1. Before 1933, Hitler permitted only one small group of speeches to be published: Adolf Hitlers Reden (Munich: Deutscher Volksverlag—Dr. Ernst Boepple, 1925).Google Scholar After 1933, he made no move, as did most of the other party leaders, to compile these earlier speeches (the collection Adolf Hitler in Franken: Reden aus der Kampfzeit, gesammelt und herausgegeben von Heinz Preiss im Auftrage von Julius Streicher, n.p., n.d. [ca. 1939], was published without his endorsement). As a result, very little indeed is known about the majority of his early speeches; their content must be sought either in the pages of the Völkischer Beobachter or in police reports, and this has never been done in a thorough way, though Reginald Phelps has made a beginning. See his “Hitler als Parteiredner im Jahre 1920,” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte (hereafter Vierteljahrshefte), vol. 11 (1963), pp. 274–88;Google Scholar“Hitler and the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei,” American Historical Review, vol. 68 (1963), pp. 983–86;Google Scholar and “Hitlers ‘grundlegende’ Rede über den Antisemitismus,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 16 (1968), pp. 390–420.Google Scholar Of the other leading Nazis, only Gregor Strasser published his speeches before 1933 (see, for example, Arbeit und Brot: Reichstagsrede, Munich: Eher, 1932;Google Scholar others are cited below).

2. Except for the work of Phelps, n. 1., above, and Jochmann, W., ed., Im Kampf um die Macht: Hitlers Rede vor dem Hamburger Nationalklub von 1919 (Frankfurt am Main, 1960).Google Scholar See, for example, Hammer, H., “Die deutschen Ausgaben von Mein Kampf,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 4 (1956), pp. 171ff.;Google ScholarDaim, Wilfried, Der Mann, der Hitler die Ideen gab (Munich, 1958);Google ScholarWeinberg, Gerhard L., ed., Hitlers Zweites Buch (Stuttgart, 1961);Google ScholarTaylor, Telford, ed., Hitler's Secret Book (New York, 1961);Google ScholarNolte, Ernst, Der Faschismus in seiner Epoche (Munich, 1963), trans. Three Faces of Fascism (New York, 1966);Google ScholarMaser, Werner, Hitlers “Mein Kampf” (Munich, 1966);Google ScholarHeer, Friedrich, Der Glaube des Adolf Hitler (Munich, 1968);Google ScholarJacobsen, Hans-Adolf, Nationalsozialistische Aussenpolitik (Frankfurt am Main, 1968);Google Scholar and Jäckel, Eberhard, Hitlers Weltanschauung: Entwurf einer Herrschaft (Tübingen, 1969), trans. Hitler's Weltanschauung: A Blueprint for Power (Middletown, Conn., 1972).Google Scholar Alan Bullock's tendency to stress Hitler's demagoguery and deemphasize his ideas (Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, New York, 1953, rev. ed. 1960, 2nd rev. ed. 1962)Google Scholar has been echoed in most subsequent biographies and in many studies of the Third Reich. See especially Bracher, Karl Dietrich, Die Deutsche Diktatur: Entstehung, Struktur, Folgen des Nationalsozialismus (Cologne, 1969), trans. The German Dictatorship (New York, 1970);Google Scholar and Krausnick, Helmut, Buchheim, Hans, Broszat, Martin, and Jacobsen, Hans-Adolf, Anatomie des SS-Staates (Freiburg i.Br., 1965), trans. Anatomy of the S. S. State (New York, 1968).Google Scholar

3. Daim, Der Mann; Bullock, Hitler; Jenks, William A., Vienna and the Young Hitler (New York, 1960);Google ScholarSmith, Bradley F., Adolf Hitler: His Family, Childhood and Youth (Stanford, 1967),Google Scholar on Hitler's youth. On the völkisch, movement and broader intellectual patterns, see, for example, Conrad-Martius, Hedwig, Utopien der Menschenzüchtung (Munich, 1955);Google ScholarMosse, George, The Crisis of German Ideology (New York, 1964);Google ScholarLohalm, Uwe, Völkischer Radikalismus (Hamburg, 1969);Google ScholarViereck, Peter, Metapolitics from the Romantics to Hitler (New York, 1941, rev. ed. New York, 1961);Google ScholarSontheimer, Kurt, Antidemokratisches Denken in der Weimarer Republik (Munich, 1962);Google ScholarStern, Fritz, The Politics of Cultural Despair (Berkeley, 1961);Google ScholarLaqueur, Walter, Young Germany (London, 1962);Google ScholarGasman, Daniel, The Scientific Origins of National Socialism (New York, 1971).Google Scholar

4. Broszat, Martin, “Die Anfänge der Berliner NSDAP, 1926/27,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 7 (01 1960), pp. 85–118;Google ScholarFranz-Willing, Georg, Die Hitlerbewegung (Hamburg, 1962);Google ScholarGies, Horst, “NSDAP und landwirtschaftliche Organisationen in der Endphase der Weimarer Republik,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 15 (1967), pp. 341–76;Google ScholarJochmann, Werner, Nationalsozialismus und Revolution: Ursprung und Geschichte der NSDAP in Hamburg 1922–1933 (Frankfurt am Main, 1963);Google ScholarMaser, Werner, Die Frühgeschichte der NSDAP: Hitlers Weg bis 1924 (Frankfurt am Main, 1965);Google ScholarNoakes, Jeremy, “Conflict and Development in the NSDAP, 1924–1927,” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 1 (10 1966), pp. 3–36;CrossRefGoogle ScholarOrlow, Dietrich, The History of the Nazi Party 1919 to 1933 (Pittsburgh, 1969);Google ScholarSchäfer, Wolfgang, NSDAP (Hanover, 1956).Google Scholar Three recent works depart somewhat from the organizational emphasis: Kühnl, Reinhard, Die nationalsozialistische Links 1925 bis 1930 (Meisenheim, 1966),Google Scholar discusses some of the writers in the Strasser circle, but misunderstands their relation to the rest of the party. Kele, Max H., Nazis and Workers: National Socialist Appeals to German Labor 1919–1933 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1972),Google Scholar catalogues working-class appeals in the Völkischer Beobachter, but does not relate these appeals systematically to the thought of the party leaders. Nyomarkay, Joseph, Charisma and Factionalism in the Nazi Party (Minneapolis, 1967),Google Scholar recognizes the diversity of ideas expressed by party leaders before 1933, but does not analyse them in detail.

