Talk:Theresienstadt concentration camp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Correction and Detention Facilities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Jewish history (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Previous discussion[edit]

Has all discussion and history on this page been removed by admins? ---BobLoblaw 07:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Simply, no discussion since the page was created. You are the second here. Pavel Vozenilek 22:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Dates?[edit]

Part of this article reads:

  • On 3 May 1945 control of the camp was transferred from the Germans to the Red Cross. Five days later, on 5 May 1945 Terezín was liberated by Soviet troops.

May 5 is not five days later than May 3. Which is the correct date, May 5 (as stated) or May 8 (as implied by "Five days later")? The 5 May 1945 was just added, but I'm not sure that that means it's wrong... Hbackman 22:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I have read several sources which confirm the arrival of Soviet troops at the camp on May 8. However, I also have one source which dates the arrival of the Red Cross as May 5, with the official control of the camp passing to Soviet officials on the morning of May 9 (Women of Theresienstadt, Ruth Schwertfeger 1988).

I also have another source which does not mention the arrival of the Red Cross previous to the liberation of the camp by Soviet troops. That source (Theresienstadt, Vera Schiff 1996) is a personal memior by a Czech Jewish nurse, who writes extensively on the typhus epidemic brought to Theresienstadt by death marchers from Birkenau on April 24. Schiff also states that death marchers under SS guard were brought to the camp during the last two weeks of April.

Schiff writes of the camp internees realizing only on the morning of May 8 that SS guards were not present to stop them from approaching the walls to watch the oncoming Soviet tanks, at which point they cut their way out through a section of chain-link. I find it puzzeling how a camp nurse would end up omitting the presense of the Red Cross, although I have left that section unchanged. Curious.

Paganolive 01:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Photos[edit]

I have uploaded 3 photos which might help add to the view on Terezin

  • Entrance to the camp with distinctive styling.

Collieman 16:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Article's name and language (concentration camp vs. ghetto)[edit]

I'd appreciate an explanation of:

* why the article's name doesn't begin with Theresienstadt, and doesn't include Terezin
* its predominant (per its title) yet internally inconsistent use of "concentration camp" rather than "ghetto"

Redirects aside, I'd have thought this article to be entitled somewhat otherwise, e.g. Theresienstadt (Terezin) ghetto.

I'd like to read some discussion here on the above points, as I'm quite new to editing Wikipedia, and Holocaust topics are my primary area of endeavor (corresponding with RL :-)
Thanks, Deborahjay 05:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The designation "concentration camp" is confusing but not wrong. It´s mentioned in the article that Terezín was a ghetto for privileged Jews from Germany, "Czechoslovakia" and Austria. In fact, it was founded by Heydrich as a transit CAMP for Czech Jews only. For instance, people could not walk on the pavement, and the living conditions were tougher than in the later period.
More than 90 % of Protectorate Jews were transported to Terezín!
The CAMP became a GHETTO - and, partially, an "Altersghetto" (i.e., for older and/or privileged Ŕeich Jews) only after HEydrich was assasinated. As late as June 1942, first non-Protectorate Jews were deported to Terezín.
TO be exact, there was one more designation used for Terezín. In the spring of 1944, it became "area of settlement" instead of "ghetto".
The twists in the tactics of the Nazis meant Terezín was quite a different place in 1941, 1942, 1944 and 1945.
This is well described in the book by HG Adler - a magnum opus of the "Holocaust science". Highly recommended...

When I was in Theresienstadt, there were two places - the fortress, which was definitely a camp, and the town, which I believe may have contained a ghetto (but I'm not sure abou this). The fortress, which was the prison for Jews during the war, would never qualify as a ghetto - people didn't LIVE there, they were IMPRISONED there. And that, to me, is a quite big difference. --Alvestrand 15:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Citations[edit]

Why are there no citations? If this is to be viewed as a credible article, the dates and events mentioned need to be cited. ~~ Kyle

So long as there is no any credible citations, all this sounds as science fiction. ~~ Martin


You don't need citations when being anti-nazi. Look on the holocaust page and you will see a coloured photo with no citations claiming to be of Jewish victims. Subsequently the Jews have altered history, and refer to Theresienstadt as a death camp. --Saintrotter 22:27, 28 February 2007

Nobody refers to Theresienstadt as a death camp over here, my dear 'historian'.Jeff5102 22:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


Did this camp avoid the "death camp" name because it seems to have avoided typhus to the degree other camps had the disease? Any idea of the normal population of the camp. 144,000 but not all at once I assume. The final survival amount 17000+- may be a good start. 159.105.80.141 15:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


Are the deaths listed a count of people who died ( and were buried ) at this camp or a count of anyone who had ever been here. From what records are the numbers taken?159.105.80.141 15:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Without citations, you should not put any figures down. Cite your sources. Magicana 00:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

For the record (these comments having been here for 3 years unchallenged):In general, people at Theresienstadt died of severe malnutrition, overwork, lack of facilities to maintain an hygienic lifestyle, lack of medical care of any kind for anyone, and murder by the guards, that is if they were not sent to Auschwitz. In support of this assertion, please see award-winning website www.rijo.de, and within it, the diary of Bernhard Kolb, a Theresienstadt survivor. The numbers requested are there too. Michalsuz (talk) 02:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Name[edit]

Why is it called concentration camp instead of compulsory deportation ghetto? As far as I know, people have not been killed or murdered there, they have not been "punished" or tortured sadistically, being obliged every morning or evening to stand for hours in order to be counted and things like that.

