Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T14:47:46.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Gypsiness,” Racial Discourse and Persecution: Balkan Roma during the Second World War

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Sevasti Trubeta
Sevasti Trubeta*
Affiliation:
Institute for Eastern European Studies, Free University Berlin. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The debate about the Roma's fate throughout the Second World War has taken on a controversial character in recent years. The focal point of this controversy is whether the Roma's persecution was racially motivated or not. Reflecting upon the Roma's treatment throughout the war period, various scholars regard social-political factors such as the wandering way of life and especially the ascription of criminality as the main reasons for discrimination against and persecution of Roma. Ultimately, the authority most responsible for the crimes against Roma in the “Old Reich” was the Criminal Office. An extreme stance is the thesis of G. Lewy, who denies not only the planned character of the persecution but also its racial/racist intention. Lewy also refutes the comparability of the Roma's fate with that of the Jews.

Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , December 2003 , pp. 495 - 514
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. For example, G. Lewy, The Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); L. Lucassen, Zigeuner. Die Geschichte eines polizeilichen Ordnungsbegriffes in Deutschland 1700–1945 (Weimar and Vienna: Böhlau, 1996); M. Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid. Die nationalsozialistische “Lösung der Zigeunerfrage” (Hamburg: Christians, 1996); S. Heim S., “Sinti und Roma im Rahmen der Nationalsozialistischen Bevölkerungspolitik in Südosteuropa,” in Dlugoboski W., ed., Sinti und Roma im KL Auschwitz-Birkenau 1943–44 (Oswiecim, Poland: Verlag des staatlichen Museums Auschwitz-Birkenou, 1998), pp. 145–161; Y. Bauer, Rethinking the Holocaust (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998); for a contrary point of view see W. Wippermann, “‘Wie mit den Juden?’ Der nationalsozialistische Völkermord an den Sinti und Roma in Politik, Rechtsprechung und Wissenschaft,” Bulletin für Faschismus und Weltkriegsforschung, No. 15, 2000, pp. 3–29; T. Bastian, Sinti und Roma im Dritten Reich. Geschichte einer Verfolgung (Munich: Beck, 2001); Rose Romani, ed., “Den Rauch hatten wir täglich vor Augen”. Der nationalsozialistische Völkermord an den Sinti und Roma (Heidelberg: Wunderhorn, 1999), particularly pp. 344–353.Google Scholar

2. For example, Lucassen, Zigeuner; Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid; Heim, Sinti und Roma im Rahmen. Google Scholar

3. Lewy, The Nazi Persecution. Google Scholar

4. Current historians frequently avoid the term “Balkans” and prefer the term “Southeastern Europe,” not least because of the pejorative connotations of the former. However, at least in the Nazi era the term “Southeastern Europe” was also not free from pejorative connotations. See numerous articles in Volkstum im Südosten (1939 to September 1944). On the terms “Balkans” and “Southeastern Europe” as describing a historical space, see: V. Papacostea, “La péninsule balkanique et le problème des études compares,” Balcania, Vol. 7, 1943, pp. 3–21; M. Todorova, Imagining the Balkans (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997); M. Todorova, “The Balkans: From Discovery to Invention,” Slavic Review, Vol. 53, No. 2, 1994, pp. 453–482; M. Todorova, “Der Balkan als Analysekategorie: Grenzen, Raum, Zeit,” Geshichte und Gesellschaft. Zeitschrift für Historische Sozialwissenschaft, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2002, pp. 471–492; H. Sundhaussen, “Europa Balcanica. Der Balkan als historischer Raum Europas,” Geschichte und Gesellschaft, Vol. 25, 1999, pp. 626–653; H. Sundhaussen, “Die Dekonstruktion des Balkanraums (1870 bis 1913),” in Lienau Cay, ed., Raumstrukturen und Grenzen in Südosteuropa (Munich: Südosteuropa Gesellschaft, 2001), pp. 19–41. In this article the name “Balkans” will be used primarily, to emphasize the National Socialist ideological context.Google Scholar

5. G. Aly and S. Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung. Auschwitz und die deutsche Pläne für eine neue europäische Ordnung (Frankfurt: Fischer Taschenbuch, 1993), p. 33.Google Scholar

