Hans Wijnberg and his sister Els, who both lived at Prinsengracht 251 during this period, said in an interview that they had entered the building on 24 March 1943 and that they took some nutmeg while they were there. They had already taken the nuts when they heard the toilet being flushed. They understood that there were people in the building and quickly ran off.[1]
\r\n\r\nHans Wijnberg en zijn zus Els, die tijdens de onderduikperiode op Prinsengracht 251 woonden, vertelden in een interview dat ze op 24 maart 1943 als kind in het pand geweest waren en dat ze daar muskaatnoten hadden weggenomen. Ze hadden de noten al gepakt toen ze hoorden dat het toilet werd doorgetrokken. Ze begrepen toen dat er mensen in het pand waren en maakten zich snel uit de voeten.[1]
\r\n\r\nHans Wijnberg and his sister Els, who both lived at Prinsengracht 251 during this period, said in an interview that they had entered the building on 24 March 1943 and that they took some nutmeg while they were there. They had already taken the nuts when they heard the toilet being flushed. They understood that there were people in the building and quickly ran off.[1]
\r\n\r\nAround half past nine in the evening of 9 April 1944, Peter, who usually checked the doors for the night, discovered that something was wrong. He quietly alerted "the men" and they went to investigate. Later they told the women who remained in the annex that the burglars were still prying at the warehouse door when they entered the warehouse from the stairs. Van Pels shouted "police", after which the burglars fled. But not without kicking another plank off the door.
\r\n\r\nOf course, there was a good chance that the police would notice the forced door, and they did. Slegers had been patrolling the city center for years along buildings for which he was hired as a night watchman. He regularly encountered suspicious situations and his name appears in numerous police reports. The police officer he alerted, Cornelis den Boef, searched the building around a quarter to eleven but, in his opinion, found nothing suspicious. Later that evening he reported to the watch commander of the Warmoesstraat police station: "However, there were no traces of theft found inside the house."[1]
\r\n\r\nOn the other side of the bookcase, the people in hiding sat in great fear. Anne wrote in her diary: "Footsteps in the house, in the private office, kitchen, then..... on our staircase, no one breathed audibly now, 8 hearts thumped, footsteps on our staircase, then a rattling of the swining cupboard. This moment is indescribable." To make matters worse, this Sunday was Easter Sunday, which meant the office staff wouldn't arrive until Tuesday. Until then, the people in hiding were unsure about what was going on and sat in dead silence in Van Pels' room, under the assumption that the police would be on guard in the building.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn Tuesday morning they managed to reach Jo Kleiman by telephone. Shortly afterwards, Jan and Miep Gies showed up, and, for the time being, the coast seemed to be reasonably safe. Later, Jan heard from greengrocer Van Hoeve that he too had noticed the hole in the door, but thought it better not to call the police.[2]
\r\n\r\nRond half tien in de avond van 9 april 1944 ontdekte Peter, die in de regel de deuren voor de nacht controleerde, dat er iets loos was. Hij alarmeerde stilletjes 'de heren' en zij gingen poolshoogte nemen. Later vertelden zij de in de schuilplaats achtergebleven dames dat de inbrekers nog aan de magazijndeur wrikten toen zij vanaf de trap het pakhuis inkwamen. Van Pels riep 'politie', waarop de inbrekers vluchtten. Maar niet zonder nog eens een plank van de deur te trappen.
