Germans in Argentina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Introduction

Though far less numerous than Italians and Spaniards, German speaking peoples represent one of the larger ethnic groups that immigrated to Argentina during the years of economic boom and population growth, beginning in the 1870’s. Additionally, this group merits extra attention because of its exceptionalism in immigration patterns, often being either merchants in Buenos Aires or farmers in isolated colonias in the Argentine interior, and because of Germany’s role in World War I and II, which raised a unique set of identity questions for Germans in Argentina and altered German immigration patterns in the 1920’s and 30’s. Moreover, the pre-World War II flows of exiled Jews and opponents to Nazism as well as the post-war German arrivals to Argentina, in addition to Argentine immigration history, factor into the historiography about National Socialism. In my opinion, German immigration to Argentina can be divided into five categories. 1) pre-1870. 2) 1870-1914. 3) 1918-1933. 4) 1933-1940. 5) post-1945. During the first period till 1870, immigration to Argentina was in general low. Of note are the colonias alemanas; the first one was founded in the province of Buenos Aires in 1827. The colonias are a unique and notable phenomenon in Argentina’s immigration history but were also far from an exclusively German practice. During the second period, from 1870 until 1914, Argentina experienced a massive boom in immigration due to or causing massive economic expansion in the port of Buenos Aires and in the wheat and beef producing pampas. In this time frame, the German speakers of Argentina established themselves and developed several institutions, which are often examined in academic studies, such as newspapers, schools and social clubs. Despite originating from all over German speaking Europe, once in Argentina, a new, Germanic Argentine identity developed. One example of this can be found in the studies of Das Argentinische Tageblatt (newspaper); it was founded by Swiss immigrants but, by the 1930’s, became the primary forum for exiles from Nazi Germany. During the third period, after a pause during World War I, immigration to Argentina again resumed and German speakers came in their largest numbers. This can be attributed to increased immigration restrictions in the United States and Brazil as well as the deteriorating conditions in post-World War I Europe. The two largest years of German immigration to Argentina were 1923 and 1924, approximately 10,000 in each year. This period is of particular interest because while the older groups of German speakers began to feel a sense of cultural crisis due to the assimilation policies of the Argentine state, the new arrivals gave new life to German cultural institutions, such as the aforementioned newspaper, and created new ones. During the fourth period, from 1933-1940, Argentina experienced another surge in Germanophone immigration. The majority were German Jews although other German opponents to Nazism also came. In total 45,000 German speakers came at this time and half settled in Buenos Aires. From 1933 to 1945, they comprised 28% of total immigration to Argentina, as mass migration to Argentina was slowing. Two recent German studies have been written on these arrivals’ impact on Das Argentinische Tageblatt and how the newspaper was used by anti-Nazi immigrants within the Argentine German-speaking community’s debate about fascism. The fifth and final category of German immigration to Argentina involves the period following World War II. The numbers were not as large as in the past and the concepts of acculturation and linguistic and cultural persistence are not dealt with in the same way. The group did not congregate as tightly and participated more in mass culture. Further, because of an era of national identities and the post-World War II problems of promoting German identity, the pre-existing process of assimilation was not met with resistance by the new arrivals. The historiography focuses on the various époques to differing degrees. For example, Hendrik Groth’s study of Jewish exiles from 1933 to 1940, Das Argentinische Tageblatt: Sprachohr der demokratischen Deutschen und deutsch-jüdischen Emigration, summarizes the entire history of German settlers in Argentina until 1933 in the first 35 pages of his 200 page book and focuses his study on the 1930’s. Conversely, Anne Saint Sauveur-Henn, in her book Un siècle d'émigration allemande vers l'Argentine, devotes similar amounts of attention to each of the five periods. Much of the German language historiography written in the 1990’s focuses on the period post-1933 because of modern Germany’s interest in researching National Socialism. The Argentine historiography that I found, which includes Marisa Micolis’ Une communauté allemande en Argentine: Eldorado: Problèmes d’intégration socio-culturelle, focused mainly on Volga Germans. English and other French language historiography focus less specifically on the Nazi role in German emigration and often attempt to look at the immigrant experience of the group within Argentine society, particularly the development of the groups’ institutions and its integration into Argentine society. Of note is that much of the existing historiography was written in the 1970’s and 80’s.