6. See Volkstum im Südosten, “Zur Zigeunerfrage,” May 1942, pp. 95–96. The article is signed “K.;” the author is apparently the publisher of the journal, namely, Felix Kraus.Google Scholar

7. E. Martini, “Einiges über die Seuchenlage in Südosteuropa,” Leipziger Vierteljahrschrift für Südosteuropa, Vol. 2, 1938, pp. 102–118.Google Scholar

8. Volkstum im Südosten, “Zur Zigeunerfrage,” May 1942, p. 95. On the application of preexisting Gypsy stereotypes to the Balkan Roma, see a further article by G. A. Küppers, Sonnenberg, “Begegnung mit Balkanzigeunern,” Volk und Rasse, Vol. 6, 1938, pp. 183–193.Google Scholar

9. On the semantics of the term “Balkans,” see Todorova, Imagining the Balkans. The main elements that construct the Balkans’ image are primitivism, civilization deficits and, to some extent, exotism. To the civilization deficits there were thought to belong the linguistic, confessional and the alleged racial variety among the Balkan populations. For Nazis’ particular aspects see e.g. Hugo Hassinger, “Lebensraumfragen der Völker des europäischen Südostens,” in K. H. Dietzel, eds., Lebensraumfragen europäischer Völker Vol. 1: Europa (Leipzig: Verlag von Quellen und Meyer, 1941), pp. 588–613; A. Klein, “Vom inneren Reichtum der ‘Balkanier',” Volkstum im Südosten, November 1942, pp. 184–188.Google Scholar

10. See Todorova, Imagining the Balkans. Google Scholar

11. Volkstum in Südosten often characterized the population in the Balkans (and particularly in Yugoslavia) as “nomadic” or “settled tribes” and mentioned that chaos ruled in the region; for example, F. Kraus, “Das Ende der südslawischen Frage,” May 1941, pp. 73—75, in which the author remarks, “Elements of chaos have again attempted to disturb the new order and, instead of a great plan for making useful for the Southeast folks the region which was for a long time perceived as Europe's powder keg, to make it recently the start point of the war expansion” (p. 73). Compare with A. Walaschofski, “Einflüsse des Hirtenlebens auf die Entwicklung von Volk und Staat in Rumäinen,” Südostdeutsche Forschungen, Vol. 3, 1938, pp. 810–822, about Romania and its difference from other “European state folks.”Google Scholar

12. Volkstum im Südosten, “Rückblick,” April 1942, p. 57.Google Scholar

13. F. Ruland, “Die Zigeunerfrage im Südosten,” Volkstum im Südosten, October 1942, pp. 163–169.Google Scholar

14. Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung. Google Scholar

15. Heim, Sinti und Roma im Rahmen, p. 144.Google Scholar

16. Ruland, Die Zigeunerfrage, p. 165; Volkstum im Südosten, October 1942, “K,” p. 95; B. H. Zimmermann, “Zur Zigeunerfrage,” Volkstum im Südosten, January 1943, p. 20. Compare with the similar argument of T. P. Vucanovic, “The Gypsy Population in Yugoslavia,” Journal of Gypsy Lore Society, Vol. 42, Nos 1–2, 1963, pp. 10–27. Vucanovic has been a well-quoted author among scholars in the postwar period; he formulated the concept of “ethnic mimicry” among the Roma. Vucanovic complains about the lack of statistical data on Roma in Yugoslavia according to racial criteria and states that “[I]n many regions of Yugoslavia the Gypsy population tries to hide its real racial character, pretending to belong to some other Balkan ethnic group […] which results in reducing the estimated number of Gypsy inhabitants” (p. 11).Google Scholar

17. Karl C. von Loesch and Wilhelm E. Mühlmann, Die Völker und Rassen Südosteuropas (Berlin: Volk und Reich Verlag, 1943).Google Scholar

18. Gypsies in Bulgaria are further mentioned by K. Schickert, who remarks that official Bulgarian statistics included Gypsies. “Bulgariens ägäische Provinz,” Volkstum im Südosten, January 1943, pp. 9–15.Google Scholar

