Online-Module

Doc. 1: Diary of János Hoffmann, 1940-1943

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:34

János Hoffmann in the 1930tiesJános Hoffmann, law

Worum geht es: 

Extracts from the diary of János Hoffmann, a Hungarian Jew who perished in Auschwitz, describing early persecution from 1940 on.

Eckdaten: 

  • János Hoffmann (Szombathely 1895 – Auschwitz 1944): Ködkárpit. Egy zsidó polgár feljegyzései 1940-1944. Szombathely 2001 (extract). Published with kind permission of Dr Judit Varga-Hoffmann. She initiated a translation project of the diary of János Hoffmann.

Case study 5: Politics of memory – the Holocaust and Hungarian public

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:29

The material gives historical insights into the complex years of 1940 to 1944, principally to discuss the current memoralisation and prevailing narratives in Hungary and the mixture of facts, myths and legends.

Worum geht es: 

When considering the sensitive issue of remembering the Second World War, the German occupation and the Holocaust, every EU member-state, including the Hungarian government, has its own history to reflect on.

Issues:

  • Perpetrators and supporters of the Holocaust in Hungary

  • Dealing with international rescue efforts and interventions

  • Exclusions and inclusions in European memory

 

Anleitung: 

1. In the 19th century, National History created the myths of nations and tried to imprint a positive image into the collective memory. The Hungarians, for example, portrayed themselves as the heroic defenders of Christianity. Nowadays however, the Hungarian government seeks to present Hungarians merely as victims of German occupation. Try to explain the background, the function and the potential consequences of this ex post facto victimization!

2. Are there comparable examples in other European countries?

Eckdaten: 

  • Diary of János Hoffmann: Shroud of mist (Nebelschleier). Source: János Hoffmann (Szombathely 1895 – Auschwitz 1944): Ködkárpit. Egy zsidó polgár feljegyzései 1940-1944. Szombathely 2001. Published with kind permission of Dr Judit Varga-Hoffmann (extract).

  • Testimony of Kató Gyulai: Two sisters. The story of a deportation. Source: Linde Apel, Constanze Jaiser: Zwei Schwestern. Geschichte einer Deportation. German translation from the Hungarian by Barbara von Boroviczény. Berlin 2001 (extract).

  • Interview with Eva Brust Cooper, 9 December 1991. Source: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, RG 50.030*0056 (extract).

  • Who informed whom in the outside world of the horrors of Auschwitz? Source: Zoltán Tibori Szabó: The Auschwitz reports: Who got them, and when?, in: The Auschwitz Reports And The Holocaust In Hungary. Ed. by Randolph L. Braham/William J. Vanden Heuvel. Columbia University Press 2011, pp. 85–120 (extract).

  • Yehuda Bauer: Rescue Attempts: The case of the Auschwitz Protocols, in: Yehuda Bauer, Rethinking the Holocaust. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001, 213-241.

  • Yehuda Bauer: Anmerkungen zum „Auschwitz-Bericht" von Rudolf Vrba, in: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 45(2), 1997, pp. 297–307.

  • Yehuda Bauer: Rudolf Vrba und die Auschwitz-Protokolle. Eine Antwort auf John S. Conway, in: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 54(4), 2006, pp. 701–710. 

Doc. 1: Clandestine documents from a concentration camp

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:24

Dear Boys!

Worum geht es: 

Contemporary reports on the medical experiments in the Ravensbrueck concentration camp, smuggled out by female Polish inmates.

Eckdaten: 

  • Constanze Jaiser and Jacob David Pampuch: Ein Schmuggelfund aus dem KZ – Erinnerung, Kunst und Menschenwürde. Projektmappe für einen fächerübergreifenden Unterricht [Smuggled Out of the Camp – Memory, Art and Human Dignity, Project Folder for Interdisciplinary Learning], Berlin 2012.

  • Krystyna Oleksy, Irena Polska (ed.): Aby świat się dowiedział ...: Nielegalne dokumenty z obozu Ravensbrück. Panstwowego Muzeum w Oświęcimiu. Oświęcim 1989.

Case study 4: Crimes against humanity – the Doctors' Trial in Nuremberg

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:23

On 9 December 1946, an American military tribunal opened a trial against 23 German physicians and administrators for their participation in crimes against humanity.