---

Sources

In this historiographical paper, I have read nine books and two articles on the subject of German migration to the Southern Cone. Additionally, I have read five books and three articles that deal with the topic of migration in broader terms. The books on the German-speaking communities draw heavily on the establishment, growth and decline of the group’s cultural institutions, namely newspapers, schools, and social clubs, most notably the Deutscher Klub, founded in 1855. Of particular note are the newspapers, mainly Das Argentinische Tageblatt, founded in 1878, and the Deutsche La-Plata Zeitung, founded in 1868. German schools are also often referenced in the historiography as a marker for the community’s establishment. Between 1905 and 1933, the number of German schools rose from 59 to 176. Though found throughout Argentina, over 80% were located in Buenos Aires, Misiones, or Entre Ríos in 1933. Further, attendance at German schools rose from 3,300 in 1905 to 12,900 in 1933. The studies inherently favour Buenos Aires, where half of all Germans lived, over the colonias because less institutions, particularly newspapers, developed.

---

General historiographical studies on migration to Argentina

An analysis of the broader historiography of immigration to Argentina reveals several themes such as a booming economy and population from 1870 to 1914, the government’s immigration policies, and immigrants’ integration into the receiving society. Argentine historiography contrasts strongly from Canadian historiography, which often studies the improving wealth of immigrant groups, growing demands for labour rights, increases in minorities’ participation in politics, and the changes – liberalizing or tightening – in women’s roles. In both North and South America, there was a massive boom in immigration beginning in the 1870’s. The causes for this are the result of push factors Europe and pull factors in the Americas. Walter Nugent concisely outlines these phenomena in his book Crossings: The Great Transatlantic Migrations, 1870-1914. He explains that Europeans sought to maintain or improve their standard of living during a time of rapidly growing population in Europe by pursuing growing economic opportunities in Canada, the US, Brazil, and Argentina. The rates of immigration increased throughout this time period as a result of more frequent and affordable transportation from Europe and the spreading of information about the receiver states. Particularly after the initial connection was made between a European region and an American country, argues Nugent, immigrants flowed there despite the potential of more favourable destinations. Newton explains that chain migration as well as linguistic and cultural similarities between the host and donor states resulted in certain Europeans emigrating to certain countries. That is to say, North America received more Northern Europeans, especially British, Irish, and, in the case of the United States, German immigrants, while the Southern Cone received more Southern European immigrants, particularly Italians and Spaniards. Rapid growth and the resulting high number of foreign born residents is a theme that figures highly in Argentine immigration historiography. From 1500 to 1800, one million Spaniards went to the Americas as whole. From 1871 to 1914, 5.9 million Europeans came to Argentina alone and Argentina’s total population grew from 1.7 million in 1869 to 7.9 million in 1914. Nugent, as well as James Scobie in his book Buenos Aires: From Plaza to Suburb, 1870-1910, discuss the impact, over a 50 year period, of 30% of a country's residents and 50% of its capital city’s residents being born outside the country; the US population never comprised more than 15% foreign born individuals. If one considers the foreign born combined with their children, this represents a drastic shift in Argentina’s ethnic composition. Many authors discuss Argentina’s lack of a national immigration policy, something which both Canada and the US had, and how this led to economic problems once the period of expansion had ended by 1918. Argentina welcomed all new arrivals, something that Carl Solberg argues, in his book Immigration and Nationalism, Argentina and Chile 1890-1914, was based on liberal economic ideals. He argues that the constant arrival of new immigrants undermined labour movements by enabling the elite to replace discontented workers with new ones. Sojourning on estancias rather than the development of small farms was commonplace. Further, very few of the foreign born residents became citizens, which allowed elites to maintain their control rather than creating a more stable base for the country after the years of rapid economic expansion. The process of acculturation into Argentine society followed a unique path. Both Scobie and Nugent describe the Argentine exceptionalism compared to North America. While only 2.5% of foreign born men were naturalized Argentine citizens in 1914, 46% of foreign born men in the US had become naturalized by 1910. This high number of foreigners caused what Solberg describes as a “nativist backlash” and an active attempt by the state to use the school system to assimilate immigrant children and to indoctrinate them with Argentine symbols. Despite not naturalizing immigrants, as Samuel Baily points out, Italians in Buenos Aires were more successful than those in New York at finding jobs, housing and attaining higher wages. Understanding the general framework of immigration to Argentina is important in understanding the relevance of a small group. The receiver state’s backlash against all immigrants beginning in the 1910’s is equally relevant to the study of any single immigrant community. Further, a negative interpretation of Germany by Argentine society during World War I, by this time composed of Italian, Spanish, and French immigrants as well as an influential British mercantile elite, had a significant impact on ethnic Germans trying to maintain their ethnic identity.

