The Everyday Life of German non-Jewish 'full Jews' in Nazi Germany, 1933-45

该项目是对1933年至1945年纳粹德国非犹太“犹太人”日常生活的主要资料进行宏观分析。非犹太的“犹太人”是指那些尽管不认为自己是宗教或世俗犹太人，但被纳粹法律贴上“犹太”血统标签的人。这些法律规定，如果一个人的祖父母至少有三个是犹太宗教团体成员，那么这个人就是“犹太人”。换句话说，后代的自我认同被忽略了。1933年，德国大约有4万名非犹太“犹太人”，其中大多数人长期以来一直与犹太社区分开生活，信仰基督教。这意味着，与自我认同的犹太人相比，他们的犹太朋友要少得多，而且在社交上依赖非犹太人。1933年后，自我认同的犹太人可以相互寻求情感上的支持，而目前的证据表明，非犹太的“犹太人”失去了大多数非犹太朋友，他们往往不愿意，也不受欢迎地参与犹太社区生活。这位博士试图对非犹太“犹太人”的生活与那些自我认同的犹太人的生活的不同程度进行大规模的定性分析。由非犹太“犹太人”撰写或与之相关的第一手资料（回忆录、访谈）在许多地方都可以找到。在档案方面，可以通过南加州大学大屠杀档案馆、维纳大屠杀图书馆、大英图书馆、美国大屠杀纪念博物馆、利奥·贝克研究所档案馆、各种德国联邦档案馆和国家档案馆访问。我已经从这些档案中找出了几个非犹太的“犹太人”。除了档案资料外，非犹太“犹太人”的主要叙述也见于自传作品、纪念书籍和历史学术著作中。为了补充主要的定性成分，可以很容易地进行一项定量微观研究，评估非犹太“犹太人”是否比自我认同的犹太人更难进入移民组织。这是可以实现的，因为在上述档案中发现的典型来源几乎总是包含有关移民的信息，即使没有较长的文本来源。对非犹太“犹太人”的社会经验进行定量微观研究是另一种可能性。这可以通过比较各种组织的成员名单（通常在国家档案中提供）与非犹太“犹太人”的可用名单来实现。到目前为止，对德国非犹太“犹太人”生活的研究非常有限。在一项旨在涵盖被纳粹贴上“犹太人”标签的整个群体的研究中，我们发现了Ascher在2007年的研究中所做的陈述：“[在纳粹主义下]布雷斯劳的犹太人试图继续他们的生活，并通过比以往更多地依赖犹太社区的社交和娱乐设施来适应对他们的限制”（Ascher, 2007, 124）。显然，对于那些从未成为犹太社区成员的人来说，不可能“比以往任何时候”更依赖于他们从未参与过或早已离开的东西。Ascher的例子说明了该领域的绝大多数研究不适用于非犹太“犹太人”的生活。为了纠正这种不平衡，这位博士将分析诸如空间丧失、人际关系、移民轨迹、纳粹政策与日常现实之间的紧张关系、性别角色的崩溃、阶级的影响、失去个人物品的情感意义以及创造正常的尝试等因素和主题。简而言之，博士学位将在很大程度上建立在“日常生活”领域的开创性作品上，如卡普兰的《尊严与绝望之间》（1996）、Hájková和冯·德·海特的《最后的维特·西蒙斯》（2019），以及米隆的论文（2019）。

The proposed project is a macro-level analysis of primary sources relating to the everyday life of non-Jewish 'Jews' in Nazi Germany, from 1933-1945. Non-Jewish 'Jews' were those who, despite not viewing themselves as either religious or secular Jews, were labelled as individuals of 'Jewish' blood by Nazi laws. These laws legislated that an individual was a 'Jew' if they were descended from a minimum of three grandparents who had been members of the Jewish religious community. In other words, the self-identity of the descendants was ignored. Most of the approximately 40,000 non-Jewish 'Jews' in Germany in 1933 had long since lived lives distinctly separate from the Jewish community and were Christian by religion. This meant that, in comparison to self-identifying Jews, they had far fewer Jewish friends and relied socially upon non-Jews. Where self-identifying Jews could turn to one another for emotional support after 1933, the current evidence suggests that non-Jewish 'Jews' lost the majority of their non-Jewish friends and often did not want, nor were welcome, to participate in Jewish community life. This PhD seeks to conduct a wide-scale qualitative analysis of the extent to which the lives of non-Jewish 'Jews' differed from those of self-identifying Jews. Primary source accounts (memoirs, interviews) by or related to non-Jewish 'Jews' are available in a number of locations. In terms of archives, access is available through the USC Shoah archives, the Wiener Holocaust Library, the British Library, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Leo Baeck Institute Archives, various German Bundesarchive and Staatsarchive. I have already identified several non-Jewish 'Jews' from among these archives. In addition to archival sources, primary accounts by non-Jewish 'Jews' are also found in autobiographical works, memorial books, and historical scholarly works. To complement the main qualitative component, a quantitative micro-study assessing whether it was harder for non-Jewish 'Jews' than self-identifying Jews to access emigratory organisations could easily be undertaken. This is achievable because the typical sources found within the aforementioned archives nearly always contain information about emigration, even when longer textual sources are absent. A quantitative micro-study into the social experience of non-Jewish 'Jews' is another possibility. This is achievable by comparing various organisations' membership lists (commonly available in state archives) with available lists of non-Jewish 'Jews'. Up until the present, research into the lives of German non-Jewish 'Jews' has been extremely limited. In research designed to cover the entire group labelled as 'Jewish' by the Nazis, we find such statements as those made by Ascher in his 2007 study: '[under Nazism] the Jews of Breslau sought to carry on with their lives and adjust to the restrictions on them by relying more than ever for their socializing and entertainment on the facilities of the Jewish community' (Ascher, 2007, 124). Obviously, for those who had never been members of the Jewish community, it was impossible to rely 'more than ever' on something they had never partaken of or had long since left. The Ascher example exemplifies the inapplicability of the vast majority of the field's studies to the lives of non-Jewish 'Jews'. In order to redress this imbalance, this PhD will analyse such factors and themes as spatial loss, interpersonal relations, emigration trajectories, tensions between Nazi policy and everyday reality, the breakdown of gender roles, the impact of class, the emotional significance of losing personal items, and attempts to create normality. In brief, the PhD would build heavily on such seminal works in the 'everyday life' field as Kaplan's book 'Between Dignity and Despair' (1996), Hájková and von der Heydt's book 'The Last Veit Simons' (2019), and Miron's paper (2019).