Denazification 2 of 3
No ‘glorious summer’ followed the ‘winter of discontent’. Yet, from April onwards, there was an ever-greater feeling in town that the final weeks of combat were receding into the background.
Fritz Ernst, historian (diary, 13 May)
The extent to which the picture of the undamaged castle ruin was really able to comfort them doubtless depended greatly on the individual case. Most of the POWs had returned by 1948, presumably the year in which the notice was printed. While they encountered the familiar picture of undamaged rows of buildings, the latter were often occupied by unknown individuals. Besides the 9,000 evacuees from Mannheim, as early as in July 1945 Heidelberg had to receive 12,000 American soldiers and officers. Hence it was not improbable that a returning father found unknown people in his apartment or even that his family was in a completely different house. Owing to the clothing shortage he had, at first, to have his uniform dyed and keep wearing the same one. When the military government banned this from 1 December, the city called for donations in kind “for our former soldiers” and threated to requisition them if this appeal did not produce enough men’s suits, coats and shirts.
Even before the city-wide registration of Nazi party members the military government had started with the denazification of the Heidelberg administration. City Commander Haskell informed Amberger that the city on the Neckar was regarded as a “test case” for cooperation between Americans and Germans. He and his superiors set “great store by a rapid and strict execution of the purge”. The first list, in which Amberger had to name 100 “unacceptable party members”, was to be followed by others at weekly intervals. The first announcement, published by the Americans on 26 April 1945, contained a mixed collection of “purges”: from Lord Mayor Neinhaus and his counterparts in the surrounding municipalities to officials in various authorities to bank clerks and couriers. But they also included a musician, a vet, a rag collector and four women. By early November, Amberger and his successors had, by order of the military government, dismissed 517 people (26 percent of municipal employees). Prior to this, they had to disclose their political guilt in questionnaires, but that was not the only criterion. For example, the technical staff were to be fired last as they were the hardest to replace.
The extermination of National Socialism was a declared war aim of the victorious powers. More difficult than banning the party was finding out who actually were members of the Nazi party. Denazification had top priority for the military government in Heidelberg as well. City Commander Haskell drafted a form and commissioned the city to conduct a survey: All those required to report had to go to distribution centers, collect a postcard-size, bilingual report card, fill it out “carefully and conscientiously” and hand it in against a receipt in the Old University building or in the Handschuhsheim town hall. Since the bridges were destroyed, the registration had to take place at these two locations. The military government thereby delegated important tasks to the city administration at an early stage. The completed cards and a list of NSDAP members compiled from them had to be handed back to the city again. Nothing is known about what happened to them. Probably they served as a basis for dismissals and confiscation of assets. On 19 May Amberger announced the result – 5,822 registered party members. Not on the list were, however, those Nazis who had fled, gone underground or been interned in the first days of the occupation, for example District Leader Wilhelm Seiler, and the Heidelberg residents conscripted to the Wehrmacht who were prisoners of war.