\r\n\r\nUiteraard was de kans groot dat de politie de geforceerde deur zou opmerken, en dat gebeurde ook. Slegers surveilleerde al jarenlang in binnenstad langs panden waarvoor hij als nachtwaker was ingehuurd. Daarbij trof hij geregeld verdachte situaties en zijn naam duikt dan ook in tal van politierapporten op. De agent die hij waarschuwde, Cornelis den Boef, doorzocht rond kwart voor elf het pand maar trof zijn inziens niets verdachts aan. Hij rapporteerde later op de avond aan de wachtcommandant van bureau Warmoesstraat: 'Binnenshuis was van diefstal echter niets te constateeren.'[1]
\r\n\r\nAan de andere kant van de boekenkast zaten de onderduikers in grote angst. Anne schreef in haar dagboek: 'Stappen in huis, privékantoor, keuken, dan..... onze trap, niemand ademde nu hoorbaar, 8 harten bonkten, stappen op onze trap, dan gerammel aan de draaikast. Dit moment is onbeschrijvelijk.' Tot overmaat van ramp was het deze zondag eerste Paasdag, wat betekende dat het kantoorpersoneel pas dinsdag zou komen. Tot zolang verkeerden de onderduikers in onzekerheid over wat er gaande was en zaten zij in doodse stilte bijeen in de kamer van Van Pels, in de veronderstelling dat er wel politie in het gebouw de wacht zou houden.[2]
\r\n\r\nDinsdagochtend lukte het Jo Kleiman telefonisch te bereiken. Kort daarna verschenen Jan en Miep Gies, en bleek de kust - voorlopig - redelijk veilig. Later hoorde Jan van groenteman Van Hoeve dat ook hij het gat in de deur had opgemerkt, maar dacht er beter geen politie bij te halen.[2]
\r\n\r\nAround half past nine in the evening of 9 April 1944, Peter, who usually checked the doors for the night, discovered that something was wrong. He quietly alerted "the men" and they went to investigate. Later they told the women who remained in the annex that the burglars were still prying at the warehouse door when they entered the warehouse from the stairs. Van Pels shouted "police", after which the burglars fled. But not without kicking another plank off the door.
\r\n\r\nOf course, there was a good chance that the police would notice the forced door, and they did. Slegers had been patrolling the city center for years along buildings for which he was hired as a night watchman. He regularly encountered suspicious situations and his name appears in numerous police reports. The police officer he alerted, Cornelis den Boef, searched the building around a quarter to eleven but, in his opinion, found nothing suspicious. Later that evening he reported to the watch commander of the Warmoesstraat police station: "However, there were no traces of theft found inside the house."[1]
\r\n\r\nOn the other side of the bookcase, the people in hiding sat in great fear. Anne wrote in her diary: "Footsteps in the house, in the private office, kitchen, then..... on our staircase, no one breathed audibly now, 8 hearts thumped, footsteps on our staircase, then a rattling of the swining cupboard. This moment is indescribable." To make matters worse, this Sunday was Easter Sunday, which meant the office staff wouldn't arrive until Tuesday. Until then, the people in hiding were unsure about what was going on and sat in dead silence in Van Pels' room, under the assumption that the police would be on guard in the building.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn Tuesday morning they managed to reach Jo Kleiman by telephone. Shortly afterwards, Jan and Miep Gies showed up, and, for the time being, the coast seemed to be reasonably safe. Later, Jan heard from greengrocer Van Hoeve that he too had noticed the hole in the door, but thought it better not to call the police.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944, around 10:30 in the morning, an arrest team of Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) raided the premises on Prinsengracht.[1] The team was led by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer and included detectives Willem Grootendorst and Gezinus Gringhuis.
\r\n\r\nThe detectives walked passed from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler. They questioned him and took him to search the building.
\r\n\r\nAccording to Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch), Kugler was immediately taken for interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them directly to the revolving bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he had strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[2] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.[3]
\r\n\r\nOp 4 augustus 1944 viel rond half elf in de ochtend een arrestatieteam van Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) het pand aan de Prinsengracht binnen.[1] Het team stond onder leiding van SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer en bestond daarnaast in elk geval uit de rechercheurs Willem Grootendorst en Gezinus Gringhuis.
\r\n\r\nDe rechercheurs liepen van het voorkantoor door naar het kantoor van Victor Kugler. Ze ondervroegen hem en namen hem mee om het gebouw te doorzoeken.
\r\n\r\nVolgens Silberbauer (die geen Nederlands verstond) werd Kugler direct door een van de Nederlandse SD’ers in verhoor genomen. Daarna zou Kugler hen rechtstreeks naar de draaibare boekenkast hebben geleid. Jaren later verklaarde Kugler zelf dat hij de SD’ers zo lang mogelijk aan het lijntje hield. Echter, aldus Kugler: ‘Zij wisten het.’[2] Verdere verklaringen omtrent Kugler tijdens de inval zijn uit de tweede hand, en lopen nogal uiteen.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944, around 10:30 in the morning, an arrest team of Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) raided the premises on Prinsengracht.[1] The team was led by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer and included detectives Willem Grootendorst and Gezinus Gringhuis.