Austerlitz -- 88.72.30.183 10:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

"Concentration camp" doesn't mean "death camp". The people were concentrated there, not necessarily exterminated. On the other hand, people indeed were punished, tortured and murdered there. It's only that it wasn't on the industrial scale as in Auschwitz, for example. ...accountless person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.220.223.216 (talk) 18:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It had features of 'Concentration Camp' and features of 'Ghetto', so both terms should be used, with realisation that we are accepting Nazi terminology, itself intended to be mendacious as well as being irredeemably imprecise because of the inherent arbitrariness characteristic of Nazism. So I would write somethin like "... referred to both as a concentration camp and a ghetto", which is factually correct. The Wikipedia page on 'Internment' handles clarification of the terms very well. The Czech name Terezin should be given with its proper accent and I'd appreciate a pronunciation if possible; could both be done by a Czech to get them right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilmslow (talkcontribs) 02:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

In Czech, it's written "Terezín", with a "carka" above i. I hope it displays correctly. As for pronounciation, I guess I'd better leave it to someone who actually knows how to upload such thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.220.223.216 (talk) 12:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

How come a holocaust denial site, as http://www.cwporter.com/hoess.htm is listed here at the "links"? The guy is everything but related to history !!! Who can remove this link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.182.10.182 (talk) 15:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

  • You fixed it -- thanks! That one slipped by us, obviously -- it was inserted in December of 2007. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:55, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Children in Theresienstadt[edit]

The article states: "There were 15,000 children living in the children's home inside the camp; only 93 of those children survived." For years I had been given, and had seen at Beit Terezin in Israel, a figure of 150 surviving children out of 15000, remarkably round figures. Both Yad Vashem and the Terezín Initiative Institute (www.holocaust.cz) give figures which seem to be very different. Friends who recently looked for the data at Yad Vashem came back with figures as follows: 7700 children entered T, of whom 1234 (this oddly mnemonic figure is not a mistake by me but the figure they found) survived the war.The Terezín Initiative Institute informs me: 'There were 10.500 children prisoners (under 14 years before deportation to Terezín) in Terezín Concentration Camp of whom 2300 survived the Holocaust and 700 died in Terezín. A couple of people professionally concerned with Holocaust education suggest to me that the apparent wide discrepancies relate to a very late influx of children who had a much higher survival rate than those in Terezín earlier. Could different age criteria for 'child' play a part? How many children were in T but not in 'the children's home'? My sister and I were two such, but I have no idea how many others there were. What about the Dutch 'Barneveld group' which was sent to T? Did it include a significant number of children? Were there Danish children? Were there other special groups with outcomes very different from that suggested in the current page?

Could someone who knows the documentary evidence comment and if possible edit the page to clarify these figures including legitimate uncertainties?

In view of the widespread interest in children in Theresienstadt, some of it reflected in the article, a section (even a page?) specifically on the children would surely be appreciated by many, including those who use 'I Never Saw Another Butterfly' and 'Brundibar' educationally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilmslow (talkcontribs) 03:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Created in part for Jewish veterans of World War I?[edit]

The article Wannsee Conference states:

"…Heydrich said that to avoid legal and political difficulties, it was important to define who was a Jew for the purposes of "evacuation." He outlined categories of people who would be exempted. Jews over 65 years old, and Jewish World War I veterans alike, who had been severely wounded or who had won the Iron Cross, would be sent to the "model" concentration camp at Theresienstadt. "With this expedient solution", he said, "in one fell swoop many interventions will be prevented." Historian932 (talk) 11:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

  • TEREZIN "Sometimes such differences in political ideologies caused dissent among the population, particularly in the running of the administration and the education of the children. However, these differences were nothing compared to the lines drawn between Czech Jews and German Jews. There was a palpable mistrust between these two groups, as oftentimes the Czech Jews felt the German Jews were imposing on their territory and the German Jews felt superior over the Czech Jews."

-- 88.75.223.243 (talk) 13:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


Dates confused[edit]

Article states that the hoax against the Red Cross visit in June '44 was so successful a propaganda movie was commissioned as a result and filming started in Feb '44. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.91.10 (talk) 22:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD for CD on Terezin Music[edit]

Hi ... just fyi, there is an AfD now for consideration of deletion of an article on a CD with the music of Terezin, here.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


Aditional information about the Czech use of Theresienstadt?[edit]

I feel the article is missing a section about its postwar use, in particular about Malá pevnost. This is not a chapter that we should forget and many people interned and mistreated after the war, were not SS or even German. The Czech camp commandant, Alois Prusa, openly told new arrivals, that none would leave Malá pevnost alive. This was not merely a matter of punishing German war criminals, it was part of the ethnic cleansing committed by the Czech against German speaking Czechoslovakians.