5. Peterson, Edward N., The Limits of Hitler's Power (Princeton, N.J., 1969),Google Scholar suggests that in many areas of government, Hitler was unable to exert power. This argument has not been well received by scholars; somewhat more prevalent is Martin Broszat's view that, except in certain areas of foreign policy, Hitler chose not to exercise his power (Der Staat Hitlers, Munich, 1969Google Scholar). The most important special studies are: Angress, Werner T. and Smith, Bradley F., “Diaries of Heinrich Himmler's Early Years,” Journal of Modern History (hereafter JMH), vol. 31 (1959), pp. 206–224;CrossRefGoogle ScholarHöhne, Heinz, Der Orden unter dem Tokenkopf (Hamburg, 1966), trans. The Order of the Death's Head (London, 1969);Google ScholarAckermann, J., Himmler als Ideolog (Göttingen, 1970);Google ScholarSmith, Bradley F., Heinrich Himmler: A Nazi in the Making, 1900–1926 (Stanford, 1971);Google ScholarLoewenberg, Peter, “The Adolescence of Heinrich Himmler,” American Historical Review, vol. 76 (1971), pp. 612–41;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBramsted, Ernest K., Goebbels and National Socialist Propaganda 1925–1945 (E. Lansing, Mich., 1965);Google ScholarBollmus, Reinhard, Das Amt Rosenberg und seine Gegner: Studien zum Machtkampf im nationalsozialistischen Herrschaftssystem (Stuttgart, 1970);Google ScholarCecil, Robert, The Myth of the Master Race: Alfred Rosenberg and Nazi Ideology (New York, 1972);Google ScholarMcGovern, James, Martin Bormann (London, 1968).Google Scholar Biographical vignettes appear in Eugene Davidson. The Trial of the Germans (New York, 1966);Google Scholar and Fest, Joachim, Das Gesicht des Dritten Reiches (Munich, 1963), trans. The Face of the Third Reich (London, 1970).Google Scholar

6. In addition to Cecil's work on Rosenberg (n. 5, above), Margarete Plewnia has written a scholarly biography of Dietrich Eckart: Auf dem Weg zu Hitler: Der “völkische” Publizist Dietrich Eckart (Bremen, 1970).Google Scholar Some studies of specific tendencies in German and European thought analyse and comment on some of the writings of a few of the Nazi ideologues. For example, Laqueur, Walter, Russia and Germany (London, 1965),Google Scholar and Cohn, Norman, Warrant for Genocide (London, 1967)Google Scholar are illuminating on Rosenberg's early writings; Kroll, Gerhard, Von der Weltwirtschaftskrise zur Staatskonjunktur (Berlin, 1958),Google Scholar provides some useful discussion of Feder's economic ideas; and Hock, Wolfgang, Deutscher Anti-Kapitalismus (Frankfurt am Main, 1960),Google Scholar helps to put Feder and Gregor Strasser in focus. Such works, of course, do not treat the Nazi writers as a group.

7. Hale, Oren J., The Captive Press in the Third Reich (Princeton, N.J., 1964);Google ScholarKessemeier, Carin, Der Leitartikeln Goebbels in den NS-Organen Der Angriff und Das Reich (Münster, 1967);Google ScholarZeman, Z. A. B., Nazi Propaganda (London, 1964).Google Scholar Some information on content is given in Kele (n. 4, above); Layton, Roland V. Jr., “The Völkischer Beobachter, 1925–1933” (unpub. diss., University of Virginia, 1965);Google Scholar and Wilcox, Larry Dean, “The National Socialist Party Press in the Kampfzeit, 1919–1933” (unpub. diss., University of Virginia, 1970).Google Scholar See also Layton, , “The Völkischer Beobachter, 1920–1933,” Central European History, vol. 3 (1970), pp. 353–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Schuman, Frederick L., “The Political Theory of German Fascism,” American Political Science Review, 04 1934, pp. 210–32;CrossRefGoogle ScholarSchuman, , The Nazi Dictatorship (New York, 1935; rev. ed., 1936);Google ScholarFromm, Erich, Escape from Freedom (New York, 1941).Google Scholar The most influential of Konrad Heiden's earliest works (both Schuman and Fromm relied on them) were: Geschichte des Nationalsozialismus (Berlin, 1933);Google ScholarGeburt des Dritten Reiches (Zurich, 1934);Google ScholarAdolf Hitler: Eine Biographie, vol. 1: Das Zeitalter der Verantwortungslosigkeit (Zurich, 1936); vol. 2:Google ScholarEin Mann gegen Europa (Zurich, 1937).Google Scholar The first two were combined and condensed in a single English translation: History of National Socialism (New York, 1935);Google Scholar translations of the two-volume biography appeared in 1936 and 1939 respectively, but were superseded in the 1940's by a one-volume edition, Der Fuehrer (New York, 1944).Google Scholar

9. See especially Konrad Heiden, History of National Socialism, pp. 3–82, and Der Fuehrer, pp. 36–77, 99–124, and Fromm, passim. Bracher's view of the Twenty-Five Points as “an innate lie” (The German Dictatorship, p. 147) can thus be traced back, via many intermediaries, to Heiden.

10. I will deal with this subject at appropriate length in an anthology of translations of Nazi political writings which I am preparing.

11. A larger study might consider Esser, whose publications always took the form of topical articles; Dinter, although his period of influence was very brief; and Streicher, who before 1923 was more than an anti-Semitic pornographer. Despite the careful scholarship of Smith and Angress, Ackermann, and to a lesser extent Heinz Höhne, it has not been possible so far to identify the political ideas of Heinrich Himmler before 1933. These analyses have had to depend not on published works but upon an unpublished and undated manuscript (“Völkische Bauernpolitik,” NSDAP Hauptarchiv, microfilm roll 98), and upon Himmler's rather enigmatic diaries. Goebbels has already been studied very extensively as a propagandist; my discussion will refer to him in those cases where he contributed something new or significant to ideological debate.