Worum geht es: 

The material put forward here deals with the SS doctor Herta Oberheuser, who took part in medical experiments with humans. As the only female defendant in the Nuremberg Trial, her defence strategy relied on gender specific arguments. It is precisely because she had not played any leading role that her case helps us to focus on ordinary physicians who participated in and benefited from such experiments.

Issues:

  • Right to Justice

  • Prosecution versus amnesty

  • Nuremberg Code, research ethics principles for the human experiments

 

Anleitung: 

1. Medicine was one of the few fields in National Socialism in which women could make a – albeit limited – career. Discuss how far this might explain Herta Oberheuser ‘s commitment. Compare her view with the perception of the witness Władysława Karolewska and the assessment of the judges.

2. "I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone", declares the Hippocratic Oath. This indicates that there has been an ethic codex for doctors and medics for 2400 years. Can the codices of Nuremberg and Helsinki help to prevent the recurrence of crimes similar to the doctors’ crimes committed in Nazi concentration camps?

 

Eckdaten: 

  • Clandestine documents from the Ravensbrück Concentration Camp. Source: Constanze Jaiser and Jacob David Pampuch: Ein Schmuggelfund aus dem KZ – Erinnerung, Kunst und Menschenwürde. Projektmappe für einen fächerübergreifenden Unterricht [Smuggled Out of the Camp – Memory, Art and Human Dignity, Project Folder for Interdisciplinary Learning], Berlin 2012. 

  • Affidavit SS-Doctor Herta Oberheuser, 2 November 1946. Source: Trials of War Criminals before Nuernberg Military Tribunals, HLSL Item No.: 1798, Evidence Code No.: NO-487, Harvard Law School Library.

  • Cross Examination of the SS-Doctor Herta Oberheuser. Source: Trials of War Criminals before Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10 (extract).

  • Cross Examination of the Władysława Karolewska, victim of the medical experiments. Source: Trials of War Criminals before Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol 1, Nuernberg, October 1946 – April 1947, pp. 409-417 (excerpt).

  • Final Statement of Dr. Herta Oberheuser, Judgement and Sentence. Source: Trials of War Criminals before Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol 1, Nuernberg, October 1946 – April 1947, pp. 174, p. 773, 294-95, 300.

  • The Nuremberg Code. Source: Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949, S.181-182, citation: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/nurecode.asp

  • "Scherben in der Wunde" ("Shards in the Wound"). Source: Der SPIEGEL 46, 9 November 1960.

  • Biographical Note on Władysława Karolewska. Source: www.tonworte.de (Smuggled Documents/Witnesses for the Prosecution).

  • Photos of the injured legs of witnesses of the persecution. Source: Trials of War Criminals before Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol 1, Nuernberg, October 1946 – April 1947, pp. 901-903.

  • World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki, Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Source: Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2001, 79 (4).

Doc. 1: "Papiermenschen"

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:20

Article by two leading Dutch officials, Methorst and Lentz, in the German journal "Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv" published in 1936 dealing with "Papiermenschen" and the inte

Worum geht es: 

The following article shows above all that the Dutch officials took part in an international discourse and did not see anything wrong in publishing in Germany.

Eckdaten: 

  • General Statistical Archive Vol. 26/1 (1936), p. 59 et seq.

Case study 3: The Dutch peoples registration office

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:19

Even though the Low Countries had a long history of religious tolerance, Jews were methodically registered in the Netherlands - with the help of the Dutch officials.

Worum geht es: 

Focussing on the specialized bureaucratic procedures and the interaction between German and Dutch officials, this material shows the way in which the registration process was planned and how the data were collected and transferred. From another perspective, it also hints at the devastating consequences of registration for the registered and, finally, offers a glimpse into the way in which Dutch society has traditionally dealt with the question of collaboration.

Issues: 

  • The historical question of collaboration in Western Europe

  • The enticing prospects and dangers of bureaucratic definitions and data-collection

  • Dutch national narrative about occupation and collaboration

Anleitung: 

1. In analyzing the case of Dutch registration, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum argues that the Dutch officials betrayed their democratic traditions by cooperating with German officials. Do you agree with this point of view?

2. Modern states collect an enormous amount of data about their citizens. What are the challenges for officials today?

Eckdaten: 

  • Article by two leading Dutch statisticians in the German journal “Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv” in 1936 dealing with “Papiermenschen” and the interest of the State in Registration. Source: General Statistical Archive Vol. 26/1 (1936), p. 59 et seq.