I don’t’ mind writing this, but I feel there need to be an agreement with the other authors. Otherwise someone might just delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.54.28.70 (talk) 07:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Troubling Sentence[edit]

The following sentence shows up twice in the article:

"Murmurstein was as popular in the ghetto as was the SS command."

What it seems to be saying is that it's subject was unpopular, but it is not completely clear and the tone seems facetious. And, as mentioned, it is repeated. Seems like this needs fixing.--Jrm2007 (talk) 05:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed this sentence ("Not surprisingly, Murmurstein was as popular in the ghetto as was the SS command"). Its meaning is not clear – is it saying that Murmurstein and the SS command were both equally unpopular (which seems implausible) or that they were both popular (in which case the sentence is presumably facetious and, as such – given the nature of the subject matter – potentially offensive). Moreover, its relevance to the surrounding text is not transparent. Indeed, the whole text under "Differing living conditions for prisoners" could do with a tidy-up. Ondewelle (talk) 09:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Anti-semitic attack[edit]

I have implemented a change of the word 'resident' throughout the article to the word 'prisoner', it is an example of what I mean. The emphasis in the article seems to be on how good life was there. As an example, please see the diary of Bernhard Kolb, who was a credible Theresienstadt survivor, at the rijo.de website. [1]. It is there in German; a translation into English will soon be available. User:Navinia (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Missing Section on the Surgery[edit]

There is no section on the surgery. There is no picture of the surgical toolbox.

According to the Independent, "a case of monogrammed surgical instruments that in 1943-44 had been used by SS Maj Anton Burger on the inmates of the notorious Theresienstadt concentration camp" ( http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/02/08/would-you-be-willing-to-profit-from-selling-nazi-surgical-equipment/ ) are available on the market.

Wikipedia curators could buy it to document and create a section on it for the Theresienstadt article and then donate it to the Theresienstadt Museum in Theresienstadt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.136.115.197 (talk) 21:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

(Redacted; most of this comment was copied verbatim from the blog it cites. Xyl 54 (talk) 15:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC))

media not just movies?[edit]

I like movies but I think books and music are just as worthy of their own sections as opposed to inclusion in other sections or being placed in "Further reading" below references. 124.170.41.115 (talk) 10:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

more information[edit]

  • This section had a translation of the German WP article, taking up most of the page. I've collapsed it, but the original article is available via the interwiki link; do we need this as well? Xyl 54 (talk) 17:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Main fortress[edit]

I've deleted the "Importatnt information..." section; I can't see what is so important about it, and (as the edit note says) it was a bit propaganda-ey. There was some information about the use of the small fortresss as a prison, so I've kept that ( though it still needs a citation).
The division of the town, and therefore the camp, into two parts suggests the article should deal with the two sections separately. The Small fortress/prison already has a section at the end of the article, so I've labelled some of the "History" section as being about the Main fortress/ghetto. I trust I've got it right. Xyl 54 (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

To the RACIST and delusional person above. I have personally been to Terezin. The fact is as soon as you walk in the the small fortress which was the original part of Terzin. That it's clearly painted on the entrance in German "Arbeit macht frei" in English "Work makes you free". Work camp is the correct given name, and Czechoslovakians were the first Nazi prisoners not Jewish. I have photos of the plaque's on the wall showing what races sent time behind bars. And documents of my visit to Terezin. And I am disgusted by your bad attitude thinking you have a right to slander dead people with your false lie's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.230.230 (talk) 06:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
I’m unclear what point is being made here. That Theresienstadt was NOT a concentration camp for Jews? That takes us into a very dark (and in some countries illegal) area. If you “personally went to Terezin” and somehow didn’t take in that particular “important fact”, then it isn’t me that’s delusional. And if that’s the message you are trying to peddle here it isn’t me that’s the racist. Xyl 54 (talk) 23:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

mportant facts about Terezin or Theresienstadt concentration camp[edit]

Gate with the slogan "Work makes you free " in the Small Fortress

After the Munich Agreement in September 1938. And following the occupation of the Czech lands in March 1939 with the existing prisons gradually filled up as a result of the Nazi terror, the Prague Gestapo Police prison was set up in the small fortress in 1940. The first inmates arrived on June 14th 1940. By the end of the war 32,000 prisoners of whom 5,000 were women passed through the small fortress. These were primarily Czechs, later other nationals, for instance citizens of the former Soviet Union, Poles, Germans and Yugoslavs. Most of the prisoners were arrested for different sign of resistance to the Nazi regime. The fact is the first people to enter Terezin (The Small Fortress) were Czechoslavakian. The Jewish Getto was not built until 1941. And the correct name is "Work camp" and at the entrance in German it's written Arbeit macht frei " Work makes you free". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.230.230 (talk) 06:25, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

What is so important about thse facts? More to the point, about this particular form of words? They’ve already been added to the article twice, and been rejected as un-necessary, (the information is already in the article) un-encyclopaedic (it reads like a school essay) and un-neutral (Theresienstadt wasn’t just a work camp for Czech dissidents) So, as WP is not a soapbox why should we keep them? Xyl 54 (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
    • ^ www.rijo.de