The Jewish Community in Hamburg 1860-1943

The Jewish Community in Hamburg 1860-1943

Hohenzollern Empire - Weimar Republic - National Socialist State

III. The Deutsch-Israelitische Gemeinde/German-Israelite Community in the Weimar Republic:
The manifold social, economic and political consequences of the First World War affected Hamburg Jews as it did other Germans. Traditional structures and values lost their legitimacy. The attempt made by the Weimar Republic to create a new and improved social and economic stability with the assurance of liberal freedoms in a situation of moral uncertainty was for many an insoluble contradiction.
Also within the Jewish community it was sensed that a new era had dawned in which economic risk and opportunity were closely connected. The solidarity of the Jewish community offered security in a time of radical change. This could have led to a strong new community life but for some members traditional Jewish values seemed out of keeping with the time.
The community experienced these conflicts in various ways, further intensified by the new generation of members. The community was able to make compromises the majority could accept. For many Hamburg Jews the Weimar Republic appeared to be the heyday of German Judaism in comparison with earlier and later periods.
1. Demographic Structure:
Hamburg Jews here refers to Jews born in Hamburg. In 1910 only just over half of all Jews living in Hamburg were born there. The community worked hard over decades to integrate the new arrrivals. It can be assumed that most Hamburg Jews were practicing Jews i.e. believers, and members of the community.
The community's 1926 survey revealed that there were 20,749 Jewish community members. Of these around 6,500 men and 3,200 women were characterized as head of household. The survey further identifies around 3,700 wives and around 6,900 children. The official national census of 1925 revealed how many citizens of Hamburg described themselves as being of the Jewish faith, which establishes that almost all practicing Jews were members of the community. The fact that such a high proportion of Hamburg Jews were members of the community is evidence that the "Hamburg System" was seen as being a tolerant institution. It also enabled the community to represent Hamburg Jews officially in public and legal affairs. However, these figures do not show the proportion of acculturated Jews. It was only during the Nazi period that these so-called "Rassejuden"/"racial Jews" were identified as individuals and recorded statistically.
The continued existence of the community only appeared demographically secure. A more detailed analysis reveals that there had been a stagnation in the growth of the Jewish population for some time. The decline in the birth rate of Jews had been previously compensated for by a lower infant mortality rate and a longer life expectancy. This led to a shift in the age structure of the community. There was an over proportion of Jews in the older generations.
The life expectancy of Jews exceeded that of the general population. The imbalance in the Jewish population, i.e. the non-renewal of the population, was exasperated by the number of mixed marriages and their accultural effect. The birth rate within mixed marriages was also lower than that of marriages between Jews.
2. Acculturation - Mixed Marriages - Membership Lost to the Community

Danger of Acculturation:
The "Hamburg System", embodying a membership belonging to different Jewish denominations and irreligious members, consciously accepted an insidious acculturation. Hamburg Jews sought to achieve a balance between a strict sectarianism and an open pluralism in order to prevent acculturation, with its accompanying loss of religious and cultural identity. As well as accomodating the possibility of freedom of religious confession through the various religious associations, and an openness towards contemporary urban life, the "Hamburg System" promoted the visible rituals of Jewish life, i.e. circumcision, Bar Mitzvah, religious weddings, attending synagogue, the number of rented synagogue seats, the consumption of koscher food, available in shops in the Grindel quarter, Sabbath observance, the attending of Jewish religious schools, the participation in community elections, membership of Jewish organizations, the Jewish youth movement and sports movement, and the support of the numerous Jewish welfare services.
Mixed Marriages:
There were two indications of a progressive acculturation: principally the possibility from 1851 onwards of marrying a non-Jew. This was called mixed marriage; the connotation being both perjorative and a cause of concern. Compared to the period prior to the First World War there was a discernable increase in the number of marriages between Jews and non-Jews. Between 1925 and 1933 almost 50% of Jewish partners, i.e. male and female, married non-Jews. Approximately 25% of all young Jews were prepared to enter into a mixed marriage, with the accompanying incipient acculturation. The Jewish community and the different religious associations differed in their reaction to mixed marriages. While the Temple Association strove for the social integration of the non-Jewish partner the Synagogue Association refused membership to the Jewish male partner in a mixed marriage. Despite the increase in the number of mixed marriages, the number of individuals withdrawing their membership of the community during the Weimar Republic was remarkably low. It began to increase from 1932 onwards, whereby some orthodox Jews also left the community, as the introduction of votes for women was too liberal for them.
3. Community Leadership and Policy

