Racialization of Disease: The Typhus-Epidemic, Antisemitism and Closed Borders in German-Occupied Poland, 1915–1918

0Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This article analyses responses to the typhus epidemic in German-occupied Poland during the First World War. The German conquest of the Kingdom of Poland in 1915 not only instated a new political regime, but also brought about social misery on an unprecedented scale. Especially in larger cities, the poor segments of the population were made homeless or cramped into tiny apartments and suffered from hunger and disease. From 1915 outbreaks of typhus occurred in major cities, often found amongst the Jewish population. The German occupiers forcefully responded by fumigating houses, quarantining suspected cases, and forcing thousands of families into delousing facilities. These measures particularly targeted Jews as German medical officials identified them as the carriers and spreaders of the disease – some of them characterized typhus itself as a ‘Jewish disease’. In an effort to prevent the spread of the disease to Germany and to protect the German Volkskörper, Polish Jews – for the fact that they were Jews – were from 1918 onwards barred from crossing the border and thousands of Jewish migrant workers in German industry were arrested and deported. The article examines both the political and the medical context in which these policies were employed and analyses Jewish responses to both the spreading of the disease and the German anti-Jewish policies. It shows the close connection between health policy and antisemitic and nationalist ideological narratives and projects, and identifies this racialization of disease as a key moment in the development of German antisemitism.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rybak, J. (2022). Racialization of Disease: The Typhus-Epidemic, Antisemitism and Closed Borders in German-Occupied Poland, 1915–1918. European History Quarterly, 52(3), 461–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/02656914221103467

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free