Was Chelmno a Ops. Reinhard

michael mills · Post by **michael mills** » 10 Mar 2004 03:16

Raistlin,

If you read the link posted by Alf, you will see that the most often used spelling is "Aktion Reinhardt".

The alternative spellings "Reinhard" and "Reinhart" appear to have been used only by members of Globocnik's staff, and only during 1942.

It may be that Globocnik resented the fact that an operation which he was given the task of administering in the Generalgouvernment (but not outside it) was named after his enemy, Fritz Reinhardt, and therefore used the misspelling in order to blur the connection.

Reinhardt, as a senior official of the Department of Finance, was primarily responsible for having Globocnik dismissed from his post as Gauleiter of Vienna for corruption. That is why Globocnik hated him, and he was suspicious of Globocnik.

By 1943, when Globocnik was under suspicion of having misappropriated the goods he was responsible for handling under Aktion Reinhardt, and was having to defend himself from accusations of corruption, he and his staff were using the spelling "Reinhardt" exclusively.

In the past, historians have tended to use the spelling "Aktion Reinhard", based on the erroneous conclsuion made by a Polish commission at the end of the war that the operation was named after Reinhard Heydrich. But that is now changing, and the spelling "Reinhardt" is being used more often.

But even in the 1950s some historians, like Robert Koehl, knew the correct spelling, and knew that the term "Aktion Reinhardt" actually referred to the salvage operation, rather than to the killing of Jews unfit for labour.

xcalibur · Post by **xcalibur** » 10 Mar 2004 03:30

Dan wrote:
xcalibur wrote:
michael mills wrote: However, I will not waste my time sharing the material with those with closed minds.
I'd love to believe that's a promise.
Leaving opinions, conclusions and biases aside on all sides, do you believe the amount of factual information presented by you has been comperable to that submitted here by Mills?

The question is ridiculous.

Penn44 · Post by **Penn44** » 10 Mar 2004 03:36

Dan wrote: Leaving opinions, conclusions and biases aside on all sides, do you believe the amount of factual information presented by you has been comperable to that submitted here by Mills?

Quantity may have importance in occupations such as beekeeping, but it has little relevance in the historical profession.

Penn44

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 10 Mar 2004 03:45

The feuds in this section of the forum are beginning to erode my patience.

(1) Avoid personal remarks.

(2) Stay on topic.

alf · Post by **alf** » 10 Mar 2004 06:12

It may be that Globocnik resented the fact that an operation which he was given the task of administering in the Generalgouvernment (but not outside it) was named after his enemy, Fritz Reinhardt, and therefore used the misspelling in order to blur the connection

So secret internal fighting between Nazi Officals is responsible? So much for the illusions of accuracy and serious genuine research so often flaunted.

As this is an internet Site, there should be no problem at all with providing hyperlinks to primary source documents to substantite any claims. I look forward to seeing the clothing clerk documents, if they exist, they will be online.

The only primary source documents (German) so far in this discussion show clearly that the clothing clerk theory is disproven, I am still chuckling over the mental image of the secret soap opera wars of Nazi Bureaucrats offerd as evidence.

I stand by my post that Reinhardt were named for Death camps and NOT some bickering clerks haggling over a clothing drive.

alf · Post by **alf** » 11 Mar 2004 07:51

Back on topic Chelmo,

here is a link that will help you address your questions Raistlin

http://www.zchor.org/chelmno.htm

It has details from Yad Vashim, the address of the Museum at Chelmno to write to and much more information, I hope it will assist you.

Curently there is one survivor from Chelmno alive I believe.

giles120 · Post by **giles120** » 11 Mar 2004 12:30

There is indeed support for the argument that the Operation/Aktion was named after Fritz Reinhardt of the Finance Ministry. However, rightly or wrongly this support is not as common as support given to Reinhard Heydrich. I consulted various sources all of which support the idea that it was named after Reinhard Heydrich and not Fritz Reinhardt. My sources include, but are not limited to;

The Nizkor Project
DeathCamps.org
Yad Vashem Holocaust Library
The Danish Centre for Holocaust and Genocide Studies
Simon Wiesenthal Museam of Tolerance
The Jewish Virtual Library
German Fund for Cultural Education, Bonn
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Furthermore, Dr Martin Gilbert's renowned book on the Holocaust, titled 'Holocaust The Jewish Tragedy' does not mention Fritz Reinhardt once when he talks about the Operation/Aktion.