---

German immigration to Argentina

The several books and articles written about Germans in Argentina often centre their studies around the number of Germans that immigrated to Argentina, where in Argentina they settled, the types of employment they took up, to what social classes they pertained, what German institutions they created, and, to some extent, how the group’s acculturation and assimilation took place. Each of the studies that I read focused on the aforementioned themes to varying degrees. Though most studies attempt to provide some frame of reference about the Germans of Argentina by supplying population statistics, the provided numbers vary enormously. Depending on who is counted, the numbers produced are nothing short of perplexing. Walter Nugent writes that between 1871 and 1928, 64,000 Reichsdeutsche went to Argentina according to the German government. However, according to Argentine authorities, 118,000 arrived. Nugent explains this is because Argentine officials often included Austrians, Swiss, and Germanophone Russians as Germans. This issue becomes more complicated, however, because in a 60 year period, these 118,000 people had children, but, at the same time, some returned to Germany. In counting “Germans”, the authors are confronted with diverging factors of the oldest arrivals being more assimilated than later arrivals. According to Olga Weyne, in her book El Último Puerto: Del Rhin al Volga y del Volga al Plata, the German embassy in 1910 stated that there were 25,000 Germans but 100,000 Germanophones in Argentina. Neither one of these figures, however, corresponds to Nugent’s number of 118,000 immigrants plus German-speaking children. Moreover, Anne Saint Sauveur-Henn cites the German Peoples’ Federation for Argentina (Deutscher Volksbund für Argentinien) in 1936, which estimated there to be 240,000 German speakers. A potential complication for the study of Germans is the issue of what constitutes a Germanophone. Of course somebody with no accent in German and an accent in Spanish is a native speaker of German. However, third or fourth generation children who lived in a zone of transculturation may speak better Spanish than German. At some point, the word Germanophone, which would not be applicable to an Argentine who has learned German, might not be applicable to naturalized Argentines with German last names. Most of these examinations do not outline where to draw the line in order to determine a “Germanophone”. However, Marisa Micolis’ 1973 anthropological study of one colonia in Misiones, Une communauté allemande en Argentine: Eldorado: Problèmes d’intégration socio-culturelle argues that naturalized German-Argentines retained the cultural traits of their parents. In 1965, only 34% of the inhabitants of Misiones spoke exclusively Spanish. Her questionnaire revealed that even in 1965, German was still spoken in 75% of the homes of ethnic Germans in Eldorado. She also asked what language these Germans spoke at work and with friends, most responding that they used German in at least some of their relationships. If this was the case in 1965, it suggests that in 1920 German was in quite a strong linguistic position. The issue of filiopietism, an agenda of inflating of the importance of a specific ethnic group, is dangerous for studies that look at specific immigrant communities. With the exception of Wilhelm Lütge’s book, Deutsche in Argentinien: 1520-1980, which begins with “the first German to ever set foot on Argentine soil” and goes on to include “citizens” of the Holy Roman Empire from Flanders as Germans, the books I have found by and large do not exaggerate the size and importance of the Argentine German community. The city of Buenos Aires, where one third of Germans lived, provides historians with a diverse array of institutions to study. Ronald Newton, in his book German Buenos Aires, 1900-1933: Social Change and Cultural Crisis, sets out to “find out what happened to one well-demarcated cultural group during a period of rapid demographic growth and apparent increase of pressures on foreigners to become Argentinized.” Newton pays particular attention to Reichsdeutsche elites in the capital city. He portrays Germans in a very different way than books on Mennonites in the interior by discussing the existence of German banks, shipping companies, and membership to the Deutscher Klub. Anne Saint Sauveur-Henn points out that although most Germans were farmers or day labourers and that two thirds lived outside the city of Buenos Aires, a proportionately high number of Germans participated in the Argentine upper-class when compared to other immigrant groups. She writes, 12.6% of those who came between 1876 and 1909 and 18% of those who came between 1909 and 1913 were merchants compared to the 4.6% national average. The historiography deals with a mainly agricultural ethnic group that was, at the same time, far more involved with international commerce than most other immigrant groups. Additionally, while Germans joined the criollos and British in Buenos Aires in a way that Italians did not, their involvement as farmers in colonias also contrasts from the Italian and Spanish immigrant majority that worked for criollos as sojourners. The authors do not deal with a German cultural eclipse in the same manner nor nearly as in depth as is found in studies of Germans in the United States such as in Becoming Old-Stock: The Paradox of German-American Identity by Russell Kazal or in Bonds of Loyalty: German-Americans and World War I by Frederick Luebke. These authors argue that German-Americans inserted themselves into the dominant Anglophone majority and moved away from their German heritage. Ronald Newton points out that since lo criollo was in a minority position in Buenos Aires over a 60 year period, it was not the core to which immigrants had to attach. He posits, and is supported by Solberg’s idea of a nativist backlash, that the German community could easily culturally and linguistically persist until the 1910’s or 20’s at which time “Germanness” became threatened not by self-extinction as in the United States but by changing pressures in Argentina. What is lacking, however, is how this shift that took place around World War I was influenced by a surge of German immigrants in the 1920’s and 30’s.