19. Vucanovic, “The Gypsy Population.”Google Scholar

20. According to Vucanović (ibid.) the presence of Roma in Croatia and Vojvodina in the nineteenth century is also statistically recorded, though less comprehensively than in Serbia.Google Scholar

21. Volkstum im Südosten, October 1942, “K”, p. 95. See also F. Ruland, Die Zigeunerfrage. Google Scholar

22. “Rückblick,” Volkstum im Südosten, April 1942, pp. 57–60.Google Scholar

23. The ascription of more or less prestigious descent to groups in accordance with their degree of cooperation with the Nazis was a frequent phenomenon. For example: F. Ronneberger, “Bevölkerungsbewegungen der Gegenwart in Südosteuropa,” Volkstum im Südosten, April 1942, pp. 61–69. Ronneberger claims that “Croats and Serbs are two different culture worlds” and, even more, “two contrary state principles” (p. 65). H. von Pozniak (“Neue Forschungen zum Problem des iranischen Ursprungs des kroatischen Volkes,” Vollkstum im Südosten, Vol. 8, 1943, pp. 132–138) refers to the debate on the supposed Iranian descent of the Croats. Although the (hidden but present) pejorative emphasis in the description of the Croats as a “tribe” (similar to the other Balkan groups), the author recognizes the political readiness of their leaders to cooperate with the Nazis, as well as to dissociate themselves from the (Pan-)Slavic movements constituting a specific (non-Slavic) historical profile. Due to this readiness he acknowledges the Croats as a Volkstum approximating “European patterns.” See also E. Lendl, “Entwicklung und Schicksal des kroatischen Volksbodens,” Volkstum im Südosten, May 1941, pp. 86–90. As for the Hungarians, see A. Michaelis, “Über die Abstammung der Ungarn,” Volkstum im Südosten, Vol. 9, 1943, pp. 149–155. F. Ronneberger (“Das rassische Antlitz der Bulgaren,” Vol. 9, 1943, pp. 156–161) presents the view of a Bulgarian professor who claims that the Bulgarians are “racially purified” and basically distinct from the Slavs. Ronneberger avoids expressing his own opinion about this, but he points out Bulgaria's political readiness to reject Pan-Slavism and Russian influence. After that, he assumes to have found out/observed numerous Bulgarian intellectuals who anthropologically belong to the dinaric-northern type. Likewise Volkstum im Südosten (“Erneurung in Griechenland,” July 1941, pp. 123–126, no byline) reports about National Socialists in Greece and claims to have recognized by “mental attitude” the influence of “German blood” that arrived in the country through migrations a long time ago and now was revived.Google Scholar

24. Compare with the similar stereotypes of another opponent, Ostpolen, from Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, p. 91.Google Scholar

25. “Vom Wesensbilde der Serben,” Volkstum im Südosten, January 1942, p. 18.Google Scholar

26. Compare with an earlier article by R. Busch-Zantner, “Die serbische Gesellschaft,” Volkstum im Südosten, July 1941, pp. 101–104: the author presumes that Serbia's political leadership has no shared blood origin and that there have always been parasites among them—numerous Turks, Greeks, Jews, Armenians and descendants of Aromunian nomads (p. 102).Google Scholar

27. H. Friedlander, Der Weg zum NS-Genozid. Von der Euthanasie zur Endlösung (Berlin: Berlin Verlag, 1997); Lewy, The Nazi Persecution; K. Pätzold, “Die faschistischen Genozide. Perspektiven. Juden, Sinti und Roma und Behinderte,” Bulletin für Faschismus und Weltkriegsforschung, No. 15, 2000, pp. 30–36; W. Wippermann, Wie die Zigeuner. Antisemitismus und Antiziganismus im Vergleich (Berlin: Elefanten Press, 1997) and “Wie mit den Juden?”Google Scholar

28. On earlier phenomena of correlation between “anti-Semitism” and “anti-Gypsiesm” in the Middle Ages as well as early modern times, see W. Wippermann, Wie die Zigeuner. Google Scholar

29. See Wippermann, “Wie mit den Juden?” p. 13 and Wie die Zigeuner; Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid; D. Kenrick and G. Puxon, The Destiny of Europe's Gypsies (London: 1972); Heim, Sinti und Roma im Rahmen. Google Scholar

30. Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, p. 135.Google Scholar

31. Kenrick and Puxon, The Destiny; Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und genozid; Heim, Sinti und Roma im Rahmen; E. Marushiakova and V. Popov, “Die bulgarischen Roma während des Zweiten Weltkriegs,” in D. Kenrick, ed., Sinti und Roma unter dem Nazi-Regime. Vol. 2. Die Verfolgung im besetzten Europa (Berlin: Centre de recherches tsiganes/Edition Parabolis, 2000), pp. 93–98.Google Scholar

32. Marushiakova and Popov, Die bulgarischen Roma. Google Scholar

33. See J. Georgiou, M. Dimitriou, E. Politou, “Roma: Katochi kai Antistasi” (“Roma: Occupation and Residence”), in Eleftherotypia. Istorika (Athens: 2001). Compare with H. R. Huttenbach, “The Nazi Genocide of Gypsies in Germany and Eastern Europe,” in David Crowe and John Kolsti, eds, The Gypsies of Eastern Europe (New York and London: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 1991), pp. 31–9.Google Scholar

34. Marushiakova and Popov, Die bulgarischen Roma. Google Scholar

35. The article titled “Fremdrassen in Deutschland” by J. Römer, Volk und Rasse, No. 3, 1936, pp. 88–95, is indicative of Nazi priorities as well as of the setting of the Gypsies within the same ideological context as the Jews. This article deals with the “non-Jewish strange races” in “Central Germany's district” and claims to have found out “strange racial elements,” explicitly, elements of “such races which do not belong to the general racial standards of our folk” (p. 88). Comparing Gypsies with Jews, the author projects the stereotypes against the latter onto former and notes, “In addition to the Jewish folk and its mixed blood members one can occasionally meet in Germany further strange racial elements which have diverse origins and are variously known depending on their constitution and spreading” (p. 88). Subsequently the author remarks that a group that appears closed like the Jews is the Gypsies and he goes on to focus his statements on a Gypsy family living in a German district.Google Scholar

36. A. M. Khazanov, Nomads and the Outside World (New York: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1994), pp. 15–17.Google Scholar

37. R. Hehemann, Die “Bekämpfung des Zigeunerunwesens” im Wilhelminischen Deutschland und in der Weimarer Republik, 1871–1933 (Frankfurt: Haag & Herchen Verlag, 1987), pp. 30–35.Google Scholar

38. D. S. Constantopoulos, Zur Nationalitätenfrage Südosteuropas (Würzburg: Hansische Universitat, 1940), pp. 52–57.Google Scholar

39. Constantopoulos (ibid.) deals in his doctoral thesis with the nationality question in Southeastern Europe and even with the instance of the Greek minority in Albania. However, he presents in great detail the concepts of “space,” “space of life” and “nationality” as well as “state” among German and Greek scholars before as well as during the period of National Socialism. In the second chapter he explains theoretical issues of the “space concept” (“Raum und Natur,” “Die Juden und die Nomaden,” “Bauernstand und Raumgefühl”) and claims that the desire for sedentary life and autochthony can be also found among Jews.Google Scholar

40. R. Ritter, “Die Bestandaufnahme der Zigeuner und Zigeunermischlinge in Deutschland,” Der Öffentliche Gesundheitsdienst, Vol. 6, No. 21, 1941, pp. 477–489.Google Scholar

41. J. Römer, “Fremdrassen in Sachsen (Aus der Erhebung des Rassenpolitischen Amtes der NSDAP),” Volk und Rassen, No. 7, 1937, p. 281.Google Scholar

42. Ibid. Google Scholar

43. Volk und Rasse, Vol. 14, No. 5, 1939, p. 118; “Sonderklassen für Zigeunerkinder. Der Oberbürgermeister von Köln hat angeordnet, dass in den verschiedenen Volksschulen die dort befindlichen Zigeunerkinder ab 1. Dezember 1939 in einer Klasse zusammengefaßt werden. Dadurch sind Zigeunerkinder ähnlich wie Judenkinder aus dem Zusammenleben mit der deutschen Jugend ausgeschaltet worden.”Google Scholar