12. In addition to the works cited in n. 4, above, the following are helpful on the beginnings of the party and on its early leaders: Deuerlein, Ernst, “Hitlers Eintritt in die NSDAP und die Reichswehr,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 7 (1959), pp. 177ff.;Google ScholarDeuerlein, Ernst, Der Hitler-Putsch: Bayerische Dokumente zum 8/9. November 1923 (Stuttgart, 1962);Google ScholarDouglas, D. M., “The Early Ortsgruppen: the Development of National Socialist Local Groups 1919–1923” (unpub. diss., University of Kansas, 1968);Google ScholarFenske, Hans, Konservatismus und Rechtsradikalismus in Bayern nach 1918 (Bad Homburg, 1969);Google ScholarFranz, Georg, “Munich: Birthplace and Center of the National Socialist German Workers' Party,” JMH, vol. 29 (1957), pp. 319–34;Google ScholarHofmann, Hans Hubert, Der Hitlerputsch: Krisenjahre deutscher Geschichte 1920–24 (Munich, 1961);Google ScholarPese, Walter, “Hitler und Italien 1920–1926,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 3 (1955), pp. 113–26;Google ScholarPhelps, Reginald, “Anton Drexler, der Gründer der NSDAP,” Deutsche Rundschau, vol. 87 (1961), pp. 1134–43;Google ScholarPhelps, , ‘ ‘Before Hitler Came’: Thule Society and Germanenorden,” JMH, vol. 25 (1963), pp. 245–61;Google ScholarPörtner, Paul, “The Writers' Revolution, Munich, 1918–1919,” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 3 (1968), pp. 137–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Hermann, Arthur R., Gottfried Feder: Der Mann und sein Werk (Leipzig, 1933),Google Scholar is reliable only on events before 1918.

14. “Das Manifest zur Brechung der Zinsknechtschaft des Geldes”. The original date of the “Manifest” is unclear. In “Innere Geschichte der Brechung der Zinsknechtschaft,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 72, Aug. 12, 1920, Feder said he first circulated the text during the latter half of November 1918. The first published version, however, appeared in the left-wing Kritische Rundschau, ed. Held, L., Munich, vol. 2 (Summer 1919), pp. 14–15.Google Scholar An expanded version—the original with extensive commentary—appeared later in 1919 as no. 1 of the pamphlet series An Alle, Alle! (Diessen: Huber). This latter version was republished without alteration by Huber, 1923, and by Eher, Munich, 1926, 1932. “Der soziale Staat,” Auf Gut Deutsch, no. 14/15 (May 24, 1919), pp. 218–27.

15. Der Staatsbankerott die Rettung (Diessen: Huber, 1919),Google Scholar no. 2 of An Alle, Alle!; with Buckeley, August, Der kommende Steuerstreik: Seine Gefahr, seine Unvermeidlichkeit, seine Wirkung (Diessen, Huber, 1921);Google ScholarDer deutsche Staat auf nationaler und sozialer Grundlage—Neue Wege in Staat, Finanz und Wirtschaft (Munich: Eher, 1923; new printings 1932, 1933, 1935).Google Scholar

16. “Manifest,” Kritische Rundschau, secs. 4, 5, p. 15.

17. Manifest (Diessen: Huber, 1919), pp. 6–7, 26, 36.Google Scholar He also proposed a comprehensive public works program, ibid., p. 47.

18. Ibid., pp. 26–27, and passim.

19. “Manifest,” Kritische Rundschau, secs. 3, 5, 6, 8, p. 15. Feder's defense of industrial capitalism (ibid.) has misled historians into thinking that he wished to give industrial capital complete freedom. Instead, however, he expected a deceleration of the profit motive to be enforced by restricted credit; he called for the abolition of luxury industries; and he wished forcibly to redirect industrial production toward the home market and toward utilitarian goods. His complaint against wholesale socialization of industry was that it would curtail productivity (Manifest, pp. 6–10); on the other hand he wanted the state to decentralize industry and to guard against the growth of large-scale enterprise (Manifest, pp. 29–30, 56, 59–61). “Profits” were to be restricted by lowered prices and were to be shared with the workers (Manifest, sec. 6, p. 8, and p. 44).

20. In “Der soziale Staat,” he even proposed that the vote be extended to children.

21. Like any negative statement, this one is impossible to prove. But it is noteworthy, given historians' assumptions about the importance of the “Führerprinzip” in early Nazi history (see, for example, Orlow, pp. 25, 74, 86), that none of the writings surveyed in this article even hints at a future dictatorship. Nor do they glorify Hitler as Führer—even Strasser's, GregorDas Hitler-Büchlein (Berlin: Kampf-Verlag, n.d. [ca. 1927])Google Scholar merely says, in effect, “if you think Hitler is unimportant, read what he has written” (pp. 3–7). Strasser also wrote: “studiere auch die Idee, die er [Hitler], der Trommler, durch die Lande verkündet…” (ibid., p. 12).

22. Kühnl, Reinhard, “Zur Programmatik der nationalsozialistischen Linken,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 14 (1966), pp. 317–33;Google ScholarPetzina, Dieter, “Hauptprobleme der deutschen Wirtschaftspolitik 1932/33,” Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 15 (1967), pp. 18–55.Google ScholarHaag, Joseph, “Othmar Spann and the Politics of ‘Totality’: Corporatism in Theory and Practice,” (unpub. diss., Rice University, 1969),Google Scholar claims for Spann a major influence on Nazi ideology after 1930. Feder praised Spann but emphasized his own originality in introducing corporatism into Nazi ideology in “Othmar Spann, zu seinem 50. Geburtstag”. Völkischer Beobachter, Oct. 3, 1928. See also Turner, Henry Ashby, “Hitler's Secret Pamphlet for Industrialists, 1927,” JMH, vol. 40 (1968), pp. 348–74,Google Scholar and “Big Business and the Rise of Hitler,” American Historical Review, vol. 75 (1969/1970), pp. 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Feder, , in Das Programm der NSDAP und seine weltanschaulichen Grundgedanken (Munich: Eher, 1927), pp. 17–20,Google Scholar refers repeatedly to his early works as the basis of the economic portions of the program.