---

El interior and Volga Germans

The studies of German communities of the Argentine interior centre around what kinds of Germans came, where they went, and what sort of communities they established. Two thirds of Germanophones did not settle in the city of Buenos Aires. One sixth established themselves in the province of Buenos Aires and half of all German speakers settled in Argentina’s other provinces, mainly in Santa Fe, Entre Ríos, and Misiones. Germans in southern Argentina were not discussed in the studies that I found and all data about, for example, German schools suggests that any German communities in southern Argentina were negligibly small. As in Buenos Aires, Reichsdeutsche, Swiss, and Austrians settled in the interior; in addition to these groups, Volga Germans settled almost exclusively in rural Argentina. Current historiography has paid the most attention to the two largest groups, the Volga Germans and Reichsdeutsche. The studies of Germanophones in the Argentine interior suggest a great deal of cultural persistence despite being in settlements with many non-German speakers. The studies show that, in contrast to the metropolis, Germanophone settlers were more concentrated and that they represented as much as 50% of the population of certain colonias. Further, though no settlement had a German-speaking majority, independent living on farms can easily provide isolation from other cultures. Iris Barbara Graefe, in her book Zur Volkskunde der Rußlanddeutschen in Argentinien, suggests that Volga Germans retained their cultural traits despite contact with Argentines and only integrated themselves in the argentinidad when they migrated to urban centres for economic reasons after World War II, thereby uprooting themselves from their cultural network. Though a common destination of German settlers, colonias were far from a German-speaking phenomenon. These agricultural settlements, which centred around a town and created an economic hub, were a common occurrence in the settlement of the Argentine interior. Unlike in Brazil where the Germans were a “paradigm for ethnic clustering” and were “fundamental in the articulation of the colonization system,” the studies of Reichsdeutsche that settled in the interior depict an ethnic group living in a zone of heavy transculturation. Anne Saint Sauveur-Henn writes that both Argentines and other European immigrants also settled in colonias, which were particularly to be found in the province of Santa Fe, and that Germans were not a majority in any colony. In the colonia where the Germans were the most numerous, Esperanza, they represented in 1856, at the time of the founding of the colonia, 30% of the population while Swiss settlers comprised 50% of the settlement. However, by 1885, the Germans and Swiss each represented approximately 15% of the population of Esperanza. The Volga Germans, an identifiable and inherently rural group, have received special attention in Argentine immigration historiography. Volga Germans, a term which includes Mennonites, Lutherans, and Catholics, began emigrating from Russia in the 1870’s. Between 1878 and 1887, 3,000 Volga Germans arrived in Entre Ríos. They settled in 130 different settlements, and by 1927, there were approximately 75,000 descendants of Volga Germans in Entre Ríos. They are unique because of this transplanting characteristic and, as seen in Marisa Micolis’ study, succeeded in linguistically persisting longer than other Germanophones. In studies of the Volga Germans, considerable attention is paid to the path the Volga Germans took to South America and what motivated them to do so. Current historiography outlines the group’s initial migration from southern Germany to the Volga region beginning in 1763. In the 1870’s, increased policies of Russification pushed the German settlers out of the Volga region of southern Russia. It is important to note that many remained in the Volga region until they were deported by Stalin or returned to Germany after World War II. Many immigrated to Argentina, Brazil, the United States, and Canada. Typically, communities travelled