44. J. Römer, “Zigeuner in Deutschland,” Volk und Rasse, Vol. 4, 1934, pp. 112–113.Google Scholar

45. Küppers, Begegnung mit Balkanzigeunern, p. 183.Google Scholar

46. Ruland, Die Zigeunerfrage, p. 163.Google Scholar

47. Loesch and Mühlmann, Die Völker und Rassen, p. 35.Google Scholar

48. Heim, Sinti und Roma im Rahmen; Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, p. 122. The crucial importance attached to social stratification for the concept of the “new order” is well expressed in the social selection of the foreign Germans migrating into the Old Reich; see Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, pp. 135, 164. Characteristic of this social-biological view are numerous publications in the journals of the time (e.g. Volk und Rasse), which differentiate between the masses, the middle class, farmers, intellectuals and officials as well. It is a matter of the evaluation of different professions in terms of “völkisch ideology.” For example: H. Gottong, “Zwei Rassenkundliche Untersuchungen im General gouvernement,” Volk und Rasse, No. 2, 1943, pp. 21–29.Google Scholar

49. See Aly and Heim, Vordenker der Vernichtung, p. 43 and specifically about Southeastern Europe on p. 351. Volk und Rasse regularly reported about restrictions against Jews in the Balkan states.Google Scholar

50. The discrimination against Roma caused an avalanche-like effect: professional bans, restrictions in everyday life, deportations of males, etc. caused extreme neediness among Roma; Nazis called this situation a “social question” and attempted to “resolve” it through liquidation. See Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid. Google Scholar

51. Küppers, Begegnung mit Balkanzigeunern … Google Scholar

52. See Wippermann, Wie die Zigeuner …, p. 136; E. Jäckel, Hitler's Weltanschauung. Entwurf einer Herrschaft (Stuttgart: Deutscher Verlag, 1983).Google Scholar

53. Küppers, Begegnung mit Balkanzigeunern, p. 184.Google Scholar

54. R. Ritter, “Primitivität und Kriminalität,” Monatsschrift für Kriminalbiologie und Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 31, No. 9, 1940, pp. 197–210.Google Scholar

55. R. Höß, Kommandant in Auschwitz. Autobiographische Aufzeichnungen des Rudolf Höß, ed. M. Broszat (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1963 [2002]).Google Scholar

56. The content of the term Volk and its correlation to the term “race” were the subject of articles published in Volk und Rasse. The focal point of this comparison was that a “folk,” in contrast to a “race,” is a political community that has been naturalized and may be regarded as a “shared destiny community.” On the initial racial content of the “folk concept” in connection with the Volksgeist a good deal has been written; for example, E. J. Dittrich and F.-O. Radtke, eds, Ethnizität. Wissenschaft und Minderheiten (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1990); F. Heckmann, “Ethnos, Demos und Nation, oder: Woher stammt die Intoleranz des Nationalstaates gegenüber ethnischen Minderheiten?” in U. Bielefeld, ed., Das Eigene und das Fremde. Neuer Rassismus in der Alten Welt?, 2nd edn (Hamburg: Argument, 1992), pp. 51–78.Google Scholar

57. “Tribe” and “race” were often used as synonyms by German scholars; for example, C. G. Carus, Über die ungleiche Befähigung der verschiedenen Menschenstämme für höhere geistige Entwicklung (Leipzig: 1848).Google Scholar

58. Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid, p. 61.Google Scholar

59. Lucassen, Zigeuner. Die Geschichte; critical view by Wippermann, “Wie mit den Juden?”Google Scholar

60. P.-A. Taguieff, “Le néo-racism différentialiste,” Langage et société, Vol. 34, 1985; A. de Benost, Europe, Tiers monde, měme combat (Paris: Laffont, 1986); T. F. Pettigrew, “The Nature of Modern Racism in the United States,” Revue internationale de Psychologie Sociale, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1989, pp. 293–303; E. Balibar and L. Wallerstein, Race, Nation, Classe. Les identités ambiguës (Paris: La Découverte, 1988).Google Scholar

61. S. Trubeta, Die Konstitution von Minderheiten und die Ethnisierung sozialer und politischer Konflikte. Eine Untersuchung am Beispiel der im griechischen Thrakien ansässigen Moslemischen Minderheit (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1999), pp. 26–56; S. Trubeta, “Meionotites kai ethnotiki taftopoiisi” (“Minorities and Ethnic Identification”), Ethnologhia, Vol. 8, 2000, pp. 173–219.Google Scholar

