paul und Klaus-Michael Mallmann

(eds), Die Gestapo. Mythos und Realita

t (Darmstadt, 1995), 84–100 , here 91 f.

58. BAB, R 58/389,

note for Heydrich, 18 Septemb

er 1935; see also Tuchel,

Konzentrationslager, 312.

59. Duhnke, KPD, 201. According to a survey initiated by the KPD party leader-

ship, at the end of 1935,of422 leading functionaries (members of the Central

Committee, the district headquarters, and the mass organizations) 119 had been

arrested and 24 killed; 125 had emigrated and around 10 per cent had left the

party as a result of the persecution (Mammach, Widerstand, 57).

60. Browder, Foundatio ns, 197 has provided various examples. Thus the political

police in the two small Lippe states were subordinated to the Prussian Gestapo

in March and April 1935 to act as branches of it; in order to enhance the

authority of the Gestapo leadership, already in May 1934 the Gestapo had

begun to promote individual local branch ofﬁces to regional branches with

authority over neighbouring Stapo local branches. Internally they were repeat-

edly instructed to avoid committing arbitrary acts against prisoners, and in

September 1935 Best ordered that in future press statements about ‘measures

taken by the state police’ should be made more convincing (BAB, R 58/243, 20

September 1935).

61. Browder, Foundations, 196 f.; on Best’s appointment see Herbert, Best, 147 f.

62. However, he had been unable to achieve his original intention of promoting

the Gestapa to be a ministry. The regulation th at the chief of the Gestapo

should himself decide what action was required to combat all ‘activities

threatening the state’ was somewhat modiﬁed by the formula, ‘in agreement

with the Minister of the Interior’. While the law envisaged closer links

between the district ofﬁces of the Stapo and the district governors (Regierung-

spra

sidenten) (PrGS 1936, 21 f.), this aim was und ermined by various decrees

implementing the law signed by Go

ring which, in particular, qualiﬁed the

requirement contained in the law for the Stapo ofﬁces to report to the

provincial governors (Oberpra

sidenten) and receive instructions from them

794 endnotes

(BAB, R 58/241, Position of the Oberpra

sidenten vis-a

-vis the Organs of the

Gestapo, 10 February 1936, and 2 April 1936 re: the Ending of the Situation

Reports of the Regierungspra

sidenten, published as doc. no. 8 in Plum,

‘Staatspolizei’). The complaint of the Oberpra

sident of the province of East

Prussia to the Prussian Prime Minister dated 28 March 1936 clearly shows how

the ofﬁces of the state police in East Prussia managed to remove themselves

from the authority of the internal state administration (GStA, Rep 90 P 3). On

this question see Gruchmann, ‘Justiz’, 559, and Browder, Foundations, 214 ff.

See also Go

ring’s instructions of 29 February 1936 (BAB, R 58/243): ‘The

Regierungspra

sidenten shall inform the Gestapa about the political situation

and about political event s through bi-monthly situation reports and reports of

events. The Gestapa shall determine the details of what these repo rts are to

cover [ ...] The district ofﬁces of the Gestapo shall inform the Geastapa and

the responsible Oberpra

sidenten and Regierungspra

sidenten about the political

situation and political events. The Gestapa shall determin e the details of what

these reports are to cover.’

63. Das Schwarze Korps, 8, 15, 22, and 29 May 1935.

64. See above all the following articles: ‘Die Gestapo’ (the style of the article

suggests that Werner Best was the author), Vo

lkischer Beobachter, 23 January

1936; Reinhar

d Heydrich, ‘Die Beka

fung der Staatsfei nde’, Deutsches Recht,

1936, 121–3 (April 1936); Werner Best, ‘Die Geheime Staatspolizei’, Deutsches

Recht, 1936, 125–8 (April 1936); id., ‘Der Reichsfu

hrer SS and Chef der

Deutschen Polizei’, Deutsches Recht, 1936, 257–8 ( July 1936); Himmler’s

speech of 5 March 1936 (BAB, NS 19/4003) is also available as a booklet:

Rede des Reichsfu

hrers-SS vor den Preußischen Staatsra

ten. 5.Ma

rz 1936 im Haus der

Flieger (1936).

65. Vo

lkischer Beobachter, 23 January 1936: ‘The state must not be content with

investigating crimes of high treason and treason that have already taken place

and punishing the offenders. It is much more important to pre-empt such

crimes and thereby to destroy the roots of these threats to the state.’

66. In his articles in the Deutsches Recht Best opposed any attemp t at subjecting the

political police to ‘legal norms’ (April 1936); they required no ‘speciﬁc legiti-

mation by law’ in order to be able to carry out their duties ( July 1936).