\r\n\r\nThe detectives walked passed from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler. They questioned him and took him to search the building.
\r\n\r\nAccording to Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch), Kugler was immediately taken for interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them directly to the revolving bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he had strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[2] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944, around 10:30 in the morning, an arrest team of Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) raided the premises on Prinsengracht.[1] The team was led by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer and included the detectives Willem Grootendorst and Gezinus Gringhuis. The first two were working for the Sipo-SD, the latter had transferred from that service to the Dutch State Criminal Investigation Department.[2] The policemen drove a car ahead, got out, whereupon one of the Dutch detectives asked the warehouse staff something, who directed him to the office floor upstairs. There they found the office staff working.
\r\n\r\nAt least Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies were sitting there at the time, both of whom knew about the people in hiding. It is not entirely clear exactly where Kleiman was at the time of the raid. Miep and Bep stated in December 1963 that they were together in the front office and that Kleiman only entered when the SD was already in the building. According to them, when they entered he gave his wallet to Bep with a request to hand it over to a drugstore owner friend nearby.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe detectives walked on from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler. They questioned him and took him to search the building.
\r\n\r\nAccording to Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch), Kugler was immediately taken into interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them directly to the bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[4] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.[5]
\r\n\r\nInitially, only Kugler went into the Secret Annex, but later Kleiman was also taken there.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Kugler's statements, Edith Frank-Holländer was the first person he saw when he, followed by the SDs, entered the Secret Annex. He said: 'Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da.'[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank later recalled that at the time of the arrest he was in the upper part of the Secret Annex, helping Peter with his schoolwork in his room and just pointing out a mistake in his dictation when he suddenly heard someone running up the stairs: "Suddenly someone came running up the stairs and then the door opened and a man was standing right in front of us with a gun in his hand. Downstairs they were all gathered".[6]
\r\n\r\nIn 1963, he added:
\r\n\r\n"He made us raise our hands and then searched us for weapons. (...) Then he ordered us to go downstairs. He came after us with a gun drawn. We first entered the room of the Pels family, where I saw Mr and Mrs Pels, as well as Mr Pfeffer [also] standing with their hands raised. Here too stood a man dressed in civilian clothes, unknown to me, who had also drawn his pistol. Then we all had to go down another floor, where I lived with my family. There I saw my wife and both daughters standing, also with their hands raised. (...) I also saw a man in a green uniform, unknown to me, who had already drawn his gun. I found out later that this man was called Silberbauer."[7]\r\n\r\n
Silberbauer also asked the detainees about jewellery and money. He emptied the briefcase in which Anne kept her diary entries and put money and jewellery in it. The detainees were given five minutes to get ready for departure.[6] Otto Frank said:
\r\n\r\n"While waiting for all this to happen, Silberbauer walked through our room and he saw a chest next to my wife's bed. It was a grey chest with iron fittings, on which was written my name and my rank in the German army. I then told him that I had been a reserve lieutenant in the German army in the First World War. At once Silberbauer's tone and attitude changed. (...) He then asked me why I hadn't reported back then, I would have been sent to the Theresienstadt labour camp."[6]\r\n\r\n
The people in hiding, together with Kleiman and Kugler, were taken to the SD in Euterpestraat for interrogation. The next day, the people in hiding were transferred to Detention Centre at the Weteringschans and from there transported to Westerbork on 8 August 1944. After interrogation, Kleiman and Kugler were locked up in Detention Centre II on the Amstelveenseweg (Havenstraat 6). They stayed there for almost six weeks until they were transferred to Detention Centre I on the Weteringschans (Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen) on 7 September.
\r\n\r\nOp 4 augustus 1944 viel rond half elf in de ochtend een arrestatieteam van Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) het pand aan de Prinsengracht binnen.[1] Het team stond onder leiding van SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer en bestond daarnaast in elk geval uit de rechercheurs Willem Grootendorst en Gezinus Gringhuis. De eerste twee waren werkzaam voor de Sipo-SD, de laatste was van die dienst overgestapt naar de Nederlandse Rijksrecherchecentrale.[2] De politiemannen reden met een auto voor, stapten uit, waarop een van de Nederlandse rechercheurs iets aan het pakhuispersoneel vroeg, dat hem naar de bovengelegen kantoorverdieping verwees. Daar troffen zij het kantoorpersoneel dat aan het werk was.