62. On this debate see M. Barker, The New Racism (London: Journal Books, 1981); R. Miles, Racism (London and New York: Routledge, 1989); M. Banton, Racial Theories (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987); M. Banton, The Idea of Race (London: Tavistock, 1977); P.-A. Taguieff, La Force du péjugé. Essai sur le racisme et seas doubles (Paris: r (préjuge), 1988 [1990]); P.-A. Taguieff, ed., Face au racisme (Paris: Éd/La Décourte, 1991).Google Scholar

63. I. Geiss, Geschichte des Rassismus (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1989); L. Poliakov, C. Delacampagne and P. Girard, Le Rassisme (Paris: Seghers, 1979); G. L. Mosse, Rassismus. Ein Krankheitssymptom in der europäischen Geschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts (Königstein: Athenäum, 1978); R. Miles, Racism. For a comprehensive presentation of the German case since the eighteenth century see W. Wippermann (“Was ist Rassismus? Ideologien, Theorien, Forschungen,” in B. Danckwortt, T. Querg, C. Schöningh, eds, Historische Rassismusforschung. Ideologien-Täter-Opfer (Hamburg: Argument, 1995), pp. 9–33), who refers to Immanuel Kant, Von den verschiedenen Racen der Menschheit (Köningsberg: 1775) and Bestimmung des Begriffs einer Menschenrasse (1785), Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741–1801), Christopher Meiner (1747–1810), etc. Google Scholar

64. The reference to biological/physiological arguments relates to the development of physical anthropology and related disciplines since the nineteenth century.Google Scholar

65. C. Guillaumin, “Rasse. Das Wort und die Vorstellung,” in Uli Bielefeld, ed., Das Eigene und das Fremde. Neuer Rassismus in der Alten Welt? (Hamburg: Argument, 1992), p. 164.Google Scholar

66. L. Poliakov, C. Delacampagne and P. Girard, Le Rassisme; I. Geiss, Geschichte des Rassismus (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1989).Google Scholar

67. Elias Norbert, Über den Prozeß der Zivilisation (Frankfurt: 1993).Google Scholar

68. A. Memmi, “Essai de définition,” La Nef, Nos 19–20, 1964, pp. 41–47.Google Scholar

69. On the diachronic Gypsy image see B. Danckwortt, T. Querg, C. Schöningh, eds, Historische Rassismusforschung; W. D. Hund, ed., Zigeuner. Geschichte und Struktur einer rassistischen Konstruktion (Duisburg: Duisburger Institut für Sprach-und Sozialforschung, 1996); Wippermann, Wie die Zigeuner. Specifically on the “wandering way of life” see Hehemann, Die “Bekämpfung.” Google Scholar

70. In dealing with this problematic the various meanings of the notion “race” and its immediate correlation with the development of scientific discourse ought to be considered. For a historical view see the classic studies by L. Poliakov, C. Delacampagne and P. Girard (see fn 64), Le Rassisme; Geiss, Geschichte des Rassismus; Mosse, Rassismus. However, all the various racial concepts have a common denominator: the intention to classify people in big groups through phenotypic, physiological features, in connection with the ascription of mental skills and collective social-cultural behaviour patterns. On the ethnological perception of Gypsies and its racial/racist implications in the German case, see R. Gronemeyer, Zigeuner im Spiegel früher Chroniken und Abhandlungen. Quellen vom 15. bis 18. Jahrhundert (Giessen: 1987); B. Danckwortt et al., Historische Rassismusforschung; Hund, Zigeuner. Geschichte und Struktur; L. Wigger, “Ein eigenartiges Volk. Die Ethnisierung des Zigeunerstereotyps im Spiegel von Enzyklopädien und Lexika,” in Hund, Zigeuner. Geschichte und Struktur, pp. 37–66; K. Ufen, 1996, “Aus Zigeuner Menschen machen. Heinrich Moritz Grellmann und das Zigeunerbild der Aufklärung,” in Hund, Zigeuner. Geschichte und Struktur, pp. 67–90. See also Heinrich von Wliskocki, Zur Ethnographie der Zigeuner in Südosteuropa: tsiganologische Aufsätze und Briefe aus dem Zeitraum 1880–1905. Ed. by Joachim S. Hohmann (Berlin: Peter Lang, 1994).Google Scholar