When we have historians who cannot agree, it makes the whole situation much more difficult. There are views both ways, but I am yet to find concrete primary evidence written at the time which says definitively that the whole program of setting up the death camps, movement of Jews to ghettos, appropriation of their valuables and goods, and the mass murder was named after Fritz Reinhardt and not Reinhard Heydrich. For that matter I have yet to find the same hard eveidence to support the view it was named after Reinhard Heydrich.

It is simply my view that it was Reinhard Heydrich. The reason why I believe it was Heydrich was that he was chair and organiser of the Wannsee Conference which was arranged to discuss the Final Solution to the Jewish Question in January 1942. Heydrich used the Wannsee Conference to harmonize the organisation and implementation of that "Final Solution" with every office and administrative department that was to participate in it. Mass murder was already being handled by the Einsatzgruppen and at Chelmno, at Wannsee the Final Solution was formally revealed to non-Nazi leaders who would help arrange for Jews to be transported from all over German-occupied Europe to SS-operated "extermination" camps in Poland.

I think it would be fitting for someone who had such a massive planning role in the Final Solution to have the operation of movement and destruction of an entire race named after him. Once again, this is my opinion, and am quite happy to hear alternative views.

It gets very dangerous to say that one person's view is wrong, when there is no firm evidence to support the contrary view. All views and opinions must be considered, then it is up to the individual to decide.

Thanks.

michael mills · Post by **michael mills** » 12 Mar 2004 13:15

I think it would be fitting for someone who had such a massive planning role in the Final Solution to have the operation of movement and destruction of an entire race named after him. Once again, this is my opinion, and am quite happy to hear alternative views.

One objection to the above conclusion is the fact that Heydrich had no documented role in the planning, organising and implementation of the killing of the 60% of the Jews of the Generalgouvernement assessed as incapable of being used for forced labour.

So far as we can tell, and the documentary sources are very sparse, that operation was communicated directly from Himmler to Globocnik, via the network of Higher SS and Police Leaders which reported directly to Himmler, thereby by-passing Heydrich and the RSHA.

Given the lack of any involvement of Heydrich in either the extermination action directed against the Jews of the G-G, run by Globocnik, or the program of salvaging the personal belongings confiscated from persons sent to camps, run by the WVHA, there seems to be no cause for naming either program after him. If they had been, the name would have been Aktion Heydrich.

giles120 · Post by **giles120** » 12 Mar 2004 13:52

Mike,

Once again, interesting comments.

I was wondering whether you have heard of this? I do not think it has been widely published, but there may be substance to it.

What is not widely known is that Heydrich apparently used a different spelling of his name for some time in the 1930s. In a speech on the occasion of the introduction of Kaltenbrunner as Heydrich's successor on 30th January 1943, Heinrich Himmler himself told his audience how he first met Reinhardt Heydrich in 1930, and specifically mentioned the unusual spelling: "Heydrich had his first name written with a dt." When a rumor arose among party members that the young chief of the Security Service (Sicherheitsdienst) might be of Jewish descent, an expert was commissioned to do research for Himmler on Heydrich's family and to come up with an authentic and verifiable family tree. Thus a scholarly "Report and List of Ancestors" on "the racial origin of Naval First Lieutenant Reinhardt Heydrich" was added to Heydrich's personnel files... Every official Dienstaltersliste der Schutzstaffel der NSDAP published by the SS Personnel Main Office between 1934 and 1942 also has Reinhardt as his first name. Heydrich himself tried to have these SS officers' lists changed to Reinhard, but in vain...

Thanks.

michael mills · Post by **michael mills** » 13 Mar 2004 00:39

Yes, I have seen the references to the fact that Heydrich's given name was sometimes spelled "Reinhardt", which is unusual.

However, the essential issue is whether an operation would be named after an official's given name rather than his surname.

There are examples of operations code-named after a person, eg "Aktion Hoeß" was the code-name for the deportation of Hungarian Jews in 1944. Here the surname was used as normal.

The other issue is whether a salvage operation, involving the collection and processing of the personal effects and clothing of persons sent to camps, both those killed and those used for slave labour, would have been named after Heydrich. Such an operation had nothing to do with security or intelligence, which was Heydrich's field. Furthermore, it was not administered by the RSHA.