\r\n\r\nOp dat moment zaten daar in ieder geval Bep Voskuijl en Miep Gies, die beiden op de hoogte waren van de onderduikers. Het is niet helemaal duidelijk waar Kleiman precies was op het moment van de inval. Miep en Bep verklaarden in december 1963 dat zij samen in het voorkantoor zaten en dat Kleiman pas binnenkwam toen de SD al in het gebouw was. Volgens hen gaf hij bij binnenkomst zijn portefeuille aan Bep met het verzoek deze af te geven bij een bevriend drogist in de buurt.[3]
\r\n\r\nDe rechercheurs liepen van het voorkantoor door naar het kantoor van Victor Kugler. Ze ondervroegen hem en namen hem mee om het gebouw te doorzoeken.
\r\n\r\nVolgens Silberbauer (die geen Nederlands verstond) werd Kugler direct door een van de Nederlandse SD’ers in verhoor genomen. Daarna zou Kugler hen rechtstreeks naar de boekenkast hebben geleid. Jaren later verklaarde Kugler zelf dat hij de SD’ers zo lang mogelijk aan het lijntje hield. Echter, aldus Kugler: ‘Zij wisten het.’[4] Verdere verklaringen omtrent Kugler tijdens de inval zijn uit de tweede hand, en lopen nogal uiteen.[5]
\r\n\r\nAanvankelijk ging alleen Kugler mee het Achterhuis in, maar later werd ook Kleiman daarnaartoe gebracht.[4]
\r\n\r\nVolgens verklaringen van Kugler was Edith Frank-Holländer de eerste die hij zag toen hij, gevolgd door de SD'ers, het Achterhuis binnenging. Hij zei hierover: ‘Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da.’[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank herinnerde zich later dat hij op het moment van de arrestatie in het bovenste deel van het Achterhuis was, waar hij Peter op diens kamer met schoolwerk hielp en hem net op een fout in zijn dictee wees toen hij plotseling iemand de trap op hoorde rennen: ‘Plotseling kwam iemand de trap op rennen en toen ging de deur open en een man stond vlak voor ons met een pistool in zijn hand. Beneden waren ze allemaal verzameld’.[6]
\r\n\r\nIn 1963 voegde hij daar aan toe:
\r\n\r\n'Hij liet ons de handen omhoog steken en fouilleerde ons daarna op wapens. (…) Vervolgens gelastte hij ons naar beneden te gaan. Hij kwam achter ons aan met een getrokken pistool. Wij kwamen eerst in de kamer van de familie Pels, alwaar ik de heer en mevrouw Pels, alsook de heer Pfeffer met omhoog geheven handen zag staan. Ook hier stond een in burger geklede, mij onbekende man, die eveneens zijn pistool getrokken had. Daarna moesten wij allen weer een verdieping lager, waar ik met mijn gezin woonde. Daar zag ik mijn vrouw en beide dochters staan, eveneens met de handen in de hoogte. (…) Tevens zag ik daar een in groen uniform geklede, mij onbekende man staan, die ook al zijn pistool getrokken had. Deze man bleek mij nadien Silberbauer te heten’.[7]\r\n\r\n
Silberbauer vroeg de onderduikers ook naar sieraden en geld. Hij schudde de aktetas waarin Anne haar dagboekaantekeningen bewaarde leeg en stopte er geld en sieraden in. De arrestanten kregen vijf minuten om zich voor vertrek klaar te maken.[6] Otto Frank vertelde:
\r\n\r\n'In afwachting van dit alles liep Silberbauer door onze kamer heen en hij zag naast het bed van mijn vrouw een kist staan. Het was een grijze kist met ijzerbeslag, waarop mijn naam vermeld stond en mijn rang in het Duitse leger. Ik vertelde hem daarop dat ik in de Eerste Wereldoorlog reserve-luitenant van het Duitse leger was geweest. Op slag veranderde toon en houding van Silberbauer. (…) Daarop zei hij tegen mij, waarom ik mij destijds dan niet gemeld had, dan zou ik destijds naar het werkkamp “Theresienstadt” zijn gestuurd.'[6]\r\n\r\n
De onderduikers werden samen met Kleiman en Kugler voor verhoor naar de SD in de Euterpestraat overgebracht. De volgende dag werden de onderduikers overgebracht naar het Huis van Bewaring aan de Weteringschans en van daaruit op 8 augustus 1944 getransporteerd naar Westerbork. Kleiman en Kugler werden na verhoor opgesloten in het Huis van Bewaring II op de Amstelveenseweg (Havenstraat 6). Daar verbleven ze bijna zes weken totdat ze op 7 september werden overgebracht naar het Huis van Bewaring I op de Weteringschans (Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen).