71. On the use of cultural anthropology as racial discourse by National Socialism see V. Böhnigk, Kulturanthropologie als Rassenlehre. Nationalsozialistische Kulturphilosophie aus der Sicht des Philosophen Erich Rothacker (Würzburg: Königs hausen Und Neumann, 2002).Google Scholar

72. Wippermann, Wie die Zigeuner, p. 142.Google Scholar

73. Wilhelm Polligkeit, “Die Haltung der Volksgemeinschaft gegenüber dem nichtsesshaften Menschen,” in Der nicht sesshafte Mensch. Ein Beitrag zur Neugestaltung der Raum- und Menschenordnung im Großdeutschen Reich (Munich: Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1938), pp. 17–48.Google Scholar

74. For similar stereotypes of migrants in the postwar period see W.-D. Bukow and R. Lloryora, Mitbürger aus der Fremde. Soziogenese ethnischer Minoritäten, 2nd edn (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1993).Google Scholar

75. R. Ritter, “Zigeuner und Landfahrer,” in Bayerischen Landesverband für Wanderdienst, ed., Der Nichtsesshafte Mensch. Ein Beitrag zur Neugestaltung der Raum- und Menschenordnung (Munich: 1938), p. 71.Google Scholar

76. Erich Schmidt, “Die Endeckung der weißen Zigeuner. Robert Ritter und die Zigeunerforschung als Rassenhygenie,” in Hund, Zigeuner. Geschichte und Struktur, pp. 138–139.Google Scholar

77. Ritter, Primitivität und Kriminalität, p. 118.Google Scholar

78. See “‘Zigeuner-Neger-Bastarde', Rassenhygienisches Gutachten von Eva Justin,” in Tilman Zülch, ed. In Auschwitz vergast, bis heute verfolgt (Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rauohlt, 1979), pp. 189–191.Google Scholar

79. See note 23 about divergent criteria as regards Bulgarians, Croats and Serbs as well as the role of the social problematic by ascertaining the “racial descent and belonging.”Google Scholar

80. See L. Hory and M. Broszat, Der kroatische Ustasche- Staat 1941–1945 (Stuttgart: Deutscher Verlag, 1964), pp. 98, 13–57, 93–106, 76, 98. However, Rajko Djuric claims (personal communication, March 2002) that this exception did not concern all the Muslim Roma in Bosnia but only those who had the financial means to buy their lives. This subject has still not been investigated.Google Scholar

81. Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid, p. 285.Google Scholar

82. See Zimmermann, Rassenutopie und Genozid, p. 285 and p. 477, note 325, with reference to the German newspaper Donauzeitung, whose 21 August 1942 edition reports, “Gypsy problem before the solution: In Croatia all Gypsies were brought in state work camps … As the so-called ‘white Gypsies’ it came to a particular regulation. The ‘white Gypsies’ are of mohammedanish belief, have pure Aryan origin and are in greatest part native.”Google Scholar

83. “Zum Mohammedanerproblem in Bosnien und der Herzegowina” (author unknown), Vol. 7, 1943, pp. 103–112.Google Scholar

84. Ritter, Primitivität und Kriminalität. Google Scholar

85. L. Glück, “Zur physischen Anthropologie der Zigeuner in Bosnien und Herzegovina,” Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus Bosnien und Herzegovina, Vol. 5, 1897, pp. 403–433.Google Scholar

86. A. Petrović, “Contributions to the study of the Serbian Gypsies. ‘Bijeli’ or white Gypsies,” Journal of the Gypsy Lore Society, Vol. 19, No. 3, 1940, pp. 87–100.Google Scholar

87. As Petrović (ibid.) says, this assertion was claimed not only by the social majority (non-Gypsies) but also by the so-called “bijeli Gypsies” themselves. Apparently it is a matter of “myth-making” by the latter to dissociate themselves from the Gypsy stigma and even more to objectify the claimed difference.Google Scholar