67. The term ‘State protection corps’ (Staatsschutzkorps) is used in an article in the

lkischer Beobachter of 23 Januar

y 1936;

it refers to the Gestapo. In his series of

articles in Das Schwarze Korps of May 1935 Heydrich had already referred to the

SS, insofar as it was serving in the state police, as the ‘domestic political

protection corps of the National Socialist state’ (29 May 1935).

68. The Gestapo article in the Vo

lkischer Beobachter of 21 January 1936 states that the

Gestapo knows that it ‘must directly hurt a large number of people’.

69. Published as a booklet: Heinrich Himmler, Die Schutzstaffel als antibolschewis-

tische Kampforganisation (Munich, 1936).

70. BAB, NS 19/4003.

endnotes 795

71. See above p. 183.

72. In his letter to the Reich Finance Minister of 21 September 1935 Frick

demanded the reintegration of the political police into the general police and

the transfer of the police from the states to the Reich (BAB, NS 19/3581, also

in R 18/5627; see also Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 313). In November 1935

Frick sent the head of the Reich Chancellery, Hans Heinrich Lammers, a

memorandum composed by Daluege which was intended to prove the need

to transfer the police to the Reich (BAB, R 43 II/391). It is unclea r whether at

this poin t Frick was fully informed about the shift in power relations in

Himmler’s favour that had already occurred. See also doc. PS-775,inIMT,

vol. 26, pp. 289 ff., undated memo by Daluege in which he presented the

alternatives of locating responsibility for all questions involving the political

police either with the Reich Interior Minister or with the Gestapa, which in

this case would become a Reich ministry.

73. BAB, NS 19/1447, 18 October 1935; see also Herbert, Best, 169.

74. The mention of Frick’s ‘Gestapa edict’ must refer to his letter of 21 September

1935 (see n. 72); see also Tuchel, Konzentrationslager, 313.

75. BAB NS 19/3582, note by Himmler 18 October 1935. The minute states:

‘There were lengthy discussions about the question of the leadership acade-

mies, internal unrest and the Verfu

gungstruppe, about the question of the

asocial elements and how to secure them in special re-education camps, as well

about tougher action against the communists. The Fu

hrer approved the

leadership schools in principle and, within the framework of the consolidation

of the whole of the police force, they are to become the responsibility of the

Reichsf

hre

r-SS either in the role of a state secretary in the Interior Ministry or

directly under the Fu

hrer.’ See Wegner, Politische Soldaten, 109. The mention

of ‘approval for the leadership academies’, which had in fact already been

founded, must refer to their ﬁnancing being taken over by the state.

76. Browder, Foundations, 207; Peter Hoffmann, Die Sicherheit des Diktators. Hitlers

Leibwachen, Schutzmaßnahmen, Residenzen, Hauptquartiere (Munich, etc., 1975),

51 ff.; BAB, R 18/5627, note by Pfundtner for Frick, 21 October 1935, and

R 43 II/102, Lammers to Himmler, 22 October 1935;NS19/2196, Himmler’s

minute after his interview with Hitler, 18 October 1935 : ‘After Lammers had

been immediately summoned the security commando was subordinated to the

Reichsfu

hrer-SS.’

77. BAB, NS 19/1269, two letters to the Reich Minister of Justice, 6 November

1935; see also Tuchel, Konze ntrationslager, 315 f.

78. BAB, R 22/1467, Himmler’s agreement in principle of 6 January 1936, and

R 22/5032,Gu

rtner to Frick, 27 March 1936, concerning the arrangement

agreed in the meantime with Himmler. For further details see Gruchmann,

‘Justiz’, 571 ff.

79.

Edi

ct Concerning the Appointment of a Chief of the German Police in the

Reich Ministry of the Interior, RGBl 1933 I, 487 f.

796 endnotes

80. BAB, R 43 II/391, contains a copy of Himmler’s order of 26 June 1936,

appointing Daluege and Heydrich as heads of the new main ofﬁces. There is

also a copy of a Himmler order for the allocation of duties within the spher e of

the Chief of the German Police in w hich he determined the respective

responsibilities of the order and security police.

81. RMBliV 1936,Sp.1339.

82. Thus, for example, in a letter dated 10 December 1937 the Baden Gauleiter,

Wagner, complained about the fact that ‘the Reich Governor who carries the

political responsibility has no inﬂuence on the political police’ (Stolle, Gehe ime

Staatspolizei, 95, quoting Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe, 233/27892).

chapter 9

1. BAB, R 19/379. In the report in the Vo

lkischer Beobachter about Himmler’s

induction as Chief of the German Police the anti-Semitic statements in

Himmler’s speech were excluded, probably in view of the caution being

exercised in Jewish persecution in the Olympic year of 1936.

