The Curious History of Von Cramm Hall

The Cornell community is greatly privileged to have access to a wealth of historical artifacts around campus that pay tribute to the intellectual and cultural diversity of the institution over its history. Today, we examine a relatively less significant building with an interesting history: Von Cramm Hall. Before we discuss the history of the building though, we would  like to emphasize that we strongly condemn Nazism, Communism and all other totalitarian movements throughout history, regardless of whether they base their ideology on promoting racial supremacy or inciting class conflict.

Established in 1956 by Thomas B. Gilchrist, Sr. (Cornell class of 1906) [See Von Cramm, A Memorial (1956)] and his son, Thomas Gilchrist Jr. (Yale class of 1933), Von Cramm Hall was funded using the American assets of Elizabeth von Elverfeldt, mother of Friedrich Sigismund von Cramm. Previous reporting on this building has distorted the circumstances of the gift. For instance, Cramm (for whom the building is a memorial) is described as “an officer in the Nazi army” in an article from the Cornell Daily Sun from October 9, 1956. The Sun adds that the building is “dedicated to a man whose principles and ideals represent everything-which is inimical to democratic institutions”. We also note that Thomas B. Gilchrist Jr. served as a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army in World War II. Extant correspondences indicate that both father and son hoped that the hall would promote German-American understanding.

Given that Cramm was born in 1916, though, he would have been liable for conscription in the Nazi German army (Wehrmacht) in 1936. Indeed, this is what Thomas Gilchrist writes, that “He and the members of his family were anti-Nazi but he had no choice than to serve in the German Army, which was then under Nazi control.” It is not particularly surprising for a member of the lesser nobility to be placed into the officer corps. A war memorial at his school in Brandenburg an der Havel records him and other students as Kriegsopfer (or “war casualties/victims”), most of whom can be seen to be junior officers. Cramm was last a 1st Lieutenant in the 16th Panzerdivision, and according to sources obtained by the Review from the Military History Research Office (Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt, MGFA) of Germany, there is “no indication for atrocities committed by members of this division against soldiers of the Red Army or civilians in the Soviet Union”.

At a macro level, the Wehrmacht’s senior leadership was complicit in enabling Hitler’s crimes, but at a micro level, it is important to judge units and people individually. (See Jeff Rutherford’s Combat and Genocide on the Eastern Front. The German Infantry’s War, 1941-44) The nuances between individual culpability and collective responsibility require historical context to appreciate, and we believe that higher education should help students see events in their proper historical and political context. This is extremely important given the diversity of students at Cornell, which includes conscripts from countries such as South Korea, Singapore and Israel.

Instead of slandering a benefactor to appear righteous, we should prefer to confront history openly and provide readers the information needed to make their own judgement.

So let us confront the realities Cramm faced in his life. What was it like to go to a school under the Nazi regime? An article about the aristocratic school Cramm attended provides us some clues: Soon after the Nazis seized power in early 1933, the SA and SS marched through the school, while the headmaster, Prof. Ludwig Ziehen, welcomed them and “commemorated the liberation of Brandenburg through the national movement”. The school assumed an increasingly National Socialist character under his leadership. Ziehen announced in Mar 1934 that “the spirit of the “Third Reich” was in line with the old Prussian spirit of duty and devotion to the state.”

This period coincides with what is known as Gleichschaltung (literally synchronization or co-ordination), the process by which the Nazis systematically established a totalitarian state apparatus in Germany – suspending citizen rights, forcing Nazi ideology onto the population, and bringing all organizations in Germany into Nazi control, the ultimate aim being to restrict voluntary association and opposition to the state. In such an environment, it becomes difficult to discern between those who yielded to pressure to join Nazi organizations, and those who “self-coordinated” (selbstgleichgeschaltet) (see Karl-Dietrich Bracher’s The Nazi Dictatorship, 247-59). From Dorothy Thompson’s report on 27 Aug 1934 on the situation in Germany, it is clear that conditions in Germany were already far from that of a free society. The fact that Cramm’s mother transferred her assets to Thomas Gilchrist Sr. in 1936 suggests that their family disapproved of Nazism. In the opinion of this author, one must always judge those who live under a dictatorship based on actions, historical context, and not on claimed views.

In the years since the end of the Cold War, the “myth of the clean Wehrmacht” has been definitively debunked. Thomas Gilchrist’s claim that Cramm gave his life to a “war against Bolshevism” is likely due to the circumstances of the Cold War. A perspective with more historical context is provided for by Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer: “The simple Wehrmacht soldier may have fought bravely, but if his bravery served an ideology of conquest, occupation and annihilation, then it was for nothing,” adding, “I very well recognize the individual tragedy that lies in this truth.”

Our investigation provides us with some information about the circumstances in which the young Cramm lived, although information about his actual views are difficult to determine with full certainty. Friedrich Sigismund von Cramm fought on the side of a regime whose cause was morally reprehensible, but we also know that those living in a dictatorship have little choice in the matter. What is for certain, is that we know from Cramm’s surviving family and the Gilchrists hoped that their gift would promote international understanding.

This investigation originally appeared in the Cornell Review’s December 10, 2021 print edition. It was submitted by a member of the community who wishes to remain anonymous.