Biographies versus histories

In October 2023 at the Willi Graf conference in Munich, I learned that even among academics--especially among academics?--there can be confusion about what constitutes a "biography" versus what a "history" should look like. At the risk of offending truly good scholars whose work I admire and respect, let me clarify.

Easy part first: Definitions. These are mine, not Merriam-Webster or Wikipedia.

Biography – A comprehensive document that examines the life of an individual, from earliest known records to death (or current date, if person is still living).

Example: A biography of George Washington would cover his birth on February 22, 1732 in Popes Creek, Virginia, his work as land surveyor and writer, his military career, involvement in the American Revolution, role in the new nation, presidency, what he did after he left office. A true biography of Washington would not include legends about chopping down cherry trees, dentures made of wood, or skipping a silver dollar across the Potomac. It would include hard questions about ownership of slaves, relationship to indigenous Americans, how lack of education above elementary school level impacted his self-esteem and hence leadership, and his true love (hint, it wasn’t Martha). And a good biography would discuss the potential of medical malpractice in his death.

History – A history examines the interactions and interface between many people over the course of a well-defined period. Histories generally focus on a movement; nation; subgroup of a nation; or, a family (genealogy), school, university, or corporation.

A “history” tends to focus on a narrow circle of people, in an even narrower timeframe. Examples: Baptists in the US from 1845-1900. Military leadership in Germany from 1870-1871. Jewish Germans during the Holocaust, 1933-1945, sometimes with World War I and Weimar Republic added for context. Puritans who emigrated from England in the 17th century. White Rose resistance from 1942-1945. The Sachs family in Houston from 1892-1953.

A well-written history pays attention equally to the people and the era, providing adequate framework for the reader.

Why are you stating the obvious?, I hear you ask. Thanks for asking!

If you look at our White Rose historiography series, you will see boundless amounts of energy expended on behalf of half-baked histories that purport to tell the complete story of White Rose resistance. As you can see when you read the associated book reviews, “half-baked” is an understatement. Most base their storytelling on Inge Scholl’s horrid little book as well as on George (Jürgen) Wittenstein’s flat-out falsehoods. These two people, both of whom had been fervent Nazis, used postwar American largesse to reinvent themselves, hiding behind true heroes to pretend they (Wittenstein and Inge Scholl) had been part of White Rose resistance.

If you note that either Inge Scholl’s book or Wittenstein’s speeches, essays, and interviews are referenced in a White Rose “history,” you can know without a doubt that it’s not worth your time. That work is built on shifting sand and will not stand the test of time.

That said – there are relatively few true biographies regarding individual White Rose persons. Yes, there are a boatload of Sophie Scholl “biographies.” Almost without exception, they regurgitate Inge Scholl legend. For Sophie Scholl bios, if you see Inge Scholl or Wittenstein or Hermann Vinke or Dumbach-Newborn or Steffahn in the bibliography – uncritically – again, run. The author has not done his or her homework.

Apart from books about Sophie Scholl, White Rose biographies are as good as nonexistent. In almost every case, writers pen long screeds about “individuals” – from 1940ish until 1943. Period. There’s almost no deep dive into lives from birth until 1940. For those who survived the war, good luck on finding anything about these individuals from 1943 until their deaths. It is as if in the world of White Rose “scholarship,” these friends existed only from 1940 or 1942 until 1943.

Good luck too learning anything about the controversial times of their lives. Or about immediate family members with whom they rubbed shoulders daily, with whom they sat at table and talked and argued and loved and fought. Good luck understanding the essence of these individuals – favorite pastime, favorite travel destinations, attitudes towards personal hygiene, correspondence outside tightly controlled parameters, friendships outside the White Rose circle.

While Inge Scholl and Scholl heirs are the most egregious offenders along these lines, they are hardly the only ones. Check out Christiane Moll’s massive book about correspondence of Alexander Schmorell and Christoph Probst. The book is massive because: 1) Lots of white space; 2) Lots of Moll commentary. Despite the misleading size of the volume, it contains relatively few letters written by either Alex or Christl. The gaps are infuriating.

At the October Willi Graf conference in Munich, someone advised me that I had originally not “qualified” to speak at the conference – not because I am not Catholic, although someone had accused me of being a Kirchenfeind (sigh) – but because I "had not written anything about Willi Graf." After I recovered from my total shock, since there is more information about Willi Graf in my histories than in any other publication, I pointed out that one of the speakers had not only blatantly plagiarized my work, but her writing had almost no real information about Willi Graf. But, this person argued, she was invited because her work was about Willi Graf.