2. Best, ‘Reichsfu

hrer SS’, referred here to the ‘potency of the State protection

corps’, in that it ‘now links the German police with the ideological commit-

ment of the SS’.

3. Hans Frank et al., Grundfragen der deutschen Polizei. Bericht u

ber die konstituierende

Sitzung des Ausschusses fu

r Polizeirecht der Akademie fu

r Deutsches Recht am 11.

Oktober 1936 (Hamburg, 1936), Himmler’s contribution, 11– 16.

4.Gu

nter Neliba, Wilhelm Frick. Der Legalist des Unrechtsstaates. Eine politische

Biographie (Paderborn, etc., 1992).

5. ‘Aufgaben und Aufbau der Polizei des Dritten Reiches’, in Hans Pfundtner

(ed.), Dr. Wilhelm Frick und sein Ministerium. Aus Anlaß des 60. Geburtstages des

Reichs und preußischen Ministers des Innern Dr. Wilhelm Frick am 12.Ma

rz 1937

(Munich, 1937), 125–30, quotations 128–30.

6. Reinhard Heydrich, ‘Aufgaben und Aufbau der Sic herheitspolizei im Dritten

Reich’, ibid. 149–53, quotation 150. The volume also contained a contribution

from Kurt Daluege: ‘Die Ordnungspolizei und ihre Entstehung im Dritten

Reich’, 133 –45.

mmler, Schutzstaffel, 29.

8. BAB NS 19/4004.

9. Ibid.

10. On the German Police Day see Robert Gellately, Hingeschaut und weggesehen.

Hitler und sein Volk (Munich, 2002), 67 ff.

11. On the Ges tapo myth see Robert Gellately, ‘Allwissend und allgegenwa

rtig?

Entstehung, Funktion und Wandel des Gestapo-Mythos’, in Gerhard Paul and

Klaus-Michael Mallmann (eds), Die Gestapo. Mythos und Realita

t (Darmstadt,

1995), 47–70. Gellately has shown here and in his book Hingeschaut, with

endnotes 797

numerous examples, that there was extensive reporting of the Gestapo and of

the existence of concentration camps. As examples of such articles, in some

cases by leading ﬁgures in the police apparatus, that often pointed the way

ahead see Dr B. (Best), ‘Rechtsstellung des Reichsfu

hrers-SS und Chefs der

Deutschen Polizei’, Vo

lkischer Beobachter, 4 June 1937; Best, ‘Die pra

ventive

Aufgabe der Geheimen Staatspolizei’, Frankfurter Zeitung, 3 March 1938; Hey-

drich, ‘Die deutsche Sicherheitspolizei. Z um Tag der Deutschen Polizei’,

lkischer Beobachter, 28 January 1939, elucidates the concept of police preven-

tive action; the article ‘Die SS-Totenkopfverba

nde’, Vo

lkischer Beobachter, 26

January 1939, contains comments about the function of the KZ.

12. BAB, NS 19/4004, Tag der Deutschen Polizei, 16 Januar y 1937. Heydrich

made similar comments in the Vo

lkischer Beobachter of 15 January 1937 (‘Zum

Tag der Deutschen Polizei’), where he wrote the police need people to ‘offer

to help’ in order ‘to secure the existence and the strength of the nation against

all threats and all attacks’.

13. BAB, NS 19/4003, speech at the celebration of the summer solstice on the

Brocken, 22 May 1936.

14. On the history of the Gestapo see Holger Berschel, Bu

rokratie und Terror. Das

Judenreferat der Gestapo Du

sseldorf 1933–1945 (Essen, 2001); Browder, Enforcers;

id. Foundations; Wolfgang Dierker, Himmlers Glaubenskrieger. Der Sicherheits-

dienst der SS und seine Religionspolitik 1933–1941 (P

aderborn, etc., 2002); Rober

Gellately, Die Gestapo und die deutsche Gesellschaft. Die Durchsetzung der Rassen-

politik 1933–1945 (Paderborn, etc., 1993); id., Hingeschaut; Eric A. Johnson, Der

nationalsozialistische Terror. Gestapo, Juden und gewo

hnliche Deutsche (Berlin,

2001); Paul and Mallmann (eds), Gestap o; Reinhard Mann, Protest und Kontrolle

im Dritten Reich. Nationalsozialistische Herrschaft im Alltag einer rheinischen Groß-

stadt (Frankfurt a. M., etc., 1987); Stolle, Geheime Staatspolizei; Wildt, Genera-

tion (on the Gestapo in this period see 214–62).