24. Manifest (Diessen: Huber, 1919), p. 36,Google Scholar makes only brief mention of the benefits for the small farmers of “breaking the bondage of interest.” Feder did not begin to write about them at length until 1926 (see “Aus der Bewegung,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 35, Feb. 12, 1926). According to Krebs, Albert, Tendenzen und Gestalten der NSDAP: Erinnerungen an die Frühzeit der Partei (Stuttgart, 1959), p. 204,Google Scholar Feder was one of the party's most popular speakers in northern rural districts.

25. In Mein Kampf (Boston and New York, 1939), pp. 287–89,Google Scholar Hitler says that Feder made it clear to him that the true political enemy was “Jewish” financial capitalism, rather than capitalism in general. While it is true that Feder concentrated his invective above all on financial capitalism, this was not his only target, nor did he call it “Jewish”. There are a few veiled anti-Semitic remarks in the Manifest (Diessen: Huber), pp. 15–16, 33–34, 62,Google Scholar but Feder explicitly denies that financial capitalism can be identified with any one segment of the population (ibid., pp. 34–35). The equation between Jews, bankers, and bolsheviks, which appears in Mein Kampf, stems from the combined influence upon Hitler of Feder, Eckart, and Rosenberg; see below, p. 15.

26. Das Programm (1927), p. 17. For systematic anti-Semitic tracts see Feder, , Die Juden (Munich: Eher, 1933);Google Scholar and, with Werner, Ferdinand and Reventlow, Ernst Graf zu, Das neue Deutschland und die Judenfrage (Leipzig: Rüdiger, 1933).Google Scholar There are occasional anti-Semitic statements in Feder's earlier speeches and articles, but they tend to be perfunctory. See, for example, “Wirtschaftsgrundsätze des Nationalsozialismus,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 30, Mar. 2, 1923; “Handel-, Finanz- und Wirtschaftspolitik—Zinsknechtschaft,” ibid., no. 174, Aug. 29, 1923; “Feder in Parchim,” ibid., no. 9, Jan. 13, 1927; “Gegen die Negerkultur,” ibid., no. 25, Jan. 31, 1930.

27. Margarete Plewnia, pp. 7–8, traces this view from Heiden through Bullock, Maser, Bracher, and Mosse.

28. Totengräber Russlands (Munich: Deutscher Volksverlag, Dr. E. Boepple, 1921);Google Scholar“Im neuen Deutschland,” Sonderheft, , Auf Gut Deutsch (Munich: Hoheneichen Verlag), 01–03 1920;Google Scholar “Aus Ungarns Schreckenstagen,” Sonderheft, Auf Gut Deutsch, May 1920. The cartoons were by Otto von Kursell.

29. See especially Rosenberg, Alfred, Die Spur des Juden im Wandel der Zeiten (Munich: Boepple, 1920).Google Scholar

30. Eckart, , “Das Judentum in und ausser uns,” Auf Gut Deutsch, serially, nos. 1–7, 01–04 1919, especially pp. 28–31, 79–80, 95–96, 109–12.Google Scholar

31. “Das Judentum in und ausser uns,” pp. 28–31, 109–12; “Der grosse Krumme,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 1 (1918–20), no.1 (12 1918), pp. 3–8.Google Scholar See also Plewnia, p. 29.

32. “Das Judentum in und ausser uns,” pp. 109–12. See also “Zwiesprache,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 1 (1918–1920), no. 2, pp. 18ff.;Google Scholar “Der Herr Rabbiner aus Bremen,” ibid., no. 37/38 (Sonderheft); “Das ist der Jude! Laien predigt über Juden- und Christentum,” ibid., vol. 1, no. 30/34 (Sonderheft).

33. Plewnia, p. 95, believes Eckart to be the author of the anti-Semitic portions of the Twenty-Five Points, because of the presence of the phrase “Das Judentum in und ausser uns.” But the restrictions of Jewish civil rights in the Twenty-Five Points are much closer to Rosenberg's thinking. See especially Die Spur des Juden im Wandel der Zeiten, ch. 20, in which Rosenberg proposes that all civil rights and state employment be forbidden to Jews (whom he defines according to blood and marriage ties, explicitly rejecting religious affiliation as a criterion). He also proposes that they be excluded from all cultural activities, though he thinks they should be permitted to practice a profession. For Hitler's use of the phrase “Das Judentum in und ausser uns,” see Phelps, , Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 16 (1968), pp. 390–420.Google Scholar

34. Plewnia is primarily interested in Eckart's probable influence on Hitler; she does not consider in detail the relations between Eckart and Rosenberg or between Eckart and Feder. The culmination of her argument, that Eckart laid the basis for the Führer cult, is the least convincing part of her study: see pp. 61–93.

35. Auf Gut Deutsch: Wochenschrift für Ordnung und Recht, Hoheneichen Verlag. Dec. 1918–July 1920, Wolfratshausen and Munich; Aug. 1920–May 1921, Munich.

36. For example, Eckart began to identify Judaism and bolshevism in the same issue of Auf Gut Deutsch in which Rosenberg discussed this theme for the first time. See Eckart, vol. 1 (1918–1920), no. 8, p. 114; Rosenberg, ibid., pp. 120–23.

37. Eckart, , “Der grosse Krumme,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 1, no. 1 (12 1918), pp. 3–8;Google Scholar “Männer,” ibid., pp. 1–3; “Bürger … Wir fordern den wahren Sozialismus,” vol. 1, no, 13 (May 17, 1919), p. 196; and “Deutscher und jüdischer Bolschewismus,” vol. 1, no. 25 (August 22, 1919). The arguments of the last are carried forward in Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin: Zwiegespräch zwischen Adolf Hitler und mir (Munich: Hoheneichen, 1924; 2nd ed., Munich: Eher, 1925: Der Bolschewismus von seinem Anfängen bis Lenin).Google Scholar Plewnia's discussion (pp. 101–9) of the relationship of this work to Hitler's thought is authoritative.