That was my epiphany regarding the issue of lack of biographies for White Rose individuals. Not only had that speaker not written a biography about Willi Graf, she had not even written coherently about his time with White Rose. (And yes, thorough book review and addition to historiography is forthcoming.)

This field – White Rose resistance – badly needs a strong dose of sound scholarship. We need people who go beyond an overall history, scholars (as in REAL scholars) who will be laser focused on the entire life of Willi or Alex or Traute or Käthe or Susanne or Hubert or the Bollinger brothers or… You get the picture. Where White Rose resistance is only part of the story, not the focus. Where those gut-wrenchingly tough questions are addressed, where legends as dispelled.

Anneliese Knoop-Graf famously said she wanted Inge Jens to publish even negative things about her brother. And yet the gap in primary source documents related to Willi Graf still exists. Not to the same extent as with Scholls. But no one writes about his father’s active involvement with the Watergate-style scandal that earned a lawsuit from League of Nations. No one talks about Willi’s membership in the NSDAP’s aeronautics organization. No one demands that information regarding the Graf family over Kristallnacht be released. There is still a great deal of work that must be done, even for someone like Willi Graf.

I will close with two examples of biographies that are very well-done, so you – current and future White Rose scholars – can see how it is done.

First, Armin Ziegler’s biography of Eugen Grimminger. This is the gold standard among White Rose biographies. My only gripe is that it’s a little dry. But by the end of the book, you understand Eugen Grimminger, his evolution from antisemitic Lutheran patriot to Buddhist nonviolent-freedom-fighter married to a Jewish woman. Ziegler didn’t prettify Grimminger’s life. He did not ignore the suicide attempt once Grimminger learned of Jenny’s murder at Auschwitz. You understand that Grimminger could be a difficult man who never backed down from a fight when he thought he was in the right, before and after White Rose. And you see him shattered by what he deemed betrayal by Hans and Alex.

Second, Shareen Blair Brysac’s stunning opus about Mildred Harnack. She too demonstrated how one writes a biography, with the difference between her work and Ziegler’s being readability. Her long-time work as successful journalist taught her how to weave a story well. She draws readers into Mildred’s life. [Note: The more recent biography of Mildred Harnack, written by Rebecca Donner, doesn’t hold a candle to Blair Brysac’s work.]

We need more volumes like those two, where Ziegler and Blair Brysac dug deep, tackled taboo topics, and gave us the gift of a portrait of people who tried to change the world.

If you are that kind of biography-writer, please contact us.

[Update as of October 2026: We've stopped accepting queries for publication, except for essays that would be appropriate for Passing the Torch. Not because we're not interested. It's just that my 72nd birthday is approaching and I need to "pass the torch" to someone who can keep it going. If you have a good topic and impeccable resume, I'll keep your proposal for whomever buys Exclamation! Publishers and continues our work.]

Just please. No more Scholl garbage until Scholl Archives are open. Please.

Unless you have the fortitude and backbone to take on the Scholl family, that is. If you are the person who will force Scholl Archives open in order to get at the heart of the matter, we will cheer you on all the way.

So you comprehend the scope of this gap: There are at least thirty people who made up the core of White Rose resistance. There were an additional 150 that worked and interfaced with the friends (180 total identified by the Gestapo). That means there’s a great deal of undone work.

What are you waiting for?

Questions? Comments? Speak your mind below. Before doing so, please log in using the email address that corresponds to your orders or newsletter subscription. Note: MARKDOWN is the app's label for formatting shortcuts.

If you enjoyed this post and would like to leave me a tip, I would be grateful! Buy Me A Coffee!

Image credit: Shopify, public domain for platform users.

The above information is fully footnoted in our White Rose histories. Please purchase them for access to that material! To order digital version of White Rose History, Volume I: Coming Together (January 1933-April 30, 1942), click here. To order digital version of White Rose History, Volume II, click here. WRH1 is © 2002, 2003, 2007 by Denise Elaine Heap. WRH2 is © 2002, 2007 by Denise Elaine Heap.

No part of this post, Web site, or translations contained herein may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the copyright holder, except for the “fair use” of quotations that are properly cited and credited, including identification of the translator if applicable. No part of this post, Web site, or translations contained herein may be included in any Large Language Model without proper licensing from the copyright holder, Denise Elaine Heap.