The Bid for Community Leadership:
Although the "Hamburg System" was formed to incorporate the views of liberal and orthodox Jews, and later the Zionist movement a precise allocation of responsibilities was necessary. The result was a community which included a broad diversity of competence within its statutes and conventions. The differences between liberal and orthodox Jews, and the pressure of urban acculturation were managed through a balance of powers. A structural and individual balance of power existed on four levels: firstly, a community structure in which fields of interest and function were separated, secondly, the collective decision making process reflected the two groups representing political and religious interests, thirdly, the defined area of community jurisdiction and independence of the religious associations, and fourthly, the bugetary policy, that in the 1920s had a volume of expenditure of around 1 million RM.
The administration comprised between 60 and 70 persons. There was a 9 member board, a 21 member council of representatives, and 16 permanent committees making a further demand on personnel. In addition there were corresponding positions in the three religious associations, and in numerous Jewish organisations. This resulted in a personnel intensive community organisation which is evidence of a commitment on behalf of Hamburg Jews to their community and its numerous institutions.
The 21 member council of representatives constituted the central decision making power. They elected the board which was dependent on their approval in all essential matters. There were areas of dispute: the census bound right to vote, the introduction of proportional representation, particlarly demanded by the Zionists, a permanent conflict concerning the active and passive vote for women, whose introduction was fiercely combatted by the orthodox Jews. The passive womens vote (women could become candidates) was first introduced in the 1930 community election, with the result that three women were elected.
The "Political" Election Campaign:
The election campaign prior to the election of the council of representatives saw the polarization of the political and religious factions into Jewish political parties. Although the campaign was fiercely contested with much polemic only 30% of the members voted in 1920; in 1925 and in the last election of 1930 around 50% voted. The initial liberal majority was now opposed by the othodoxy and the growth of Zionism, which demanded rigorous democratization of proceedings and institutions. However, the result of the elections reflected the interests of the business orientated bourgeoisie, small business, the self employed and intellectual elite, i.e. the upper middle class.
4. School System
With the development of a modern economy and its demand for qualified employees the educational system became of central importance. Recognizing this, in the 1920s, the Jewish community made every effort to become on a par with the state school system in offering children the possibility of acquiring state school leaving certificates. The community was responsible for 2,000 children, whose parents were of different religious views. During the period of the Weimar Republic the Jewish community was not able to establish a general Jewish school system.
The educational interests of the orthodox Jews was represented by the Talmud Torah Realschule. The educational standard of the school was recognized by the Hamburg education authority and was grant aided. The good reputation of the school was due to the commitment of its headmaster Dr. Joseph Carlebach, the future chief rabbi of Altona and later Hamburg. The Hamburg education authority generally supported the Jewish communities educational aspirations. With the help of the education authority the Talmud Torah Realschule became a combined Volksschule, Realschule, and Oberrealschule (elementary, secondary, and sixth form school), and then in 1932 it gained the right to award A-Level certificates i.e. university entrance qualifications. This fulfilled the aspiration of the Hamburg Jewish community in that they finally had their own school that prepared children for university, which removed the necessity for children to transfer to state schools on the ground of educational qualifications.
The final qualifications that Jewish girls' schools offered was initially more limited. The sole Jewish community girls' school initially had the standard of a Volksschule (Secondary Modern School). In 1928 it attained the status of a Realschule (Secondary School) with the ability to award the mitteler Reife (roughly GCE O-Level) . The Jewish community were proud of this development especially when seen in relation to the state school system. When the two private Jewish schools were closed due to financial problems the community's girls' school attained the status of a Realschule with the ability to award the Obersekundareife (seventh year of the German secondary school certificate - roughly the first year of the two year sixth form).
During this period the two Jewish community schools together had around 1,200 pupils. The maintenance of the two schools cost the Jewish community one third of its revenue.
5. The Jewish Religious Associations:

The Importance of the Religious Associations in the "Hamburg System":
Only around 40% of all community members were members of any one of the three religious associations. 70% of these association members belonged to the orthodox Synagogue Association. Through its numerical prominence the Synagogue Association claimed leadership of the community.
In general wealthy Hamburg Jews were likely to be members of the Temple Association whereas poorer Jews were likely to be less committed religiously.
Although only around 40% of all community members were members of any one of the three religious associations they were over-proportionately represented on the council of representatives, as is shown in the diagram below:

Composition of the Council of Representatives According to Membership of Religious Association

1920 1925 1930

Synagogue Association 12 7 7
Temple Association 6 9 6
New Dammtor Synagogue 2 4 5
Independent 1 1 3
Total 21 21 21