  • Secret letter by the head of the main department of the Generalkommissar für Verwaltung und Justiz to the head of the department state law of the Reichskommissar, 3 September 1940, discussing a draft of an ordinance for an obligatory registration of the Jews in the Netherlands and the racist categories to be used. Source: Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogsdocumentatie, 20, 1260.

  • First Regulation to the Reich Citizenship Law, November 1935. Source: Reichsgesetzblatt, I, p. 1333. 

  • Regulation of the Reichskommissar concerning the obligatory registration of people with Jewish blood, 10 January 1941. Source: Order for the Occupied Dutch Territories, VO 6/1941.

  • Letter of the Dutch Secretary of State of the Ministry for the Interior to the Head of the Registration office, 22 March 1941 about the registration of “doubtful cases” in the care of sanatoria. Source: Archive of the House of the Wannsee Conference: Memorial and Educational Site.

  • Report by the Generalkommissars für Verwaltung und Justiz, 5 September 1941, about the result of the registration in the Netherlands. Source: Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogsdocumentatie, 20, 1260, 77, 1260.

  • Extract from the protocol of the Wannsee-Conference, 20 January 1942, noting the number of “Jews” in the Netherlands. Source: Political Archive of the German Foreign Office, R.100857.

  • Report of the representative of the German Ministry for Foreign Affairs in the Netherlands, Otto Bene, 31 July 1942 about the first deportations and the view the Dutch Secretary of State of the Ministry for the Interior held about them. Source: Political Archive of the German Foreign Office, R. 100876.

Doc 1: The new Reich Justice Minister Franz Schlegelberger

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:16

Short notice in the Völkische Beobachter on Schlegelberger’s appointment, 31 January 1941.

Worum geht es: 

The "Völkischer Beobachter", the central organ of the Nazi movement, announces that Franz Schlegelberger has become acting Minister of Justice after the death of Franz Gürtner. 

Eckdaten: 

  • Völkischer Beobachter, 31 January 1941.

Case study 2: The Reich Ministry for Justice and the Nazi crimes

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:14

The case of Franz Schlegelberger is an example of a German perpetrator and highlights the way in which the Nazi regime could rely on the support of the legally trained traditional "elites".

Worum geht es: 

The material presented here shows the way in which the Reich Ministry of Justice voluntarily shed the basic principles of the rule of law. Thus, Franz Schlegelberger supported the idea that judges should "work on behalf of the Führer", take the political ideas of the Nazi Regime as a backbone of their rulings and be responsible not to the code of law but ultimately to Hitler and his murderous, racist ideology.

Issues

  • Involvement of the judiciary and the traditional elites in the Nazi crimes

  • Difference between lawful and legal, law and justice

  • The precarious relationship between power and law

  • The dangers of conformism

Anleitung: 

1. Professor Schlegelberger’s career can be considered as a typical example of the integration of the conservative elite into the Nazi Regime. Why do you think the young Nazi movement integrated the old elite and what made Schlegelberger participate?

2. After the war Schlegelberger maintained that he wanted to prevent the worst by making small concessions. Discuss whether this is an appropriate strategy or not.

Eckdaten: 
  • Short notice in the Völkische Beobachter on Schlegelberger appointment, 31 January 1941. Source: Völkischer Beobachter, 31 January 1941.

  • State Secretary Schlegelberger’s letter to Hitler, 10 March 1941. Source: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 6 (1958), p. 417.

  • State Secretary Franz Schlegelberger at a conference of senior court presidents, 23 April 1941. Source: Dokumente zur “Euthanasie”. Ed. Ernst Klee. Frankfurt a.M. 1985. pp. 216/218. Translation in: Nazism 1919-1945. A documentary reader. Ed. by J. Noakes and G. Pridham. – Repr. Exeter: Univ. of Exeter Pr. Vol. 03. Foreign Policy, War and Racial Extermination. – 1988, pp. 1032/1033.

  • The case of Marcus Luftglas. Source: Nazism 1919-1945. A documentary reader. Ed. by J. Noakes and G. Pridham. - Repr. Exeter : Univ. of Exeter Pr. Vol. 04. The German home front in World War II. – 1998, pp. 141/142.

  • Poland Penal Law Provision, 16 December 1941. Source: Reichsgesetzblatt I [Governement Gazette], p. 759 et seq.

