Writing about the Holocaust as Scholars and Survivors: Early Holocaust Research and the Practices of Restitution and Reparations

Abstract

This article looks at the impact sources produced in the practice of restitution and reparation had on early Holocaust historiography. It analyses the examples of two Holocaust researchers from the first generation who today are perceived as important pioneers in their field of study: Henry Friedlander and Raul Hilberg. While both held strong personal opinions about the practice of restitution, they did not use sources produced in it for their research. This article explores three main reasons for this omission. The first one is connected to the questions of how they wanted to study the Holocaust. The second reason is to be found in their moral criticism of the practice itself. The third reason lays in the actual effects their research had on legal proceedings resulting from the Holocaust. In the end, this article argues that their decision of how to study the Holocaust was very closely intertwined with what these scholars perceived as their task as historians. An analysis of the first generation's take on restitution and reparation practices provides insights into the development of early Holocaust historiography. It shows what they perceived as their obligation as historians of the Holocaust as well as difficulties they faced by addressing the topic.