The
Press Christchurch, New Zealand, May 20, 2000
"Making History"
by Sean Scanlon As
Canterbury University begins a
high-powered inquiry into how it came
to award a masters degree for a thesis
which questions key assumptions about
the Jewish holocaust, SEAN
SCANLON unravels the curious tale
of the man at the centre of the
row. This is the story of an enigma: a
one-time Christchurch menswear salesman
who now holds a doctorate in history; a
man married in a New Brighton Presbyterian
church who went on to embrace Judaism to
the extent of changing his first name from
Stuart to the Biblical Joel. He formed an action group to fight
anti-Semitism, only to leave it soon
afterwards to write a masters thesis
questioning key historical assumptions
about the Holocaust and the fate of the
Jewish people during World War 2. It is the story of historian Joel
Hayward, a man who makes a living
from the past but now finds himself unable
to escape his own. Dr Joel Hayward, senior lecturer in
defence and strategic studies at Massey
University, was born Stuart Andrew Hayward
on May 27, 1964, in Christchurch, to his
father John, a compositor, and
mother Lorraine. In 1986 he married
Kathleen Michie, also of
Christchurch, at St Kentigerns
Presbyterian Church in New Brighton. Three years later Stuart Hayward
changed his first name to Joel, a
decision, he says, which expressed his
"choice to go through life with a first
name that has deep spiritual significance
for me". "I have never
made a big deal of Jewishness in my
family. It's merely a personal matter
of pride that I have some Jewish
heritage. I have enjoyed my time in
Israel, remain committed to Zionistic
ideals, and still enjoy reading Hebrew
scriptures." In 1991, after completing his Bachelor
of Arts degree at Canterbury University,
Joel Hayward started a masters thesis
entitled The Fate of Jews in German
Hands. From then until the thesis was
completed in 1993, Dr Hayward researched
and wrote about the Holocaust. His
thinking, it would appear, changed
dramatically over this time. In late 1991 Dr Hayward wrote an
article in the Australian Jewish magazine
Without
Prejudice. In it he supported
accepted orthodox historical opinion on
the Holocaust. Importantly, he criticised
the Leuchter
Report, written by Fred
Leuchter and based on a series of
tests Leuchter carried out at various
former concentration camps in 1988. Leuchter
concluded "the alleged gas chambers at
the inspected sites could not have then
been, or now, be utilised or seriously
considered to function as gas
chambers". However, Leuchter held no formal
engineering, forensic, or chemistry
qualifications. He had a Bachelor of Arts
degree from Boston University and owned a
business in the United States specialising
in making hardware for executing prison
inmates. By the time Joel Hayward's thesis was
completed he had reversed his unfavourable
opinion of the Leuchter Report and changed
his stance on the Holocaust itself. In the 360-page thesis Dr
Hayward questions whether there
was ever an official Nazi policy
to exterminate Jews, whether Nazi
gas chambers may in fact have
fallen into the category of
"atrocity propaganda", and
whether far fewer than six
million Jews died at the hands of
the Nazis. These issues are among
the central tenets of Holocaust
revisionism. As a result the thesis
attracted the attention of the
world's leading Holocaust
"revisionist" historian, David
Irving. Irving, branded an anti-Semite
by a judge in a British libel
case last month, dedicated part
of his web page to Dr Hayward,
describing him as "one
of the most original historians
in the southern hemisphere",
and hailing his thesis as a
"landmark in the turning of the
tide in the favour of historical
revisionism". | | | Dr
Hayward says he went along on
January 30, 1992, to what he
thought was an ordinary afternoon
tea with friends. As they talked
about his half-completed masters
thesis a video camera hidden
behind a hollowed out book
recorded the entire conversation.
|
Here in New Zealand, however, a
five-year embargo placed on the thesis
with the support of Hayward's supervisor,
Dr Vincent Orange, meant it did not
reach the public domain until late last
year. No explanation for the embargo has been
given. Last December, Dr Hayward asked the
university to pull the thesis from its
libraries. The university
refused, but allowed him to write an
addendum in which he casts doubt on
several of his key conclusions and the
strength of his own scholarship. Of the pivotal
Leuchter
Report, Dr Hayward writes: "The
report contains serious errors of fact and
judgment, several of them significant
enough to rob the report of its evidential
value." He concludes: "My thesis represents an
honest attempt on my part to make sense of
events I wanted to understand better. "Yet I now regret working on such a
complex topic without sufficient knowledge
and preparation, and hope this brief
addendum will prevent my work causing
distress to the Jewish community here in
New Zealand and elsewhere, or being
misused by individuals or groups with
malevolent motives." Dr Hayward now says of his thesis: "I
simply see the evidence very differently
now to the way I did then as an
inexperienced student straight out of a
BA." Dr Hayward's volte face has prompted
the New Zealand Jewish Council to call on
the university to withdraw his First Class
Honours Masters degree. But it also raises
several uncomfortable issues for the
University of Canterbury. The University this week set up an
independent three-person working party to
investigate the controversy. The
high-powered group is chaired by former
High Court judge Sir Ian Barker,
joined by Emeritus Professor Anne
Trotter and Professor Stuart
Macintyre, of Melbourne. It has wide
powers to probe the nature of the thesis
topic, the supervision received, the
examination procedures, and the embargoing
of the thesis. The inquiry might also need to explore
claims that university authorities were
alerted to the potential problem eight
years ago -- before the work was even
submitted for examination. In May 1992, the university
received a letter from an organisation
called Opposition to Anti-Semitism Inc
(OAS). The group, based in
Christchurch, was
concerned about the direction Dr
Hayward was taking in his then
half-completed thesis. Ironically, OAS had been formed a year
earlier by Dr Hayward with Yossie
EtzHasadeh (previously Philip
Woodfield of Christchurch, now in
Israel) and Denis Green. The organisation's goal was to monitor
anti-Semitic groups in New Zealand and
warn people about Holocaust revisionism.
