Problematic testimony of Dr. Bendel

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 07 Feb 2004 01:03

Dr. Bendel testified at Belsen trial that the height of the gas chambers in Krema II and III was 1.5/1.6 meters and that ceiling was very low:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/camps/bergen ... al-04.html

Then the door was opened and the people were crowded into the gas chambers which gave the impression that the roof was falling on their heads, as it was so low.

One got the impression that they fought terribly against death. Anybody who has ever seen a gas chamber filled to the height of one and a half metres with corpses will never forget it.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/10/1 ... 25-47.html

Q: How big were the chambers?

A: Each chamber was 10 meters long and 4 wide.

Q: [by the defense attorney, Dr. Zippel]: You stated that the gas chambers had dimensions of 10 by 1.6 meters, is that correct?

A: Yes, certainly.

There were 2 underground gas chambers, each approximately 10 meters long, 5 wide, and one and a half high. The 2 gas chambers supplied the corpses for the crematoriums.

The "gas chambers" of Crematoriums 3 and 4 (III and IV) measured in turn 6 x 3 x 1.5 meters (18 square meters, 27 cubic meters): "For crematoriums 3 and 4 there were 2 other gas chambers which each measured 6 meters long, 3 wide, and one and a half high."

Since the height of the gas chamber was 2.4 m, this part of testimony obviously calls for an explanation.
It can't be dismissed as a bad estimate, since someone who has been to the gas chamber either touched the ceiling with his head or not, and with the height of 1.5 m almost everyone would have to stoop.

To date I see the following alternatives:

1) Bendel never was in the gas chamber and lied in his testimony.
2) Text was somehow garbled in all instances. This happens with translations. But there are too many such instances, it's hard to see how it could happen, though it's still seems possible (e.g. he might have been talking not about meters, but translator/transcriber/whoever got it all wrong; but then we have not only quantitative, but also qualitative description).
3) Bendel might have been in the gas chamber, but was mentally disturbed, so that he couldn't even get such a fact correct.

I'd like to hear your comments.

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 07 Feb 2004 01:33

A note for our readers:

(1) Josef Kramer, commandant of concentration camp (Konzentrationslager - KL) Belsen and 44 other defendants were put on trial by a British military tribunal in 1945. Although the proceedings were termed "the Belsen trial", the charges also involved war crimes committed by some of the defendants when they served at KL Auschwitz. Bendel's testimony at the Belsen trial referred to here involved the gas chambers at KL Auschwitz, not KL Belsen.

(2) The United Nations War Crimes Commission report of the Belsen trial is available on-line, beginning with the foreword at:

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/WCC/belsenfwd.htm

Contemporary newspaper reports of the trial published in the London Times are available on-line only in this forum, at:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=19219

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 08 Feb 2004 07:16

(1) The witness or witnesses claiming to be Dr. Bendel from Auschwitz have two different sets of first names: one who calls himself Paul Bendel and is quoted in the book Temoignanes sur Auschwitz, Editions de l'Amicale des deportes d'Auschwitz, Paris: 1946, pp. 159-164; and Charles Sigismund Bendel, who testified at the Belsen trial and at the trial of Bruno Tesch, et al. before an American military tribunal. It is not clear whether there is only one person named Bendel, or two.

(2) Carlo Mattagno, the author of the article you linked to at:

http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/10/1 ... 25-47.html

has assumed that there is only one person named Bendel -- that Paul and Charles Sigismund Bendel are the same person.

(3) Mattagno's scholarship is very poor -- many of his footnotes do not support his claims at all, while other claims are referenced by footnotes to secondary sources and not to the original documents he describes. For example, I was unable to confirm the accuracy of Mattagno's version of Dr. Bendel's testimony at the Belsen trial. In particular, Mattagno made a number of statements, in each case footnoting to The Trial of Josef Kramer and Forty-Four Others ("The Belsen Trial"), William Hodge & Co., London-Edinburgh-Glasgow: 1949. The Trial of Josef Kramer and Forty-Four Others ("The Belsen Trial") is on-line beginning at: http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/WCC/belsenfwd.htm
If the readers take the time to check these citations, they will find little or no support for what Mattagno is saying.

(4) There is also the possibility that Dr. Bendel (or both Dr. Bendels) may actually have given unreliable testimony. Sometimes this happens in criminal trials. However, Dr. Bendel (or both Dr. Bendels) are not the exclusive source of evidence for gas chambers at KL Auschwitz, so I'm thinking: "So what?"

xcalibur · Post by **xcalibur** » 08 Feb 2004 18:08

I believe that the trial of Bruno Tesch was conducted by the British Military Court at Hamburg not by the Americans?

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 18:18

David, I'm told that Bendel might have used another name, just as Ada Bimko did.

http://pub86.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm ... =171.topic

There's no question about Mattogno's very poor scholarship, I found egregious errors in his other works. But that's not very relevant.

You're right asking "So what?" when it comes to the evidence about the gas chambers, but that's beside the point since the question I have is explicitly about Bendel. It certainly does not influence other evidence about the gas chambers, as there are many unreliable eyewitnesses for other historical events.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 18:55

Is Paul Bendel's testimony available in electronic form?

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 19:36

It's in this book: Eugen Kogon et.al. Nazi Mass Murder (Yale: 1993). Does anybody have it?