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944, around 10:30 in the morning, an arrest team of Sicherheitspolizei und Sicherheitsdienst, (Sipo-SD) raided the premises on Prinsengracht.[1] The team was led by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer and included the detectives Willem Grootendorst and Gezinus Gringhuis. The first two were working for the Sipo-SD, the latter had transferred from that service to the Dutch State Criminal Investigation Department.[2] The policemen drove a car ahead, got out, whereupon one of the Dutch detectives asked the warehouse staff something, who directed him to the office floor upstairs. There they found the office staff working.
\r\n\r\nAt least Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies were sitting there at the time, both of whom knew about the people in hiding. It is not entirely clear exactly where Kleiman was at the time of the raid. Miep and Bep stated in December 1963 that they were together in the front office and that Kleiman only entered when the SD was already in the building. According to them, when they entered he gave his wallet to Bep with a request to hand it over to a drugstore owner friend nearby.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe detectives walked on from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler. They questioned him and took him to search the building.
\r\n\r\nAccording to Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch), Kugler was immediately taken into interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them directly to the bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[4] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.[5]
\r\n\r\nInitially, only Kugler went into the Secret Annex, but later Kleiman was also taken there.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Kugler's statements, Edith Frank-Holländer was the first person he saw when he, followed by the SDs, entered the Secret Annex. He said: 'Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da.'[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank later recalled that at the time of the arrest he was in the upper part of the Secret Annex, helping Peter with his schoolwork in his room and just pointing out a mistake in his dictation when he suddenly heard someone running up the stairs: "Suddenly someone came running up the stairs and then the door opened and a man was standing right in front of us with a gun in his hand. Downstairs they were all gathered".[6]
\r\n\r\nIn 1963, he added:
\r\n\r\n"He made us raise our hands and then searched us for weapons. (...) Then he ordered us to go downstairs. He came after us with a gun drawn. We first entered the room of the Pels family, where I saw Mr and Mrs Pels, as well as Mr Pfeffer [also] standing with their hands raised. Here too stood a man dressed in civilian clothes, unknown to me, who had also drawn his pistol. Then we all had to go down another floor, where I lived with my family. There I saw my wife and both daughters standing, also with their hands raised. (...) I also saw a man in a green uniform, unknown to me, who had already drawn his gun. I found out later that this man was called Silberbauer."[7]\r\n\r\n
Silberbauer also asked the detainees about jewellery and money. He emptied the briefcase in which Anne kept her diary entries and put money and jewellery in it. The detainees were given five minutes to get ready for departure.[6] Otto Frank said:
\r\n\r\n"While waiting for all this to happen, Silberbauer walked through our room and he saw a chest next to my wife's bed. It was a grey chest with iron fittings, on which was written my name and my rank in the German army. I then told him that I had been a reserve lieutenant in the German army in the First World War. At once Silberbauer's tone and attitude changed. (...) He then asked me why I hadn't reported back then, I would have been sent to the Theresienstadt labour camp."[6]\r\n\r\n
The people in hiding, together with Kleiman and Kugler, were taken to the SD in Euterpestraat for interrogation. The next day, the people in hiding were transferred to Detention Centre at the Weteringschans and from there transported to Westerbork on 8 August 1944. After interrogation, Kleiman and Kugler were locked up in Detention Centre II on the Amstelveenseweg (Havenstraat 6). They stayed there for almost six weeks until they were transferred to Detention Centre I on the Weteringschans (Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen) on 7 September.