38. “An alle Werktätigen!” April 5, 1919. Reprinted as a pamphlet (Halle an der Saale: Walter Kersten, 1924), and used as election campaign literature by the Völkischsozialen Block; and in Feder, , Kampf gegen die Hochfinanz (Munich: Eher, 1933), pp. 97–103,Google Scholar where Feder claims coauthorship. See also Eckart, “Männer,” and “Bürger,” loc. cit., and Rosenberg, , ed., Dietrich Eckart: Ein Vermächtnis (Munich: Eher, 1928),Google Scholar introduction.

39. Rosenberg, , Letzte Aufzeichnungen (Göttingen, 1955), p. 77.Google Scholar See also Eckart's romanticized reminiscences of his revolutionary activities in “Sturmtage,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 1 (1918–1920), serially in nos. 14–21.Google Scholar

40. Rosenberg, , “Die russisch-jüdische Revolution,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 1 (1918–20), no. 8 (02 21, 1919), pp. 120–23.Google Scholar Rosenberg so valued this essay that he reprinted it often. See Die Spur des Juden im Wandel der Zeiten, pp. 20–32; “Der jüdische Bolschewismus in Russland,” Völkischer Beobachter, 11 26, 1921;Google Scholar “Der jüdische Bolschewismus,” Tötengräber Russlands; and the introduction in Pest in Russland! Der Bolschewismus, seine Häupter, Handlanger und Opfer (Munich: Boepple, 1922).Google Scholar

41. See, in addition to works mentioned in n. 40, Der staatsfeindliche Zionismus auf Grund jüdischer Quellen erläutert (Hamburg: Deutschvölkische Verlagsanstalt, 1922);Google ScholarDer völkische Staatsgedanke, Untergang und Neugeburt (Munich: Eher, 1924);Google ScholarDie internationale Hochfinanz als Herrin der Arbeiterbewegung in allen Ländern (Munich: Boepple, 1925).Google Scholar In Das Verbrechen des Freimauerei: Judentum, Jesuitistmus, deutsches Christentum (Munich: Lehmann, 1921),Google Scholar Rosenberg assimilated Jesuits and freemasons into his conspiratorial theory.

42. The identification of Jews and bolsheviks appears first in “Die russische-jüdische Revolution”. References to the role of banking circles begin in Die Spur des Juden, ch. 20; to Zionism ibid., ch. 13. See also “Hochverrat der deutschen Zionisten,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 2 (1920–1921), no. 11/12, pp. 153–72.Google Scholar

43. Die Protokolle der Weisen von Zion und die jüdische Weltpolitik (Munich: Boepple, 1923):Google Scholar not a new edition of the Protocols but a commentary on them, with some quotations from them. Rosenberg did not, of course, bring the Protocols to Germany, and although Robert Cecil argues that he read them in 1917, Cecil's only evidence for this is an unsupported statement by Heiden (Cecil, p. 17; Heiden, Der Fuehrer, p. 9). The first hint of familiarity with the Protocols in Rosenberg's work comes in Die Spur des Juden (1920), in which Rosenberg's references to Tolstoy echo the writings of Fyodor Vinberg, one of the purveyors of the Protocols. (For German editions of the Protocols see Cohn, Norman, Warrant for Genocide, New York, 1966, pp. 129–35.)Google Scholar It is noteworthy that Rosenberg did not review the Protocols until February 1921; see “Bücherschau,” Auf Gut Deutsch, vol. 2 (1920–1921), no. 5/6.Google Scholar

44. Schriften und Reden, 2 vols., (Munich, 1943),Google Scholar contains one rather ambiguous reference to Jews from 1917 (“Gedanken über Persönlichkeit,” vol. 1, pp. 15–16) and three anti-Semitic essays from the summer of 1918 (“Eine ernste Frage,” pp. 75–79; “Über Religions-Unterricht,” pp. 79–88; “Der Jude,” pp. 88–115) among a wide variety of essays on art, architecture, archaeology, and aesthetics. While such editions after the fact are not necessarily reliable, there was no reason, in 1943, for Rosenberg to hide his early anti-Semitism.

45. “Um eine Weltanschauung,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 48, 05 24/25, 1925;Google Scholar “Nationalsozialismus im Weltkampf,” ibid., no. 258, Nov. 7/8, 1926; “Auseinandersetzung über Wundts ‘Deutsche Weltanschuung’,” ibid., no. 40, Feb. 18, 1927. See also Lane, Barbara Miller, Architecture and Politics in Germany (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), pp. 148–53, 155–67.Google Scholar

46. Munich: Boepple, 1924–1944.

47. According to Letzte Aufzeichnungen, pp. 69–71, Rosenberg's first impulse on arriving in Germany was to attempt to sell some paintings and/or a previously written tract on aesthetics (perhaps the same as “Objektiver und individueller Stil,” Schriften und Reden, vol. 1, pp. 46–54,Google Scholar or “Von Form und Formung im Kunstwerk,” ibid., pp. 27–45, both dated May 1918). Although he was a trained architect, by his own account he does not seem to have tried very hard to find a job in this field, although, of course, in Germany in 1918 and 1919 there was scarcely any work for architects (or for engineers, which may have some bearing on Feder's political activities). Thus, jobless, it is quite likely that Eckart's patronage would have swayed him toward anti-Semitic journalism. “Die russisch-jüdische Revolution” shows that Rosenberg kept himself very well informed about events in Russia after he left, presumably through Russian newspapers. He must therefore have known that he was distorting the facts; there is thus a real possibility that he did so intentionally and perhaps cynically, to please Eckart. Eckart's death at the end of 1923 may have released Rosenberg from some sense of obligation and permitted him to return to an emphasis on his own earliest interests.