The Deutsch-Israelitische Synagogenverband Hamburg/Hamburg German-Israelite Synagogue Association:
In 1909 the orthodox Hamburg German-Israelite Synagogue Association chose the Hungarian Dr. Samuel Spitzer as their chief rabbi. However, his period of office did not produce the desired force for integration of its members. Firstly, the liberal Temple Association was founded, and then later the conservative New Dammtor Synagogue, in opposition to the orthodox Synagogue Association. Spitzer's successor Dr. Joseph Carlebach, formerly headmaster of the Talmud Torah Realschule, became chief rabbi of Altona in 1925. His liberal mindedness accommodated the moderate orthodox Jews. The debate between the moderate and strict orthodox members within the Synagogue Association was destructive as it carried over into community affairs. Also, in the mid 1920s, a conflict arose over whether the Jewish community should have at least formal constitutional control over the religious associations. The conflict was solved only after the Synagogue Association had decided to take a moderate line.
Indirect Dependency:
The religious associations were legally independent of the community. They also had financial independence through their membership revenues. This financial autonomy of the individual associations was however limited, so that in certain aspects they were dependent on community policy. During the 1930/31 Economic Depression the community had to save both the Synagogue Association and New Dammtor Synagogue from insolvency. The liberal Temple Association was always prepared to give generous financial support to the "Hamburg System". This enabled the community to finance their community schools from which the orthodoxy principally benefitted. The liberal Temple Association built a new Temple and cultural centre in Oberstraße in 1930/31.
6. Economic Depression - Occupational Restructuring - Self Help
Economically independent middle class Jews were the economic backbone of the Hamburg Jewish community. More than half of all Hamburg Jews were employed in trading in produce and goods, as self- employed craftsmen, in brokering, banking and financial services, and in the wholesale trade. They were also self-employed and employed as domestic servants. These sectors of employment were representative of Jews throughout Germany. The vast majority of Hamburg Jews were not acquainted with the world of industry. It was common for Jews to be self-employed. The majority of Hamburg Jews had a secure income.
The economic dependency of Hamburg Jews on Hamburg's economic structure made itself manifest during the 1923 Inflation, but was overcome with a certain composure. Although Jews lost their assets and capital there was an expression of economic optimism, especially among the middle class. This was conspicuous in comparison to the reaction of the Hamburg community and its members regarding the difficulties encountered during the 1929-1933 Depression. The community tried to adjust to the situation with a flexibility and sense of solidarity, and organised career's guidance, the search for jobs, help with occupational restructuring, self-help and the search for apprenticeships, with significant success. Jewish self-help, always directed towards educational advancement, was especially effective in surmounting the economic crisis. Self reliance also appeared a possible answer to the growing political, social, and now economic antisemitism.
7. Antisemitism - Open Terror - Jewish Resistence
The increase in antisemitism from the end of the 1920s was for Hamburg Jews not an unexpected development. It developed gradually as right-wing extremist political parties in Hamburg increasingly gained in influence, and the Nationalsozialistische Arbeiter Partei Deutschlands (NSDAP) became prominent within the so-called "völkisch" movement ("völkisch" = Nazi term for a "German national"). Despite this ominous development there was still a confidence in the protective role of state institutions. During the Great Depression of 1929/30 the NSDAP became a focal point of widespread protest and gained strength as a political party. Previously only appealing to right-wing extremists within the working class it now gained support from the opinion-forming section of the middle class. In the autumn 1930 Reichstag (parliamentary) Election it became obvious that the parliamentary democracy of the Weimar Republic, and the values for which it stood, no longer possessed a legitimacy. It was no different in Hamburg, as the 1931 metropolitan council election demonstrated.
The Hamburg Jewish community began to formulate a defence to the explicit antisemitism and open terror. However, no effective answer was found for what was taking place within the society. Strategy documents were draw up and, in an extraordinary committee meeting, measures were discussed and resolved regarding an internal policy. Open discussion within the community was discouraged in an attempt to prevent further disquiet. All discussion concerning antisemitism was omitted from the semi-official community news-letter.
At the beginning of 1931 the Jewish cemetery in Rentzelstraße in the Grindel quarter was desecrated, and then in the summer of 1931, for the first time in Hamburg, a synagogue was desecrated. The seriousness of the situation could no longer be concealed. At the beginning of 1932 the cemetery in Rentzelstraße was again desecrated. The Hamburg judiciary was at this time still independent when it came to the sentencing of offenders. From the summer of 1932 onwards the open terror against "Jews" became commonplace. The community had to request police protection, and the religious associations could only advise their members to depart the synagogue, quickly and quietly, directly after the service, and not as was customary to linger longer. When, at the beginning of 1932, the public prosecutor declined to prosecute antisemitic aggitators the Jewish community leadership reacted by prohibiting any provocation, or radical reaction towards antisemitic acts.
In August 1932 the Hamburg Senat repealed its ban of the NSDAP. Hamburg Jews saw this as the beginning of a tolerance of antisemitism by the state of Hamburg. Despite this development the community leadership rejected any form of active self defence; the offer of support by the social democratic Reichsbanner was rejected. There were isolated, unofficial instances of self defence and resistence by Jewish youth groups and individual local zionist organizations, but these were ultimately insignificant.
Following the experiences of the years between 1930 and 1932 many members of the Jewish community had no doubt as to what the outcome would be when the NSDAP seized power.
German text: Prof. Dr. Ina S. Lorenz, Institut für die Geschichte der deutschen Juden