  • State Secretary Schlegelberger’s letter to Hitler, 24 March 1942.

  • Article in the Völkischer Beobachter on Schlegelberger honorable discharge, 25 August 1942. Source: Völkischer Beobachter, 25 August 1942.

  • Final statement of defendant Schlegelberger at the Nuremberg Military Tribunal, Case 3. Source: http://www.mazal.org/archive/nmt/03/NMT03-T0941.htm (8 January 2009).

Doc. 1: Joseph Goebbels about intended actions against the Jews

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:02

Excerpt from the diary of the Minister of Propaganda and Regional Party Leader of Berlin, 25 May 1938

Worum geht es: 

Extract from the diary of the Minister of Propaganda and Regional Party Leader of Berlin, Joseph Goebbels, concerning the situation of Jews in Berlin, 25 May 1938. Since the German metropolis offered much more scope for self-assertion, the number of Jewish people and businesses had not shrunk as much as it had in other German towns. This is why Goebbels asked his close friend Count Helldorf – in his function as police chief of Berlin – to implement harsher persecution measures.

Eckdaten: 

  • Elke Fröhlich (ed.): Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, Teil I, Aufzeichnungen 1923-1941, Munich 2005, vol. 3/1, pp. 316 et seq.

 

Case study 1: Policing persecution in Germany

Submitted by Birgit Marzinka on Mon, 04/08/2014 - 15:01

The material presented here includes documents concerning the role policemen played in the “fateful year of 1938” in Berlin.

Worum geht es: 

The material presented here includes documents concerning the role policemen played in the "fateful year of 1938" in Berlin. A British newspaper report and an eyewitness account are contrasted with internal police memos and Joseph Goebbels’ diary to show the build-up to the hate crimes of the so-called Crystal Night in Berlin – which continued for more than three days. An excerpt from an autobiography highlights the fact that not all the policemen were prepared to simply follow orders. Those who stood aside or hampered the persecution were not punished for doing so by the Nazi regime.

Issues:
  • The mixture of violence and bureaucracy in pre-war persecution of Jews in Germany
  • The role of the police in pre-war persecution in Germany
  • The scope for action available to individual officials
Anleitung: 

1.) The sources indicate that policemen behaved in very different ways. Describe their scope for action and explain their motivations.

2.) Do you see any relevance of this historical experience for the work of officials today?

Eckdaten: 

  • Extract from the diary of the Minister of Propaganda and Regional Party Leader of Berlin, Joseph Goebbels concerning the situation of Jews in Berlin, 25 May 1938. Source: Elke Fröhlich, (ed.): Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, Teil I, Aufzeichnungen 1923-1941, Munich 2005, vol. 3/1, pp. 316 et seq.

  • Directives by the Berlin Police chief Count Helldorf concerning the status of Jews in the capital, 20 July 1938. Source: Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933-1945 [The Persecution and Murder of the European Jews by National Socialist Germany], Vol. 2: Deutsches Reich 1938 – August 1939, Munich, Oldenbourg, 2009, pp. 234-241.

  • Telegram by head of Gestapo, Heinrich Mueller, to all regional Gestapo offices units ordering them not to stop "actions against Jews" 9 November 1938. Source: International Military Tribunal, Vol. XXV, 374-PS, pp. 376-378.

  • Article on the "Crystal Night" by the Guardian. Source: The Guardian, 11 November 1938.

  • Extracts from Dr. Bernhard Landau’s eye-witness report "The hell of Sachsenhausen. My experiences after 10 November 1938". Source: Wiener Library London, 058-EA-1279.

  • Valentin Senger’s account of a truly helpful policeman. Source: Extract from Valentin Senger: No. 12. Kaiserhofstrasse. The Story of an Invisible Jew in Nazi Germany, New York 1980, pp. 65-68.

  • Report of the British Embassy in Berlin to the British Foreign Ministry, 16 November 1938. Source: Documents on British Foreign Policy, Third Series, Vol. III, No. 313.

  • Map of Berlin (1936). Source: Joseph Wulf Library, House of Wannsee Conference.

  • A Propaganda photo of Joseph Goebbels (1938). Source: DHM Lemo.

  • Three photos taken on 10 November 1938 in Berlin. Sources: Archiv Heinrich Hoffmann and Wiener Library.

Syndicate content