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 08 Feb 2004 19:58

Sergei -- (1) I have a copy of the Nazi Mass Murder book.

(2) Mattogno handles the problem of the two Dr. Bendels like this:

"The testimony in question, titled "The Sonderkommando," is signed "Dr. Paul Bendel, 167 460," but is undoubtedly that of Charles Sigismund Bendel." http://www.vho.org/GB/Journals/JHR/10/1 ... 25-47.html

(3) You said:

There's no question about Mattogno's very poor scholarship, I found egregious errors in his other works. But that's not very relevant.

You're right asking "So what?" when it comes to the evidence about the gas chambers, but that's beside the point since the question I have is explicitly about Bendel. It certainly does not influence other evidence about the gas chambers, as there are many unreliable eyewitnesses for other historical events.

Both points are relevant when it comes to your question. I'm saying that:

(a) while the question you have may be "explicitly about Bendel," there appear to be two persons with that name.

(b) I can't find any testimony by either of the two Bendels claiming that the gas chambers were only 1.6 meters high, as claimed by Mattagno.

(c) Mattagno's "scholarship" is both poor and partisan, so I don't trust him as the only source of Bendel's challenged testimony.

(d) Mattagno is the person who claimed one or both of the Bendels lied, so the burden of proving it is on Mattagno. He failed, so why bother to knock down a claim that can't stand up?

xcalibur -- You are correct. In fact, both of the trials I mentioned were held by British, not American, military tribunals.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 20:47

David, Paul Bendel seems to give the size of the pits as 800 sq. feet (John Zimmerman says so), Charles Bendels gives it as 12 x 6 meters, which is again 800 square feet. It would be too a remarkable coincidence.

Again, Charles Bendel said that the gas chamber was full of corpses to the height of 1.5 meters and that the ceiling was very low.

Just because Mattogno is unreliable in his interpretations does not mean that he makes up citations. His sources are NI documents, whatever they are. (Something to do with Nuremberg trials?)

Would it be hard to scan Paul's testimony? ;]

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 08 Feb 2004 21:10

Sergey -- The NI designation for a document refers to the numbering of exhibits by allied military tribunals in the various trials of lesser war criminals. The designation NI-11953, for example, is the transcript of testimony in the British trial of Bruno Tesch et al.

Pressac has some excepts from the statements of Paul Bendel and from the testimony of Charles Sigismund Bendel in his work Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, pps. 469-72. Scanning Pressac's comments will be difficult because when the book is opened to any particular page it is a foot tall and nearly four feet wide. To keep from trashing the book (it's somewhat scarce, I understand) and to hold the pages steady while scanning (it takes 3-4 scans to cover a page and keep the pixel level sufficiently low to comply with forum requirements), I will have to move my computer, monitor and scanner from a back room to my dining room table, set up operations, scan the text, and then shut down and remove the gear. I will try to do this for you today or tomorrow.

Scanning the references to Bendel from the normal-sized Kogon et al. book, on the other hand, is child's play and in fact I did it a few minutes ago. Kogon and his co-authors refer (at pp. 143-144) to the man as "Paul Sigismund Bendel." The statement quoted here is from Temoignages:

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 21:15

David, we already discussed it, thanks, but no reason to scan Presac. At least for now.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 21:22

David, John Zimmerman writes:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschw ... -disposal/

Paul Bendel, a French doctor and Sonderkommando, wrote of three pits of 20 by 40 feet dug near Kremas IV and V because the crematoria could not handle the bodies.
...
Eugen Kogon et.al. , Nazi Mass Murder, 170-171.

That is, Zimmerman too thought that it was Paul. I based my identification of Paul as Charles on this info, but now it seems that we again have two Bendels, at least until proven otherwise.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 21:25

There's no reason to scan Pressac, but it would be helpful if you said that Pressac has to say about this matter - whether he thought Paul to be Charles. And whether Paul gives other measurements - it's important.

xcalibur · Post by **xcalibur** » 08 Feb 2004 21:31

Sergey Romanov wrote:David, Paul Bendel seems to give the size of the pits as 800 sq. feet (John Zimmerman says so), Charles Bendels gives it as 12 x 6 meters, which is again 800 square feet. It would be too a remarkable coincidence.

Again, Charles Bendel said that the gas chamber was full of corpses to the height of 1.5 meters and that the ceiling was very low.

Just because Mattogno is unreliable in his interpretations does not mean that he makes up citations. His sources are NI documents, whatever they are. (Something to do with Nuremberg trials?)

Would it be hard to scan Paul's testimony? ;]

Just read that testimony at Nizkor. It seems to that this Bendel is perhaps saying two different things: That the floor-to-ceiling height of he gas chamber was "low". He then goes on to say that the height of the pile of corpses was 1.5-1.6 meters, meaning that this was the height from the floor to the top of the pile.

1.5 meters=58.5 inches or 4.875 feet. it certainly seems to me that a pile of bodies could reach that height whereas it would be a ridiculous floor-to- ceiling height unless people entered the chamber on their knees.

Sergey Romanov · Post by **Sergey Romanov** » 08 Feb 2004 21:37

xcalibur yes, this piece is ambiguous, but someone (Paul or Charles) whom Mattogno cites repeats 1.5 meters, so it kind of corroborates my interpretation.

Does anybody know what NI documents are supposed to be?