48. On foreign policy, Der völkische Staatsgedanke (Munich: Eher, 1924);Google ScholarDer Zukunftsweg einer deutschen Aussenpolitik (Munich: Eher, 1927).Google Scholar Rosenberg's influence on Nazi foreign policy is assessed in Jacobsen, H. A., Nationalsozialistische Aussenpolitik 1933–38 (Frankfurt am Main, 1968),Google Scholar and in Schubert, G., Anfänge der Nationalsozialistische Aussenpolitik (Cologne, 1963).Google Scholar On art and culture see, in addition to works cited in n. 45, Houston Stewart Chamberlain als Verkünder und Begründer einer deutschen Zukunft (Munich: Eher, 1927);Google ScholarDer Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts (Munich: Hoheneichen Verlag, 1930).Google Scholar

49. According to Letzte Aufzeichnungen, Rosenberg developed an early enthusiasm for the works of the then distinguished (though controversial) archaeologist Gustav Kossina, who in 1906 and 1912 set forth the idea that the Indo-European, or “Aryan,” “homeland” was to be found along the Baltic. See also Rosenberg, , “Einzelne Gedanken,” dated 1917, Schriften und Reden, vol. 1, pp. 12–13, 16, 24–26.Google Scholar It is important to realize that, in equating “Aryans” and “Indo-Europeans,” Rosenberg was following established and respectable current usage: not only did Kossina confound the two, but so did Childe, V. Gordon (The Aryans, New York, 1926).Google Scholar

50. Feder, , Der Dawespakt (Munich: Eher, 1928);Google ScholarDas Programm der NSDAP … (Munich: Eher, 1927);Google ScholarDie Wohnungsnot und die soziale Bau- und Wirtschaftsbank … (Munich: Eher, 1929), and nn. 14 and 15, above.Google Scholar

51. In January 1929, the NS Briefe announced that a major treatise by Gregor and Strasser, Otto, zu Reventlow, Ernst Graf, Blank, Herbert, and Muchow, Reinhold, “National Socialism as the Weltanschauung of the Twentieth Century,” was forthcoming.Google Scholar (The book appeared as no. 1 of the Grünen Hefte der NS-Briefe series, 5 vols., Berlin: Kampf Verlag, 1929.)Google Scholar Very soon after this announcement, Rosenberg began to refer to the need for national socialism to provide a new, twentieth-century “myth.” See “Die Kulturkrise der Gegenwart,” Völkischer Beobachter, Feb. 27, 1929.

52. See, for example, Wendland, Winfried, “Kulturbolschewismus,” NS-Briefe, 1928–29, no. 18 (03 15, 1929), pp. 292–97;Google Scholar Wendland, “Vom Sinn der Kunst,” ibid., 1929–30, no. 8 (Oct. 15, 1929), pp. 123–26; and Wendland, Nationalsozialismus und Kunst, no. 4 of the Grünen Hefte, Nov. 1929.

53. Rosenberg, Alfred, “Nationaler Sozialismus?” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 25, 02 1, 1927;Google ScholarGregor, answered in “Nationaler Sozialismus,” NS-Briefe, 1926–1927, no. 34 (02 15, 1927).Google ScholarStrasser, Otto, “Gewinnbeteiligung!” NS-Briefe, Jan. 15, 1929;Google ScholarFeder, Gottfried,“Gewinnbeteiligung,” Volk und Gemeinde (Troppau, 1929), Folge 8.Google Scholar

54. On the Strassers as dissidents, see Kühnl, Nyomarkay, Bullock, Mosse, Bracher, and many others. Strasser, Otto wrote for the NS-Briefe and the Strasser newspapers (which included the Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, Sächsicher Beobachter, Rheinisch-Westfälische Arbeiter-Zeitung, Mārkischer Beobachter, and six editions of Der nationale Sozialist);Google Scholar he also edited the Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung for a brief period. Gregor edited the NS-Briefe from Oct. 1, 1926, to July 1930 (taking over from Goebbels, who was editor from Nov. 1, 1925, to Sept. 1926), and wrote an extraordinary volume of short essays for these and other Nazi publications. The Kampf-Verlag itself owed most of its direction to Gregor; it was closed down in 1930 not by party fiat, but by letting Otto take it over and run it into bankruptcy. Gregor's organizational activities (he was Propagandaleiter and then Reichsorganisationsleiter) are treated by Orlow and Kele; his career as a Reichstag member is not yet well understood.

55. See, for example, Geismaier, Michael [pseud.], Gregor Strasser (Leipzig, 1933);Google ScholarStrasser, Otto, Juni Sonnabend 30: Vorgeschichte, Verlauf, Folgen (Prague, 1934);Google ScholarDie deutsche Bartholomäusnacht (Zurich, 1935);Google ScholarWohin treibt Hitler? (Prague, 1936);Google ScholarEuropa von Morgen (Zurich, 1939);Google ScholarHitler und Ich (Buenos Aires, 1940; trans.: Hitler and I, Boston, 1940);Google ScholarL'aigle prussien sur l' Allemagne (Montreal, 1941);Google ScholarThe Gangsters around Hitler (London, 1942);Google ScholarGermany in a Disunited World (Eastbourne, England, 1947);Google ScholarExil (Munich, 1958).Google Scholar These writings should be used only with extreme caution, and this is also true for the memoirs, polemics, and apologias of other former members of the Strasser circle: Krebs, Blank, Niekisch, Hierl.

56. Heiber, Helmut, ed., Das Tagebuch von Joseph Goebbels 1925–26 (Stuttgart, 1961), pp. 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57. Stressed by Kühnl, Bullock, Orlow, and Kele.

58. Nyomarkay, pp. 82–89.

59. Kroll, G., Von der Weltwirtschaftskrise zur Staatskonjunktur, argues that Gregor Strasser could not have written such a bold program for public works and deficit spending.Google Scholar But on the contrary the bases for such a program were laid by Feder, and many of Gregor's speeches and articles contain its major outlines. See, for example, Strasser, Gregor, “Instinktlose Geschäftemacher,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 172, 10 20, 1925;Google Scholar “Es lebe die Revolution!”, ibid., no. 259, Nov. 9, 1926; “Bürger oder Proletarier,” ibid., no. 280, Dec. 3, 1926; “Freiheit und Brot für den deutschen Mann,” ibid., no. 66, Mar. 19–20, 1929; “Für den Staat der Arbeiter und Soldaten,” ibid., no. 67, Mar. 21, 1929; “Gregor Strassers Abrechnung mit den Young-Parteien,” ibid., no. 250, Oct. 21, 1930; “Heerschau im Gau Düsseldorf,” ibid., no. 316, Nov. 12, 1931. Some of these are reports of speeches. The most complete version of the full employment program is Gregor, Strasser, Arbeit und Brot! (Munich: Eher, 1932).Google Scholar

60. Hitler did endorse a modified version, the NSBO. There is, however, considerable disagreement as to whether the NSBO was an effective organization: Orlow, pp. 196–97, thinks not; Kele, pp. 149–56, thinks it was.

