Arthur Kampf. From my Life [Aus meinem Leben], 1950. Part One

CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION

German Artists' Writings in the XX Century - 12

Arthur Kampf
From my Life [Aus meinem Leben]

Aachen, Museumsverein Aachen Publishers, 1950,

64 pages of text and 16 pages of black and white pictures

Review by Francesco Mazzaferro. Part One

[Original Version: March 2017 - New Version: April 2019] 

Fig. 1) The front page of Arthur Kampf 's autobiograpghy (1950)

When the short text of the memoirs of Arthur Kampf (1864-1950) was printed in 1950 with the title From my life (Aus meinem Leben) [1], he had just passed away. In many respects, the eighty-six year old history painter died as a painter defeated by history. It may seem odd to dedicate a post to the memoirs of an artist, who is virtually forgotten today. Still, we cannot gain a complete idea of the art literature in the twentieth century Germany, if we limit ourselves to analysing only the artists who, in the art history of that country, are now sitting on the winning side. From this point of view, the publications available in the German book markets today do not offer a complete picture of the debate during those years. And perhaps it would be hardly possible to do so for a country that has gone through such terrible phases in its history, as two World Wars, Nazism and Communism.

To read the memoirs of German artists such as Arthur Kampf allows us to remove the erroneous impression that the German art literature of the early twentieth century was animated only by radical vanguard artists (Nolde, Klee, Kandinsky) or moderate modernists (Klinger, Corinth, Liebermann), all engaged in challenging the aesthetic conventions of the age of Wilhelm II. Not at all: in the first decades of the century the society of the young unified Germany was really fractured by essential aesthetic rifts. It would be surprising if it were not so, if one considers that the entire German society was crossed by an acute malaise and an inability to find elements of cohesion on fundamental issues, an inability that would manifest itself in all its severity during the Weimar years. It should however be added that, among academic painters, Kampf was perhaps the one who best managed to be in decent personal relations with the more traditional sectors of the Secession (Liebermann) and even with some moderate Expressionists (Hofer, Pechstein). When he was assigned the task of setting up the German pavilion for the International Exhibition of Rome in 1911, he even managed to engage (in a rare moment of unity) most of the manifold souls of German art (with the exception of true vanguard movements), showing around one hundred works [2]. And yet, as we shall see from his memoirs, while that experience proved Kampf’s skills to dialogue with many components in the German art world, his stay in Rome was also a missed opportunity to overcome his national vision of art.

The painter of German imperial nationalism

We have to think of Kampf as a personality with a complex history. Educated as a history painter in the context of late-romanticism, he did not only represent that official academic art, against which all German secessions of the first decades of the twentieth century stood off, but was later on one of the promoters of the dialogue between artists, musicians and writers sharing a modern but classical style in the years immediately preceding the first World War, and finally one of the most revered painters from National Socialism after 1933, decorated by Hitler personally on the occasion of his seventy-fifth birthday in 1939. In sum, he was therefore a figure who personified the intricacies of those decades.

One thing is certain. Since the years of his move from Dusseldorf to Berlin, in 1899, Kampf was a painter always passionately tied to power. He wrote that the years in which he had been close to the Emperor Wilhelm II were the most beautiful of his life [3]. e was named President of the Senate of the Academy of Fine Arts. As evidence of the role he played in Berlin in the years just preceding the First World War, in 1913-1914 he realized the huge (and now lost) fresco for the Great Hall of the Humboldt University in Berlin, with a theme of clear national inspiration: the address to the German people of the philosopher Fichte, one of the initiators of the national revival during the Napoleonic occupation.

The national theme was always very present. Think of the fresco cycle of the Life of Otto I in Magdeburg, of the many paintings where he displayed episodes of the life of Frederick II of Prussia, of the many pictures where he celebrated the pain and the wrongs suffered by the German people in the Napoleonic period, and of those paintings narrating melancholically the life of German soldiers behind the front line during the First World War.

How much he was attracted, in general, by power is demonstrated by the pages in the memoirs in which he recounted his meeting with the King of Belgium Leopold II [4], he showed enthusiasm for the receptions given by other emperors and kings [5], or wrote in detail of the days spent at Kemal Ataturk’s residence in Ankara, in order to paint his official portraits.

