The Historiography of the Holocaust

132 Martin Dean
Jewish property rights remains unsolved in many eastern European countries
to this day, as communist expropriations have served to overlay and consolidate
the theft of property conducted under Nazi rule.
In other countries, such as Hungary, the significance of Jewish wealth within
the economy was greater and the local government also enjoyed more autonomy
from the Germans. This final section will review briefly some of the recent
historiography of the Holocaust in Hungary as a useful example for comparison.
Although the timing and organization of the Holocaust in Hungary during
1944 differed considerably from that described in the occupied territories of
the Soviet Union, nevertheless, several recent interpretations have focused on
the issue of ‘local collaboration’, stressing themes similar to those analysed
above.
Despite the well-oiled machinery of destruction the Nazis had created by 1944,
it is unlikely that they could have destroyed the bulk of Hungary’s Jewish
community without local assistance. As described by the leading historian of
the Holocaust in Hungary, Randolph Braham:
Without the unequivocal support of the new, constitutionally appointed
Hungarian government [of Döme Sztózay] that enjoyed the blessing of
Miklós Horthy, who was Hungary’s highly respected head of state, the Nazis –
as the cases of Bulgaria and Romania had clearly shown – would have been
severely hampered if not helpless. The SS commandos were, in fact, amazed
at the enthusiasm with which their Hungarian counterparts were ready to
‘solve’ the Jewish question. The new government placed the instruments of
state power at the disposal of the Hungarian and German Nazis bent on the
swiftest possible implementation of the Final Solution. With Horthy still at
the helm and providing the symbol of national sovereignty, the Hungarian
police, gendarmerie, and civil service collaborated with the SS in the
anti-Jewish drive with a routine and efficiency that impressed even the
Germans. 71
Tim Cole has recently taken Braham’s analysis of the indispensability of
Hungarian support one step further by examining the direct contribution of
the local authorities to the anti-Jewish measures. He even criticizes the approach
of Braham and others, who worked primarily from German sources, noting
that they inevitably laid ‘greater stress on external rather than internal factors,
characterizing power as emanating from the centre, and portraying Hungarian
officials as merely carrying out German orders’. Cole draws attention to the
conclusions drawn by Elek Karsai in his study of the Hungarian administration:
‘if any local administration deviated from the national directives, they were
aimed at exceeding the target: either by implementing the government decrees
ahead of schedule or by taking more severe and harsher measures than required.