61. “Die Götzendämmerung des Marxismus,” Völkischer Beobachter, Apr. 8, 1925; “Die Herrschaft des Kapitalismus,” ibid., Feb. 17, 1926; “Die Versklavung der Eisenbahner,” ibid., Feb. 26, 1926; “Triumph der Börse,” ibid., Oct. 29, 1926; and many others.

62. 58 Jahre Young-Plan! (Berlin: Kampf-Verlag, 1929).Google Scholar See also: “Immer wieder: Fort mit Locarno,” Völkischer Beobachter, Nov. 18, 1925; “Der Betrug der Abrüstung,” ibid., June 12, 1926; “Gedanken über Aufgaben der Zukunft,” NS-Briefe, June 15, 1926; “Versailles—Dawes—Bauernnot,” Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, Feb. 28, 1928, Sondernummer; “Gregor Strassers Abrechnung mit den Young-Parteien,” Völkischer Beobachter, Oct. 21, 1930; “Deutschland nur Deutschland!” ibid., Feb. 23, 1932.

63. Works cited in n. 62.

64. “Nationalsozialismus und Landwirtschaft,” Völkischer Beobachter, Mar. 7, 1930, dated Mar. 6, 1930, over Hitler's signature.

65. Section IV.A. of the draft program as published by Kühnl, Reinhard in Vierteljahrshefte, vol. 14 (1966), 317–33;Google ScholarStrasser, Gregor and Goebbels, Josef, “Resolution der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Nordwest der NSDAP zur Frage der Fürstenabfindung,” NS-Briefe, Feb. 1, 1926.Google ScholarStrasser, Gregor, “Nationale Wirtschaft,” in Kampf um Deutschland (Munich: Eher, 1932), no page numbers, dated 06 13, 1925;Google Scholar“Wir und die Agrarzölle,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 62, 06 11, 1925;Google Scholar “Nochmals: Wir und die Agrarzölle,” ibid., no. 76, June 28/29, 1925; “Der Weg in die deutsche Not—Der Weg ous der deutschen Not,” ibid., no. 162, Oct. 8, 1925; and works cited in n. 62.

66. Orlow, pp. 128–84, sees the appeal to the farmers as a result of the May 1928 elections, in which the party lost votes in urban areas, gained them in rural ones. Certainly the election returns confirmed the importance of agriculture to the Nazi cause, but appeals to the small farmer loom very large in the Völkischer Beobachter from 1925 on, and dominated the pages of the NS-Briefe between 1925 and 1927. The NS-Briefe, during these years, helped to bring into the party a number of lesser ideologues whose exclusive interest was the plight of the small farmers. See especially Erich Rosikat, articles of Nov. 15, 1925, Apr. 14/15, 1926, and May 15, 1927; Hans Seibert, Aug. 15, 1926; Herbert Backe, Oct. 15, 1926; Gross, Oct. 1, 1926; Böttcher, Jan. 15, 1926. In view of Ackermann's belief (Heinrich Himmler, p. 205) that Himmler was already influenced by “Blut und Boden” ideas at this time, it is worth noting that Himmler's writings for the Strasser publications use Feder's and Strasser's terminology. See “Die Lage der Landwirtschaft,” NS–Briefe, Apr. 1, 1926; and “Bauer, wach auf!” Der Nationale Sozialist für Sachsen, Aug. 1, 1926.

67. Nolte, Three Faces of Fascism, p. 327.

68. “Gedanken,” loc. cit.; “Frontsoldaten,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 93, 04 24–25, 1927;Google Scholar “Quo vadis Reichswehr,” ibid., no. 64, Mar. 16, 1928; “Ziele und Wege…,” NS-Briefe, July 1927; with Otto and others, “Der Nationalsozialismus—die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts,” ibid.; “Das letzte Abwehrkampf des Systems,” Kampf um Deutschland, pp. 317–35; also published as a book by Eher, 1932.

69. “Gedanken,” loc. cit., and “Eine sehr notwendige Feststellung,” Völkischer Beobachter, no. 43, 02 12, 1932.Google Scholar

70. Women's place was in the home, as wives and mothers of German soldiers. Strasser stressed the perils of childbirth and compared them to the dangers faced by the front soldier. Nazi women were urged to take a soldierly attitude to motherhood. “Gedanken,” loc. cit., and “Die Frau und das Nationalsozialismus,” Vöbkischer Beobachter, Apr. 6, 1932.

71. “Lüge der Demokratie,” Der nationale Sozialist für Sachsen, May 23, 1926; ‘Es lebe die Revolution!” Der nationale Sozialist für Sachsen, Nov. 7, 1926, reprinted Völkischer Beobachter, Nov. 9, 1926; “Von der Revolt zur Revolution!” Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, Nov. 6, 1927; “Nationalsozialismus und Geschichte,” NS Jahrbuch, 1928; “Macht Platz, Ihr Alte!” Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, July 13, 1930 (reprinted in Kampf um Deutschland, which gives original date as May 8, 1927). Goebbels, at first, was also energetic in calling for the “second revolution”; see “Die Revolution als Ding an sich,” NS-Briefe, Sept. 1, 1926, and Die zweite Revolution: 15 Briefe an Zeitgenossen (Berlin: Kampf—Verlag, 1926).Google Scholar Kele sees Goebbels as the most radical of the Nazi leaders, but his most radical-sounding writings are singularly lacking in content. See, for an example of empty rhetoric, “Die Radikalisierung des Sozialismus,” NS-Briefe, Oct. 15, 1925.