The purpose of the publication of the Memoirs in 1950

In the years immediately following the Second World War, the Federal Republic of Germany sought to mend the tragedies of its own history also in terms of art taste. It did it along two very different roads.

The first avenue was to impose completely new aesthetic criteria, setting a clear break with the past: the new post-war aesthetic benchmarks were in fact due to be consistent with the belonging of the Federal Republic of Germany to the Western world, and were therefore characterised by American-style abstract expressionism and French-derived informal art. This was a clear-cut new direction of art: even painters of socialist orientation, like Hofer and Pechstein, who even fought Nazism, experienced the condemnation of their work as degenerate art during the dictatorship and suffered in person the discrimination by the regime, were harshly criticized in the fifties for their figurative approach to art, considered outdated in terms of aesthetics and suspected of collusion with the Soviet socialist realism.

The second way was the complete removal of recent art history. The memory of Nazi art was erased, even in the sense that it was not possible nor due to speak about it. In some cases, however, one has the impression of a selective removal in an attempt to rehabilitate artists, who were compromised with the regime. This was also the case of these memoirs, published in Aachen in 1950, where Arthur Kampf described himself as a neo-Romantic artist linked to the world of Wilhelm II, but told us very little about his life between 1924 and 1944 and forgot completely to inform us on his links with Nazism after 1933. This is a theme on which we have already discussed also concerning the Memoirs of Emil Nolde, a much more important and successful painter than Kampf. Those of Nolde and Kampf, moreover, were very different personal circumstances; nevertheless, what was common to their Memoirs, both released after the war, is that they ignored the period after the seizure of power of Hitler, and the authors’ relations with the regime.

If the manipulation of the historical memory succeeded with Nolde (who was an artist naturally attracting the interest of the new audiences for his absolute freedom of expression), it was a lost battle for Kampf: not only his stylistic canons and his iconographic themes were too tied to the past, but they had also inspired the Nazi iconography [6]. We have decided not to display here the painting by Hermann Otto Hoyer entitled “In the beginning was the word”, dated 1937, which showed Hitler addressing his supporters exactly in the same posture as Fichte in Kampf’s fresco in the Great Hall at the Humboldt University in Berlin. None among the art critics in 1950 could ignore that affinity.

August Gotzes’ introduction and his focus on Kampf’s roots in Aachen

The text of the memoirs was preceded by a short introduction by August Gotzes. In fact, we know only very little about him. He was an art critic, who wrote short texts and articles on painters today considered as minor (Hans Schroedter 1939 [7]; Heinrich von Richthofen 1942 [8], and Walter von Wecus 1947 [9]) published during the years immediately preceding, contemporary to and following the Second World War.

Gotzes introduced the purpose of the publication of the autobiography of Kampf with these words: "It is not our job to take a position on the art creation [Note of the editor: by Kampf], a subject discussed in the two monographs printed by Velhagen and Klasing Publishers in Bielefeld [10]. While these essays have merit, they however lack the originality and the charm of immediacy that only an autobiography written by the artist can guarantee. What Kampf personally thought, planned, judged, invented, created and achieved, is revealed here in its full depth and clarity” [11].

One cannot fully understand the meaning of these lines, if not consulting the two monographs of 1922 (by Hans Rosenhagen) and 1944 (by Bruno Kroll) which Gotzes referred to. Not surprisingly, they offered diametrically opposed images of the work of the painter. Gotzes’ defence line in support of Kampf was clear: only his memoirs can give us a true picture of his art creation, which cannot be read in terms of the essays written by others, but only fully understood in one refers to his autobiographic text. The only way to fully evaluate his art was to give the floor to the artist himself.

Gotzes explained that, at his request, Kampf had quickly drafted his Memoirs in the two years following the end of the war. He had simply made use of his memory, having lost his personal archive during the war (paintings, books and papers had been devastated by the Red Army during the advance in Lower Silesia, where Kampf had fled in 1944 to avoid bombing in Berlin). The painter accepted Gotzes’ request to put his life in writing, although he commented: "I have so little time, I should paint as much as I can [12]”. The drafting of the memoirs was finalised in spring 1949. Gotzes recalled that Kampf worked until the last day of his life, ending the umpteenth canvas on the day of his death, titled "The horsemen of the apocalypse" [13].