Here is a comment I wrote a couple of years ago on Hoeß's report "The Final Solution of the Jewish Problem at KL Auschwitz", written in November 1946 at the request of the Polish examining magistrate Jan Sehn, and published as Appendix One in the book "Commandant of Auschwitz: The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", translated from the German by Constance Fitzgibbon, 1959.

Fourth Extract, p. 194

‘Aktion Reinhardt’ was the code name given to the collection, sorting and utilisation of all articles which were acquired as the result of the transports of Jews and their extermination.

[Comment]
In this short paragraph, Hoess reveals the true meaning of the codeword “Aktion Reinhardt”, which is often misinterpreted as the designation of a program to exterminate the Jews of the Generalgouvernement. As Hoess shows, it in fact designated the program of processing the personal effects of Jewish deportees arriving at various camps, Auschwitz-Birkenau among them.

Note the spelling “Reinhardt”, which is the correct spelling. In some of the earliest documents in which “Aktion Reinhardt” is referred to, the spelling “Reinhard” is used, which gave rise to the misapprehension that the operation was named after Reinhard Heydrich. In later documents, the spelling “Reinhardt” is used exclusively, suggesting that it is the more correct.

One theory is that “Aktion Reinhardt” got its name from Fritz Reinhardt, the State Secretary of the German Department of Finance. There is no document stating the origin of the name, but it is more likely that it came from the surname “Reinhardt” than from Heydrich’s first name. Operations were usually designated by the surname of the person in charge of them (eg “Aktion Hoess”, the designation for the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz), rather than after first names.

If the above theory is correct, it would suggest that Fritz Reinhardt was the person in charge of “Aktion Reinhardt”. That is entirely possible, since all proceeds from the disposal of the personal possessions seized from the deported Jews had to be handed over to the Department of Finance, so it is logical that that department would be in charge of the whole operation. That would mean that Odilo Globocnik, the SSPF for Distrikt Lublin, was not in charge of “Aktion Reinhardt”, as has commonly been supposed, but was only responsible for that part of the Aktion that took place in his Distrikt, ie at the Lublin-Majdanek Concentration Camp and at the Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka camps. Hoess was presumably responsible for the operation of “Aktion Reinhardt” at Auschwitz, with Hoess, Globocnik and other camp commanders being ultimately responsible to Reinhardt for the materials collected in the course of the Aktion.

The possibility, indeed likelihood, that “Aktion Reinhardt” took its name from the State Secretary of the Department of Finance reveals a delicious irony of history, since Odilo Globocnik and Fritz Reinhardt were deadly enemies. Globocnik was an “Altkaempfer” of the Austrian Nazi Party who had been made Gauleiter of Vienna shortly after the Anschluss in 1938. However, in 1939 he had been forced to resign his position due to allegations of flagrant corruption that had been brought against him by Fritz Reinhardt. Himmler gave Globocnik a way out by appointing him SSPF of Distrikt Lublin in newly conquered Poland. The idea was that Globocnik should redeem himself in his new post from the stains on his reputation arising from the corruption allegations. But even in Lublin Globocnik was not safe from Reinhardt, who continued to investigate his financial affairs. Even the WVHA, to which of course Globocnik did not belong, regarded him with some suspicion as a bit of a “loose cannon” of dubious origin (he was a Croat from Trieste). It must have been galling for Globocnik to have been made responsible for the operation in Distrikt Lublin of a program of handling valuables named after his arch-enemy. Maybe the name “Reinhardt” was intended to remind him that he was being watched, given his reputation for light-fingeredness.

In 1944, Globocnik rendered to Himmler a detailed report on the operation of “Aktion Reinhardt” in Distrikt Lublin. This report included a detailed accounting of the value of the possessions seized from the deported Jews and their disposal. The context of the report makes it apparent that Globocnik was again under suspicion of having diverted some of the proceeds from the confiscated Jewish property into his own pockets; he produced the report in an attempt to clear his name. Of course it is true that the German camp staff did steal a large amount of the confiscated valuables.

Giles, do you really think that a program of collecting, sorting and utilising articles confiscated from Jews, including their underwear, would be code-named after the feared Reinhard Heydrich, whose name was a by-word for the ruthless hunting down and elimination of the enemies of the Reich, not for collecting personal effects and distributing them to needy ethnic Germans?