exclusively to one destination and recreated similar community structures to those in Russia, a process that historian John Bodnar refers to as “transplanting”. While Canadian and American historians have written many books to the Germans of Manitoba and Nebraska, the current historiography on German immigration to the Argentine interior is sparse. Considering two thirds of German speakers did not settle in the city of Buenos Aires, this lack demonstrates a particular need for new studies. It would, furthermore, be valuable to have a study examining the connections between Germanophones of the interior and Buenos Aires. The studies of Das Argentinische Tageblatt do not mention the newspaper’s circulation outside of Buenos Aires. Criticisms and gaps in existing scholarship The definition of German, despite my application of the French word germanophone, remains problematic for me and paints a rather confusing picture in the existing historiography. The question about numbers is not just about “How many arrived?” but also “To what extent did they reproduce non-Argentines over a period of 40 or 60 years?” At some point between the day of an immigrant’s arrival and present day, his descendants became first naturalized and later argentinized. Should a fully fluent speaker of German who also speaks Spanish and who has never been to Europe be counted in the same category of Germanophone as his great-grandfather who never left Europe? Can we count them simply as Argentines considering they identified with German culture? The binary interpretation of Germans who lived in Argentina and of Argentines in general, which is commonplace in this historiography, does not adequately describe the situation. Germanic Argentines or Germano-Argentines would also group all degrees of Argentines of German heritage into the same category. To consider an internally diverse ethnic group throughout its various stages of acculturation seems to be an inherently onerous endeavour, one which requires scholars to avoid the process of counting and classifying the subjects in question. Moreover, in terms of counting, one should question what the statistics provide. The studies that chart the overall growth and establishment of the ethnic group, if interpreted in the linear fashion in which they are written, collapse time. There is no inherent connection between a farmer from Baden who came to Argentina in 1870 and a Jewish Berliner who came in 1935. Nor is there a link between a Volga German in Misiones and a Hamburg merchant in Buenos Aires in 1900. This comes dangerously close to a filiopietistic agenda of over exaggerating the German presence in Argentina. Since the relevance of immigration history is not to demonstrate European countries’ presence abroad but rather to look at the building blocks and the evolution of modern states, themes such as schooling in foreign languages, the transformation of gender roles, the improvement or deterioration of standards of living, and becoming Argentine will hopefully receive more attention in the future. A major theme of the historiography of Germanophones in the United States is the cultural eclipse that began by 1900 with the growth of mass culture and improving communication and was pushed over the top by the cultural trauma the community experienced as a result of World War I. On the Argentine side, this notion is not often discussed. At some point, a cultural eclipse did take place because there is no longer any significant amount of German spoken in Argentina. Authors such as Anne Saint Sauveur-Henn and Hendrik Groth describe a community that was growing ever larger in the 1920’s and 30’s while Ronald Newton writes of a “gathering sense of a crisis of cultural identity” and the communities of Rosario, Córdoba, Tucumán, Santa Fe, and Bahía Blanca subsiding into stagnation in his book that focuses on the same time frame. The process of acculturation in Argentina did not, therefore, follow the same linear path that the communities of North America experienced. However, an in depth analysis of decline and resurgence has yet to be written.