For the rest, the brief introduction by Gotzes was all centred on the relationship between Kampf and the city of Aachen, which had given him the birthplace and where he had returned after a long stay in Düsseldorf (1879-1899) and Berlin (1899-1943), and after many stopovers all over Germany as a displaced person in the country destroyed by war. The iconography itself of the pictures chosen by Gotzes in support of the memoirs offered us an intimate and absorbed image of Kampf’s art.

The essay by Hans Rosenhagen 1922

The first monograph mentioned by Gotzes in his preface was a 1922 essay by Hans Rosenhagen (1858-1943) [14], an art critic whom we have already met as author of the first essay on Max Liebermann in 1900 [15]. Rosenhagen was an art critic with a liberal and democratic orientation, strongly disapproving academic art since the late 1890s [16]. He was instead very supportive of all innovative art movements of the Secessions (for instance, he published detailed reviews of every exhibition of the Berlin Secession in the journal Die Kunst für Alle).

The anti-academic aesthetic orientation of Rosenhagen probably explains why the main thesis of his 1922 essay was that the art of Arthur Kampf was not academic at all, since he did not follow a single model. Rosenhagen distinguished therefore between a naturalist and a monumental Kampf.

Even Kampf’s passion for history painting (or painting of figures) was not necessarily - according to Rosenhagen - a symptom of conservatism: indeed, the critic recalled not only the obvious model of Alfred Rethel (the romantic artist whose historic frescoes, now destroyed, Kampf admired as a young man in the town hall of Aachen), but also made the example of Max Klinger, as a contemporary moderate modernist who liked monumental painting (and in fact, in parallel to the fresco painted by Kampf to the Great Hall of the Humboldt University in Berlin, Klinger also completed a huge fresco for the Great Hall of the University of Leipzig in 1909).

However, Rosenhagen enjoyed especially Kampf’s most intimate works (Picture of a boy, 1907), and those full of colour, revealing his passion for scenes from every day’s life (The fish market in Altona, 1899) or for the far-eastern world (The Indian, 1912).

Rosehnhagen saw Kampf as an artist perfectly aligned with the realist tradition in German painting, running from Dürer and Altdorfer, continuing with Moritz von Schwind (1804-1871) and Carl Spitzweg (1808-1885) and reaching Ludwig Richter (1803-1884) and Arnold Böcklin (1827-1901) [17]. His realism was explained as a search for objectivity [18]; Kampf was also appreciated for his compositional skills [19] and the simplicity and clarity of expression [20]. In this way - I might add - Kampf became the forerunner of the art streams of the so-called 'return to order' and of New Objectivity (Neue Sachlichkeit), which imposed themselves in Europe and in Germany between the two World Wars. And, in fact, Rosenhagen celebrated especially the artist who, in 1914, succeeded in creating a group of intellectuals in Berlin, bringing together artists, musicians, writers and patrons in the name of a modern art, which was keeping contact with tradition.

The essay by Bruno Kroll 1944

The essay by Bruno Kroll (1895-1984) was instead dated 1944, the year in which Kampf was included by Hitler in person in the list of the so-called Gottbegnadeten (the 'Blessed by God', or the artists to whom nothing should have been ever missing even in times of war, so that they could continue ensuring their contribution to the German culture). Kroll was one of the closest art critics to Nationalsocialism, and took care to provide the reader of those years with his nazi-conform interpretation of contemporary art, with many articles and a monograph on "Contemporary German artists. The development of German art since 1900” [21], published in 1937 and reprinted in 1941 and 1944. He was a university professor in Berlin between 1934 and 1942, and member of the Council of the Nationalgalerie between 1939 and 1942.

The text of Kroll offered an entirely ideological interpretation of his work, completely focused on the role which art was given by the regime in order to strengthen national identity. Moreover, the text was published in the war period, and it was certainly no coincidence that it included several illustrations of works aiming at supporting war propaganda.