I do not expect to change your mind on this point. In my experience, the set of historiographical postulates known as "The Holocaust" seems to have the status of a credo, which individuals either accept or reject in toto. I constantly promote a more rational approach, capable of accepting that certain of the postulates are wrong, while others are right.

I note that the more rigid defenders of "The Holocaust", for example Alf on this particular thread, promote the view that rejection of one the postulates comprising the overall concept is tantamount to the rejection of the whole package, ie that rejection of the common interpretation of the meaning of "Aktion Reinhardt" is equivalent to rejection of the fact that there was a massive annihilation of Polish Jewry; but I trust that you will be capable of seeing that that is not so.

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » 13 Mar 2004 00:51

Hi All,

Thank you all who have posted info. on this subject. I did not know there was so much info out there.
Thank you,

Raistlin

giles120 · Post by **giles120** » 19 Mar 2004 01:11

The Fritz Reinhardt theory is indeed plausible and persuasive. The use of the surname as opposed to the christian name does make a great deal of sense. Still, there does appear to be inconsistencies between views. Different sources provide different explanations. Whatever our views, I wonder what the real answer is. Some real conclusive primary evidence would be ideal.

Thanks.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 20 Mar 2004 02:27

I think that info posted by alf shows that AR was not named after Fritz:

The only interesting reference to the Reich Ministry of Finance to be found in the archives of the IfZ is a Declaration on Oath by Bruno Melmer, Nürnberg, 11th February 1948 (NG-4983). Fritz Reinhardt is not mentioned at all. Another serious problem is that Melmer reported important events for May 1942 which actually took place in mid-August 1942. It will be difficult to explain why Einsatz or Aktion Reinhardt should have been named after a State Secretary whose ministry first became involved in the Aktion over two months after the first known occurrence of the code name

Earldor · Post by **Earldor** » 20 Mar 2004 20:38

giles120 wrote:The Fritz Reinhardt theory is indeed plausible and persuasive.

It is no such thing.

http://www.deathcamps.org/reinhard/pic/sslist2.jpg

As you can see in the promotion list of the O.R. death camp personnel, they are very much part of Operation Reinhard (or Reinhardt, if you want to follow the alternative spelling). I doubt that even mr Mills wants to claim that the men on the list were promoted simply because of logistics and stolen goods. Which were, of course, very much part of the Aktion Reinhard.

Was Höfle simply in charge of the warehouses of O.R.? No, but he is still listed as the referent of Operation Reinhardt in this document: http://www.deathcamps.org/lublin/pic/globstaff.jpg.

His full title in this document is Referent für Judenangelegenheiten - Sonderaktion Reinhardt or "Section Head for Jewish Affairs - Special Action Reinhardt".

In their article on the Höfle -telegram Peter Witte and Stephen Tyas write the following (Peter Witte and Stephen Tyas: "A New Document on the Deportation and Murder of Jews during "Einsatz Reinhardt" 1942", Holocaust and Genocide Studies, V15 N3, Winter 2001, pp. 470-71):

"The subject of the radio telegram reads "fortnightly report Einsatz Reinhart [sic.]." The same idiosyncratic spelling Einsatz Reinhart appears in both the printed and the typewritten office letterheads of Höfle's section in Globocnik's staff(6). Whether this reflects Höfle's ability to spell is not clear, though the latter is well documented.(7)"

6) Letter from Höfle's office clerk SS-Oberscharführer Franz Hoskowetz to the Commander of the Security Police and the SD Lublin, September 26, 1942; copying Archives of IfZ München, Fb 95/23, see also "Abteilg. Reinhart" in a letter from SSPF Lublin (Hoskowetz) to Section Population and Welfare Lublin, September 4, 1942; printed in Kermisz, Dokumenty i materialy, vol. 2, p.39.

7) See Joseph Wulf, Vollstrecker, pp. 277-79, for a number of stunning examples.

Josef Wulf: Das Dritte Reich und Seine Vollstrecker (Frankfurt, Berlin, Wien, Ullstein, 1984)

[snip]

Thanks.

You're welcome.

Fritz the Rat · Post by **Fritz the Rat** » 03 Dec 2006 19:10

new address: http://www.death-camps.org (now with hyphen).

Fritz

Axis History Forum

Was Chelmno a Ops. Reinhard

ARC