---

Conclusions

In relation to the largest three immigrating peoples, the Italians, Spanish and French, the historiography of German settlement portrays a degree of German exceptionalism. Proportionately, Germanophones became permanent settlers more frequently than other immigrant groups. This is because they typically settled in colonias rather than sojourning on large estancias as groups such as Italians and Spaniards did. The Volga Germans differ from other Germans because they transplanted whole European agricultural communities to the Argentine interior. German exceptionalism also remains true if one compares Germans to smaller ethnic groups such as the Danish or the British. María Bjerg’s article entitled “The Danes in the Argentine Pampa: The Role of Ethnic Leaders in the Creation of an Ethnic Community, 1848-1930” reveals that Danes willingly attended catholic church and chose to send their children to Argentine schools. Further, attempts to establish Danish language institutions such as schools as the group grew larger were often met with resistance from the community as a whole. When compared to the British, the German merchant class in Buenos Aires resembles the British role in Argentine foreign commerce. Nonetheless, the British dominated in a way the Germans did not; in 1910, 60-75% of the Argentine railway industry was British owned. Further, unlike the British, two thirds of Germans lived outside Buenos Aires and many were rural. The general themes presented indicate that, along with German exceptionalism within Argentina, Argentine Germans had a unique experience compared to the experiences of Germans in the rest of the Americas. The current state of historiography about German immigration to Argentina can provide many answers to questions of numbers, roles in the labour market, and community establishment. Very few studies, however, explore in any detail the processes that eventually undid the community, critically question what being German meant in an Argentine context, nor deal with the construction of a specific German identity belonging to Germanophones in Argentina.

---

Bibliography

Baily, Samuel, “Italian Immigrants in Buenos Aires and New York City, 1870-1914: A Comparative Analysis of Ajustment,” in Mass Migration to Modern Latin America, 2003, edited by Samuel Baily and Eduardo José Míguez, (Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.), 69-80.

Bjerg, María, “The Danes in the Argentine Pampa: The Role of Ethnic Leaders in the Creation of an Ethnic Community, 1848-1930,” in Mass Migration to Modern Latin America, 2003, edited by Samuel Baily and Eduardo José Míguez, (Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.), 147-166.

Graefe, Iris Barbara, 1971, Zur Volkskunde der Rußlanddeutschen in Argentinien, (Vienna: Verlag A. Schnell).

Groth, Hendrik, 1996, Das Argentische Tageblatt : Sprachohr der demokratischen Deutschen und der deutsch-jüdischen Emigration, (Hamburg: Lit Verlag).

Kazal, Russel, 2004, Becoming Old Stock: The Paradox of German-American Identity, (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

Luebke, Frederick C., 1987, Germans in Brazil: A Comparative History of Cultural Conflict During World War I, (Baton Rouge, Lousiana: Louisiana State University).

Luebke, Frederick C., 1974, Bonds of Loyalty: German-Americans and World War I, (DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press).

Lütge, Wilhelm, Werner Hoffmann, Karl Wilhelm Körner, Karl Klingenfuss, 1981, Deutsche in Argentinien : 1520-1980, (Buenos Aires: Verlag Alemann).

Micolis, Marisa, 1973, Une communauté allemande en Argentine: Eldorado: Problèmes d’intégration socio-culturelle, (Québec, Centre international de recherches sur le bilinguisme).

Moya, José, “Spanish Emigration to Cuba and Argentina,” in Mass Migration to Modern Latin America, 2003, edited by Samuel Baily and Eduardo José Míguez, (Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.), 9-28.

Newton, Ronald C., 1977, German Buenos Aires, 1900-1933: Social Change and Cultural Crisis, (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press).

Nugent, Walter, 1992, Crossings: The Great Transatlantic Migrations, 1870-1914, (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press).

Saint Sauveur-Henn, Anne, “Die deutsche Einwanderung in Argentinien, 1870-1933. Zur Wirkung der politischen Entwicklung in Deutschland auf die Deutschen in Argentinien,” in Nationalsozialismus und Argentinien : Beziehungen, Einflüsse und Nachwirkungen, 1995, edited by Helger Medding, (Frankfurt: Peter Lang – Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften), 11-30.

Saint Sauveur-Henn, Anne, 1995, Un siècle d'émigration allemande vers l'Argentine, (Cologne, Germany: Boehlau).

Scobie, James, 1974, Buenos Aires: From Plaza to Suburb, 1870-1910, (New York: Oxford University Press).

Seyferth, Giralda, “German Immigration and Brazil’s Colonization Policy,” in Mass Migration to Modern Latin America, 2003, edited by Samuel Baily and Eduardo José Míguez, (Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.), 227-244.

Solberg, Carl, 1970, Immigration and Nationalism, Argentina and Chile 1890-1914, (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press).

Weyne, Olga, 1986, El Último Puerto: Del Rhin al Volga y del Volga al Plata, (Buenos Aires: Editorial Tesis S.A.).

Young, George, 1974, The Germans in Chile: Immigration and colonization, 1849-1914, (Staten Island, New York: Center for Migration Studies New York).