72. Mein Kampf (New York and Boston, 1939), pp. 323–27.Google Scholar

73. “Gedanken,” loc. cit.; see also “Nationalsozialismus und Geschichte.”

74. “Vom Wesen des Kapitalismus,” NS-Briefe, mid-July 1927; Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, Aug. 10, 1930, after Otto's break with the party.

75. Works cited in n. 74, and Der Nationalsozialisnmus—die Weltanschauung des 20. Jahrhunderts.

76. “Völkische Bauernschaft,” Der nationale Sozialist für Sachsen, Aug. 15, 1926. Otto affected pseudonyms drawn from past leaders of peasant revolution: Ulrich von Hutten, Michael Geismeier. Unlike Gregor and Feder, Otto did not write very often for the journal of the NSBO, Das Arbeitertum.

77. With Jünger, Ernst, Blank, Herbert, and Schauwecker, Franz, Vom Sinn des Krieges: Eine Antwort an Remarque (Berlin: Kampf-Verlag, 1929),Google Scholar no. 3 of the Grüne Hefte. See also “Pazifismus und Sozialismus,” Der nationale Sozialist für Sachsen, Jan. 30, 1927.

78. “14 Thesen der deutschen Revolution,” NS-Briefe, July 1, 1929, pp. 22–24; Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, July 28, 1929. Kele, p. 158n., says that Herbert Blank probably wrote the Theses, and cites the July 1, 1929, issue of NS Briefe. I can find no evidence there to support his view.

79. NS-Briefe, July 1, 1929, pp. 22–24.

80. Goebbels, , “Vom Chaos zur Form,” NS-Briefe, Aug. 1, 1929.Google Scholar

81. Goebbels, “Nationalsozialismus oder Bolschewismus,” NS-Briefe, Oct. 15, 1925. For Goebbels' and Gregor's proposal to the Hanover Conference for a Russian entente, see Kele, pp. 96–97.

82. Gregor Strasser, “Russland und wir,” Völkischer Beobachter, Oct. 22, 1925. Otto Strasser, “Trotzskis Ende,” NS-Briefe, Oct. 15, 1927; “Die Krise des Kommunismus,” ibid., Feb. 1, 1929; and especially “Der Sowjetstern geht unter,” ibid., Dec. 15, 1927, republished as no. 2 of the Grüne Hefte (Berlin: Kampf-Verlag, 1929).Google Scholar See also “10 Jahre Sowjet Union,” NS-Briefe, Apr. 15, 1929, and Internationale Marxismus oder nationaler Sozialismus: Eine Grudlegende Diskussion zwischen Otto Strasser und Bruno Frei (Berlin: Verlag der nationale Sozialist, 1930), published after Otto's break with the party.Google Scholar

83. For example, in “Ministersessel oder Revolution?” Berliner Arbeiter-Zeitung, Aug. 10, 1930; published as a pamphlet by the Kampf-Verlag, 1930.

84. Only one early article, “Wahlbeteiligung oder nicht?” NS-Briefe, Dec. 1, 1925, is at all suggestive of this position.

85. Lane, pp. 148–52, 156–60.

86. Ibid.

87. See the biographical note by Haushofer, Heinz in Neue Deutsche Biographie (Berlin, 1957), vol. 3, p. 517.Google Scholar

88. Das Bauerntum als Lebensquell der Nordischen Rasse (Munich: J. F. Lehmann Verlag, 1928, new editions 1929, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1937, 1938, 1940, 1942).Google ScholarNeuadel aus Blut und Boden (Munich: Lehmann, 1930, new editions 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1943).Google Scholar Schuman, Heiden, and other early writers on the Nazis often pointed to these works as a source of the policies of the SS.

89. Bullock, Alan (New York, 1961), p. 110;Google ScholarReitlinger, Gerald, The SS: Alibi of a Nation (London, 1956), p. 29;Google Scholar and Frischauer, Willi, Himmler: The Evil Genius of the Third Reich (London, 1953), pp. 28–29,Google Scholar say that Darré joined the party in 1928. Höhne and Ackermann show some uncertainty on this point, but Orlow, p. 180, has him entering the party in time to set up the Agrarpolitisches Apparat and write the agricultural program in March. Yet there is as yet no documentary evidence which places Darré in the party before November 1930 (Hauptarchiv, roll 46, folder 951, cited by Orlow). Darré himself claimed that he had no association with the party or with Hitler before April 1930: Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg, 1949), vol. 42, pp. 405–7.Google ScholarKater's, Michael excellent essay, “Die Artamanen—Völkische Jugend in der Weimarer Republik,” Historische Zeitschrjft, vol. 213 (1971), pp. 577–638, assembles conflicting evidence on Darré's relations with the party, but comes to no firm conclusion as to when he joined. See especially pp. 623–28, nn. 295–96 and 320–22.Google Scholar

90. Gies, Horst, “NSDAP und Landwirtschaftliche Organisationen in der Endphase der Weimarer Republik,” Vierteljahrshefte, loc. cit.Google Scholar

91. On the basis of the evidence cited in Lane, p. 156, it seems to me most likely that Darré was introduced to the party by Paul Schultze-Naumburg, not by Himmler.

92. Lane, pp. 153–56.

93. Ibid.

94. Ibid.

95. The influence is clear by 1931, uncertain before that date. Ackermann and Höhne, in the process of trying to show the roots of these ideas in the Artamanenbewegung, concoct a fictional meeting between Himmler and Darré in that movement. See also nn. 66 and 89, above.

96. “Landstand und Staat,” Völkisther Beobachter, Apr. 19–20, 1931, Apr. 21, 1931; Landvolk in Not und seine Rettung durch Adolf Hitler (Munich:Eher, 1932).Google Scholar See also “Auf den Weg,” Nationalsozialistische Landpost, Sept. 1931; and “Ostraumgedanke oder Rück forderung unserer Kolonien?” Völkischer Beobachter, May 9, 1931.

97. Das Zuchtziel des deutschen Volkes (Munich: Lehmann, 1931), originally in Volk und Rasse.Google Scholar

98. Nolte, p. 325.

99. Lane, pp. 169–84.