Several members were converting to
Judaism. Joel Hayward resigned from the
group before he started his thesis. Dr Hayward says he formed OAS because
"I considered, and still consider
anti-Semitism to be a vile and repellent
thing." He says he left OAS because of a
personality clash. "I certainly did not leave because I
had become less hostile to
anti-Semitism." OAS members soon became worried about
the path Dr Hayward's thesis was taking
and arranged to meet
him. Dr Hayward says he went along on
January 30, 1992, to what he thought was
an ordinary afternoon tea with friends. As
they talked about his half-completed
masters thesis a video camera hidden
behind a hollowed out book recorded the
entire conversation. Dr Hayward says a selective 13-minute
transcript was made of the three-hour
conversation by the OAS. "They only
included statements that cast me in the
worst possible light." The group sent Canterbury University
registrar Alan Hayward (no
relation) parts of the transcript with a
letter detailing concerns about Joel
Hayward's views on the Holocaust. Alan
Hayward forwarded the letter to Professor
David McIntyre (then head of the
university's history department and now
retired). Yossie EtzHasadeh says that at this
point the OAS concerns went no
further. "Essentially they (the university) were
very unco-operative." The transcript includes the following
statements by Dr Hayward: - "In
my thesis, I argue that Hitler didn't
order the genocide of the Jews."
-
"I'm also saying that there is not one
shred of documentary evidence showing
that there was a plan to kill the
Jews."
-
"I mean up until today, not one piece
of paper has been found, not one German
document, French document, any document
-- apart from Allied propaganda
documents."
-
"Not six million. I personally don't
think the Nazis ever got their hands on
six million Jews."
Dr Hayward did not find out about the
video until two months after it was made.
He considers the taping dishonest and
unfair and says he nearly had a breakdown
as a result. He admits to saying some "dumb and
silly things", but says the tape didn't
pick up nuances when his tone and facial
expression showed he believed the opposite
of his words. "This was supposed to be a casual
private conversation, and it was a full
eight years ago," he says. "In no way do
those comments represent my current views,
which have evolved substantially with my
growing understanding of the evidence and
of the historian's craft." Dr Hayward also says he has
never used his Jewish background
in order to bring credibility to
his scholarship. "As a scholar my
ethnicity is not important. "I am merely trying to step
back from a debate I absolutely
do not want to be involved in. I
don't work on the Holocaust. I
love teaching, researching, and
writing on military history." | | | I
am merely trying to step back
from a debate I absolutely do not
want to be involved in. I don't
work on the Holocaust. I love
teaching, researching, and
writing on military history.
|
He has written nothing on the Holocaust
since the publication of his thesis, but
has been asked by publishing house
Macmillan to write a book about Hitler's
effectiveness as a military
strategist. While Dr Hayward might wish to put the
Holocaust thesis down to academic
immaturity, the university might find it
more difficult to explain how it came to
award a first-class honours degree for a
piece of work the author now largely
discredits. Dov Bing, Professor of Political
Science and Public Policy at Waikato
University, was called upon to review the
Hayward thesis for the
Jewish
Chronicle in April. Currently
on sabbatical in
Israel, Professor Bing says, "I do
not think that a thesis which has as its
central finding that there were no gas
chambers would find academic acceptance
anywhere." Professor Bing points out that the
thesis is based on evidence widely
discredited by mainstream scholars.
"Hayward's problem has been that he
ignored well-established sources and used
sources that have no credibility at
all." He says Dr Hayward placed too much
weight on the Leuchter Report and on the
research of David Irving. Professor Bing says Dr Hayward should
have been cautioned by his supervisor Dr
Orange. "He should have known that Hayward
was merely following in the footsteps of
Irving and Leuchter -- all well-known
Holocaust deniers." David Zwartz, president of the
New Zealand Jewish Council, agrees: "We
lay full responsibility on the experienced
professional historians at the university
whose job was to guide and assess his
work." Dr Orange has declined to comment until
after the university inquiry. As a matter of course every masters
student at Canterbury has a supervisor who
acts under university guidelines.
Generally a supervisor encourages,
supports, and advises the student. When the thesis is finished the
supervisor marks it and sends it to an
external examiner for assessment -- in
Hayward's case Waikato University's
Professor John Jensen, who is now
retired. The university's dean of postgraduate
studies, Professor Graeme Wake,
says that while he was not at Canterbury
at the time the thesis was written, he
believes Dr Hayward and Dr Orange had a
good working relationship. "I must stress, though, that when a
student submits a thesis it is their work
and their decision to submit, not the
supervisor's." The university does not endorse the
findings of any thesis produced there, he
says. "Our examining procedures are designed
to grade the quality of analysis and
writing, the maturity of judgment, and the
ability to absorb, transmute, and present
material." This doesn't wash with David Zwartz.
"The university's reputation for
scholarship is in question as long as it
stands by a thesis which has been
repudiated even by its own author," he
says. With Dr Hayward's admission that he was
wrong, the university now faces the
possibility of a having to withdraw a
degree it awarded -- and embarrassing
criticism of its academic
standards.
Related stories: Varsity
leader defends historian | Joel
Hayward web page (mirror) |