"Kampf - Kroll wrote - is one of the last great idealists. His art embodies the forces that keep alive the identity of the people and the artistic sense of community. He is a representative. He is it to the extent that many works by his hand – whether they are "The blessing of the volunteers of 1813", "I gave gold for iron" or "Fichte speaks to the nation" can be said as being naturally fitting to the people taste, even before you know who their author is" [22]. The text of Kroll was instead silent precisely on the aspects that must have seemed more important to Rosenhagen (Kampf’s intellectual life in 1914 Berlin, when he worked with numerous personalities of culture to create a "Club of artists" combining different tendencies in art and literature), and instead celebrated the monumentality of his art because of its national features.

The text celebrated the “intellectual liberation” that, in the opinion of Kroll, the advent of Nazism offered German art 1933, still bent in his view from the 1918 defeat. Kampf was therefore represented as an artist who had been able to resist the corruption of the spirit and had always believed in the existence of a common creative spirit of the German people. In fact, the themes chosen by the artist showed that he shared the Nazi racist ideology and supported the German military aggression against the rest of the world.

From the point of view of iconography, Kroll recognised to Kampf all features of a Nazi artist since the previous decades: "The search for the absolute domination of the vital values over the purely aesthetic ones. The willingness to serve, the vital sense, the general understanding of the artistic language” [23].

The memoirs and the Düsseldorf years (1879-1899)

Let us now return to Kampf's memoirs, which should be read taking into account the intention expressed by Gotzes: he wanted to display the artist's history in different terms from those of 1922 (where Kampf was an enlightened academic artist, able to communicate with the most moderate among his modernists colleagues) and 1944 (where Kampf was one of the performers of a nationalist art fitting like a glove in Nazi canons). So, these are pages that should always be taken with a grain of salt. And yet, even with this caveat, they may be a very useful testimony of German art at the turn of nineteenth and twentieth centuries, from the perspective of an academic painter.

Kampf was raised in an Aachen family, which on the one hand promoted the artistic education of the children (also the brother was a painter) and, on the other one, wanted to give them an educational profile that would not isolate them in the German province. To this aim, they were sent to a private college in Belgium, where they learnt French and Flemish. When he was seven, Arthur visited for the first time a museum in Antwerp. He was accompanied by his mother. Since then Rubens became his favourite painter [24]. The love for art was so obvious that his father enrolled him at fifteen in the Academy of Düsseldorf, then Germany's main art centre. The new building of the Academy in neo-Renaissance style had just been opened, and thus the young man was now confronted with a very modern setting [25]. We know memoirs of painters born almost in the same years (Nolde was born three years later, Klee was born fifteen years later) who tried in vain to be enrolled in the Academy (in Munich) and were therefore forced to learn the craft through alternative manners, preserving since then a deep grudge against that institution. To the contrary, the memoirs of Kampf about his (hard, but respected) teachers at the Academy of Düsseldorf were rather full of nostalgia. The artist studied in particular under Peter Janssen (1844-1908) and Eduard von Gebhardt (1838-1925), both history painters, the first producing frescos in a classicist style and the second painting in a clearly romantic mood. Arthur devoted pages full of affection to both of them [26].

In the classes at the Academy, the work of all students was first subjected to a collective comment and then corrected by the masters. This method "is great. Students can listen therefore to the most diverse opinions on their work, drawing stimuli and learning much” [27]. In the early years, until 1884, the climate between students was comradely, and the relationship with the teachers human. Arthur had a deep friendship with Helmuth Liesegang (1858-1945), a landscapes painter. We can feel some tones of nostalgia for those years of fraternal friendship among young students, in an atmosphere of cohesion which was of course impossible to endure among adults and which was not repeated again in the following years, in the interpersonal relationships between artists: "Then the differences of opinion translated themselves in heated discussions, which often ended in personal animosity and slander” [28].

Arthur produced the first painting for an exhibition at twenty-one, in 1885, still under the direction of Jannsen: The last statement was a scene of an accident at work, perhaps due to a knife confrontation: "I have prepared a sketch of a worker, seriously injured. He is making a statement to a police officer, sitting in front of him, and is explaining him the course of events. Next to him there are the two co-workers who have returned him to his miserable hut. The wife sustains the wounded, lying on the ground, and presses a cloth to the wound” [29]. The painting was presented at the Kunsthalle in Düsseldorf, sparking a sensation: for the first time, Kampf explains, a picture depicted a worker instead of a history scene [30]. For this the public interpreted it as a sign of a 'social democratic' orientation by Kampf, who felt much isolated in Düsseldorf in that occasion; the picture got however an award in Berlin in 1886 [31].

