Stamm und Landschaft. Josef Nadlers Konzeption der deutschen Literaturgeschichte

Josef Nadlers approach to historiography of German national literature has often been criticized because of its affinities to National Socialism, but the early development of his theories and the reasons for their increasing acceptance until 1933 have been disregarded. This book analyses the relation between Nadlers own adaptions of his concepts in the years 1912 to 1951, the changing political and scientific contexts and the varying attitude of journalists and German philologists to his work. It presents the basis for the theorys first formulation and further development, the concepts problematic aspects, and the reason why it still gained scientific status only to lose it again. Nadler developed a system of specifically German folkish cultures ("Volkstümer") based on the allegedly hereditary character of a German tribe ("Stammescharakter") and its interaction with its environment based on this character. Each folkish culture is supposed to fulfill a specific task in the history of German literature and of the German people. Before 1918, his work shows influences of imperial thinking. Later, it is marked by the concerns of the German bourgeoisie about the supposed "degeneration" of the German people and the loss of territories. In the 1930s, Nadler considered himself an authority of national-socialist ideology, but among Nazi officials his concepts were controversial. After 1945, Nadler interpreted this as a proof for not having been a Nazi. Therefore, the substance of his concepts remained unchanged while he again altered their presentation. Before 1920, most German philologists refused to accept Nadlers work. This was not due to any general objection to hereditary-based ("völkische") conceptions, but to the exlusion of nomothetical methods from German philology. This fact lost its signifcance with the growing need for an academic model for writing the history of German national literature and with the changed political situation, which seemed to confirm the implications of Nadlers work. These advantages lasted through the 1930s and early 1940s, though some critics thought the concepts conformity with NS-ideology insufficient. After 1945 Nadler wasnt able to reestablish his concepts scientific status because of the general rejection of hereditary-based aspects in German Philology. Nadlers approach has always been controversial. But its most problematic aspect - the idea of specific mental traits for each German "tribe" held constant by heredity - was never critically examined in its entirety, because it was generally accepted from the outset. Even after 1945, the concepts first formulation got some positive reviews although it already built on this ieda. Besides, some obejections were made through the whole period (circular reasoning, a-priori-reasoning), but didnt always have the same consequences for the scientific status of the tribal- folkish conception of the history of German literature.