15. Mann, Protest, 292. Other police auth orities, administrative agencies, busi-

nesses, or Nazi organizations were responsible for initiating 33 per cent of

the investigations, 13 per cent were the result of interrogations. There was,

however, a selective procedure according to which some categories of case

(e.g. investigations of Jews) were not represented and others (e.g. investigations

of communists) are under-represented.

16. Johnson, Terror, 392 ff.

17. Burkhard Jellonnek, ‘Staatspolizeiliche Fahndungs- und Ermittlungsmethoden

gegen Homosexuelle. Regionale Differenzen und Gemeinsamkeiten’, in Ger-

hard Paul and Klaus-Michael Mallmann (eds), Die Gestapo. Mythos und Realita

(Darmstadt, 1995), 343–56, here 350, notes a ﬁgure of 87.5 per cent for

denunciations in cases of malicious statements (Heimtu

cke) for the Saarbru

cken

Gestapo ofﬁce; according to Johnson, Terror, denunciations of Christians,

hovah’s

Witnesses, homosexuals, and those subject to political persecution

were relatively infrequent (pp. 251, 269, 312 ff., and 393). Robert Gellately

798 endnotes

notes in his study of the Wu

rzburg Gestapo that 54 per cent of all cases of ‘racial

disgrace’ (sexual relations of ‘Aryans’ with Jews) and 59 per cent of all cases

which involved too close contact with Jews derived from denu nciations by the

population; 24 per cent and 7 per cent respectively derived from interroga-

tions, 7 and 14 per cent respectively derived from information from other

organizations (Gestapo, 162). For a distribution pattern of denunciations for the

individual categories see Stolle, Geheime Staatspolizei, 252 ff.

18. Johnson, Terror, 392 ff.

19. Elisabeth Kohlhaas, ‘Die Mitarbeiter der regionalen Staatspolizeistellen. Quan-

titative und qualitative Befunde zur Personalausstattung der Gestapo’, in Ger-

hard Paul and Klaus-Michael Mallmann (eds), Die Gestapo. Mythos und Realita

(Darmstadt, 1995), 219–35, 221 ff. There are ﬁgures for January 1934 and June

1935 in GStA, Rep 90 P 13,H.2, and Rep 90 P 14,H.1; BAB, R 58 /610,

contains the results of a questio nnaire ‘Personnel complement of the Stapo

ofﬁces and Stapo regional ofﬁces on 31 March 1937’.

20. Kohlhaas, ‘Mitarbeiter’, 227; Browder, Foundations, 56, on those who came in

from outside.

21. BAB, R 58/610, ﬁgures for 31 March 1937. The actual strength is given, the

number of posts planned for is usually somewhat higher. Stapo ofﬁces, which

also

had

to watch over sections of the frontier, were invariably better staffe d;

thus the Ko

stlin ofﬁce had 86 ofﬁcers, although the district had a population of

only about 700,000. See Koh lhaas, ‘Mitarbeiter’, 226 f.

22. Walter Otto W eyrauch, Gestapo V-Leute. Tatsachen und Theorie des Geheim-

dienstes. Untersuchungen zur Geheimen Staatspolizei wa

hrend der nationalsozialis-

tischen Herrschaft (Frankfurt a. M., 1989 ). According to Weyrauch the Frankfurt

Stapo had a list of 1,200 informal agents (p. 11); see also Kaus-Michael Mal-

lmann, ‘Die V-Leute der Gestapo. Umrisse einer kollektiven Biographie’, in

Gerhard Paul and Klaus-Michael Mallmann (eds), Die Gestapo. Mythos und

Realita

t (Darmstadt, 1995), 268–87.

23. Circular edict of the RFSSuChdDtPol, 15 February 1938,inRMBliV 1938,

cols. 285 ff.

24. On the SD after 1926 see Browder, Enforcers, 210 ff.; Wildt, Generation, 378 ff.;

and Michael Wildt (ed.), Die Judenpolitik des SD 1935 bis 1938. Eine Dokumenta-

tion (Munich, 1995).

25. Wildt (ed.), Die Judenpolitik, 27.

26. BAB, R 58/239.

27. Aronson, Heydrich, 212 f. Reinhard Ho

hn,

head

of Central Department II 1,

became a professor of law at Berlin University in 1935 and had to leave the SD

in 1937 (Wildt, Generation, 378 f.); Franz Six, head of Department II (Inland) in

the SD Main Ofﬁce, who was an expert on the press, became a lecturer in

nigsberg in 1937 and a full professor and Dean of the Faculty of Foreign

Studies at Berlin University in 1940 (Lutz Hachmeister, Der Gegnerforscher. Die

Karriere des SS-Fu

hrers Franz Alfred Six (Munich, 1998)); before joining the SD

endnotes 799