The 'Exhibition of remains of Emperor William I in Berlin" (1888) belonged to the same period. The artist told that he had rushed from Aachen to Berlin as soon as he learned that the emperor was dying. He arrived when William I had just passed away: the city was invaded by a sad and silent crowd, in a day when it had been snowing intensely. Kampf participated in the event with great emotion. For two whole days he remained in the street among the Berliners, queuing to get close to the coffin (among those preparing for the wake, he identified among others Marshal von Moltke); there were so many people, that he could not enter. Then, in the cold night of the second day, he paid a little boy who, using a trick, made him jump the queue; thus, he was finally able to access the wake. "I painted the picture from memory” [32]. The painting won a gold medal in Munich. Arthur quickly became famous in Berlin as a painter of national history and made the acquaintance – at twenty-four years – with Adolph Menzel (1815-1905), the main artist working in the German capital at that time [33]. He was due to meet him again later on, in his early years in that town. He dedicated in 1890 two fortunate pictures to the anti-Napoleonic popular uprisings of 1813, celebrating episodes of spontaneous resistance against the occupation. Meanwhile, he made quickly career in the Düsseldorf academy in 1891 and became assistant professor in 1893 [34].

Arthur felt so well at the Academy of Düsseldorf that he declined, in 1895, a first offer to become professor of painting at the Academy of Fine Arts in Berlin, which was offered to him by Anton von Werner. The latter "was a very intelligent man and had managed excellently his Academy according to his preference; but he behaved vis-à-vis his teachers in an excessively hierarchical mood. I realized it during a visit in Berlin in 1891, at a dinner at his house, to which also the professors were invited. They behaved towards him in so a timid and obsequious way, which seemed ridiculous, since I was not used to that happening in Düsseldorf” [35]. Two years later, he travelled to Spain, where his attention was all for Velázquez, Titian, Rubens, Ribera [36]. His also met there Francisco Pradilla (1848 -1921) [37], the history painter who directed the Prado Museum in those years.

The eternal love for Dutch painting

I already mentioned that Rubens was Kampf’s first love. It must be said that the Düsseldorf Gallery retained (until the early nineteenth century) one of the largest collections of Rubens paintings (which were then sold out across the whole of Germany). Even at a later stage of his artistic production, the references to Rubens were obvious (compare, for instance, the Rape of the Daughters of Leucippus of the Antwerp painter with the Venus and Adonis, 1924).

His Golgotha of 1897 also had a clear Flemish inspiration. He proposed the same iconographic scheme in 1944 (the authorship is not certain), revealing elements of continuity and formal differences over fifty years of painting.

The memoirs prove that Kampf always maintained a passion for northern European masters like Rubens and Rembrandt, accompanied by Frans Hals, Vermeer and Bruegel. They were joined, in a tangle with Venetian and Spanish art, by Titian and Velázquez [38].

In 1923 Kampf travelled to Haarlem, where he had been commissioned some portraits. It was also a real pilgrimage to admire the paintings of Frans Hals and compare them with Rembrandt's pictures and drawings. Of both he admired in particular the collective portraits: "All is narrated in a so fresh and lively way. The difference between Hals and Rembrandt is amazing. Hals searches for life, freshness and joy, Rembrandt for light and atmosphere, but the latter is deeper in expression and feeling. If we abstract from paintings, in my opinion the pen drawings by Rembrandt are what strongest has ever been done in terms of expression. Yes, I know nothing likewise in the whole art, where one was able to represent an action by so reduced means. It is something great and noble.” [39].

Rubens, Rembrandt, Hals and others were all artists who, during the nineteenth century, were considered in Düsseldorf as the supreme source of inspiration for the renewal of art in a neo-romantic direction. It is extraordinary how - in parallel and in the same years - exactly these artists profoundly influenced the evolution of some German artists with a much different orientation than that of Kampf. Liebermann too cannot be understood if one does not analyse the impact which the Dutch world had on him; Rembrandt was also the inspiration for Nolde; finally, Corinth died at Zandvoort in 1925, during a trip to visit again Dutch museums. They shared the same love for the same art, but with very different outcomes.

End of Part One
Go to Part Two 

NOTES

[1] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben (From my life), Introduction by August Gotzes, Aachen, Verlag Museumsverein Aachen, 1950, 64 pages and 16 black and white pictures.

[2] Pica Vittori, L’arte mondiale a Roma (Art from the world in Rom), Bergamo, Istituto Italiano d’Arti Grafiche, 1913, 540 pages and 732 pictures. The original is available at https://archive.org/stream/lartemondialerom00pica

[3] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p.43.

[4] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 28.

[5] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p.28 (reception by Leopold II of Belgium), 33 (reception by William II, Emperor of Germany).

[6] Ronge, Tobias - Das Bild des Herrschers in Malerei und Grafik des Nationalsozialismus. Eine Untersuchung zur Ikonografie Führer- von und im Funktionärsbildern Dritten Reich (The image of the power man in painting and graphic of National Socialism. A survey on the iconography of images of the Führer and party officials in the Third Reich), Berlin, Lit Verlag, 2011, 522 pages. See: 
https://books.google.de/books?id=bw7N5B0d00cC&pg=PA390&dq=%22arthur+kampf%22+%22professor+steffens%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiZ-5ue28zSAhWjHsAKHZ_hC5YQ6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=%22arthur%20kampf%22%20%22professor%20steffens%22&f=false

[7] Gotzes, August - Hans Schroedter, in Die Kunst für alle: Malerei, Plastik, Graphik, Architektur, N. 8, May 1939, pages 259-260. See: 
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/kfa1938_1939/0273?sid=3069c3c9ac96be6e095340bfcb1f2256

[8] Gotzes, August - Heinrich von Richthofen, in: Die Kunst, 1942, Number 1, pages 165-167.

[9] Gotzes, August - Walter von Wecus, der Maler u. Zeichner (Walter von Wecus, painter and drawer, Cologne, Drei-Königen-Verlag, 1947, 43 pages.

[10] These were two volumes written by Hans Rosenhagen (1922) and Bruno Kroll (1944). Rosenhagen, Hans - Arthur Kampf, Bielefeld and Leipzig, Velhagen and Klasing Verlag, 1922, 119 pages and 107 figures. The original text is available at 
https://archive.org/details/arthurkampf00roseuoft. 
Kroll, Bruno - Arthur Kampf, Bielefeld and Leipzig, Velhagen and Klasing Verlag, 1944, 131 pages and 131 figures.

[11] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 6

[12] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 6

[13] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 6

[14] Rosenhagen, Hans - Arthur Kampf… (quoted)

[15] Rosenhagen, Hans - Max Liebermann, Bielefeld and Leipzig, Velhagen and Klasing Verlag, 1900, 104 pages and 113 figures. The original text is available at 

https://archive.org/details/liebermann00rose

[16] Rosenhagen, Hans - Die nationale Kunst in Berlin (The National Art in Berlin), 1897. See: 
http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/deu/302_Hans%20Rosenhagen_nationl%20Kunst_51.pdf  

[17] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 8

[18] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 8

[19] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 112

[20] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 9 and 117

[21] Kroll, Bruno - Deutsche Maler der Gegenwart. Die Entwicklung der Deutschen Malerei seit 1900, Berlin, Rembrandt Verlag, 1937, 162 pages.

[22] Kroll, Bruno – Arthur Kampf … (quoted), p. 2

[23] Kroll, Bruno – Arthur Kampf … (quoted), pp. 16-17

[24] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 9 

[25] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 10

[26] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), pp. 15-17

[27] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 11

[28] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 12

[29] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 12

[30] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 12

[31] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 13

[32] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 14

[33] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 15

[34] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 17

[35] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 17

[36] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), pp. 18-22

[37] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 19

[38] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 49

[39] Kampf, Arthur - Aus meinem Leben … (quoted), p. 45