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944 around 10.30 am, an arrest team raided the building on Prinsengracht.[1] The policemen drove a car ahead, got out, whereupon one of the Dutch detectives asked the warehouse staff something, who directed him to the office floor upstairs. There they found the office staff working. At least Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies, both of whom knew about the people in hiding, were sitting there at the time.
\r\n\r\nIt is not entirely clear exactly where Kleiman was at the time of the raid. Miep and Bep stated in December 1963 that they were together in the front office and that Kleiman only entered when the Sicherheitsdienst (SD) was already in the building. According to them, when they entered, he gave his wallet to Bep with a request to deliver it to a drugstore owner friend nearby.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn January 1948, Kleiman mentioned the SD officer Karl Silberbauer and (detectives) Gezinus Gringhuis and Willem Grootendorst entering the office.[3] The detectives walked on from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler, who at the time was director of Opekta/Pectcon. The policemen questioned him and took him along while they searched the building. Initially, only Kugler went into the Secret Annex, but later Kleiman was also taken there.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to statements made by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch) after the war, Kugler was immediately taken into interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them straight to the bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[4] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.
\r\n\r\nAccording to statements by Kugler, Edith Frank-Holländer was the first person he saw when, followed by the SDs, he entered the Secret Annexe. He said: "Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da." [4]
\r\n\r\nKugler was eventually taken to the SD building at Adema van Scheltamaplein 1 along with the eight people in hiding and Johannes Kleiman.[5] In the SD building, they were locked together in a large room, to be interrogated one by one later.
\r\n\r\nOp 4 augustus 1944 rond half elf 's ochtends viel een arrestatieteam het pand aan de Prinsengracht binnen.[1] De politiemannen reden met een auto voor, stapten uit, waarop een van de Nederlandse rechercheurs iets aan het pakhuispersoneel vroeg, dat hem naar de bovengelegen kantoorverdieping verwees. Daar troffen zij het kantoorpersoneel dat aan het werk was. Op dat moment zaten daar in ieder geval Bep Voskuijl en Miep Gies, die beiden op de hoogte waren van de onderduikers.
\r\n\r\nHet is niet helemaal duidelijk waar Kleiman precies was op het moment van de inval. Miep en Bep verklaarden in december 1963 dat zij samen in het voorkantoor zaten en dat Kleiman pas binnenkwam toen de Sichterheitsdienst (SD) al in het gebouw was. Volgens hen gaf hij bij binnenkomst zijn portefeuille aan Bep met het verzoek deze af te geven bij een bevriende drogist in de buurt.[2]
\r\n\r\nKleiman noemde in januari 1948 de SD'ers Karl Silberbauer en (rechercheurs) Gezinus Gringhuis en Willem Grootendorst die het kantoor binnenkwamen.[3] De rechercheurs liepen van het voorkantoor door naar het kantoor van Victor Kugler, die op dat moment directeur van Opekta/Pectacon was. De politiemannen ondervroegen hem en namen hem mee om het gebouw te doorzoeken. Aanvankelijk ging alleen Kugler mee het Achterhuis in, maar later werd ook Kleiman daarnaartoe gebracht.[4]
\r\n\r\nVolgens verklaringen van de SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer (die geen Nederlands verstond) na de oorlog, werd Kugler direct door een van de Nederlandse SD’ers in verhoor genomen. Daarna zou Kugler hen rechtstreeks naar de boekenkast hebben geleid. Jaren later verklaarde Kugler zelf dat hij de SD’ers zo lang mogelijk aan het lijntje hield. Echter, aldus Kugler: ‘Zij wisten het.’[4] Verdere verklaringen omtrent Kugler tijdens de inval zijn uit tweede hand, en lopen nogal uiteen.
\r\n\r\nVolgens verklaringen van Victor Kugler was Edith Frank-Holländer de eerste die hij zag toen hij, gevolgd door de SD'ers, het Achterhuis binnenging. Hij zei hierover: ‘Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da.’ [4]
\r\n\r\nUiteindelijk werd Kugler samen met de acht onderduikers en Kleiman naar het gebouw van de Sicherheitsdienst aan het Adama van Scheltemaplein 1 gebracht.[5] In het gebouw van de SD werden zij samen in een grote ruimte opgesloten, om later een voor een te worden verhoord.
\r\n\r\nKugler noemde in zijn vrij summiere verklaring voor de Politieke Recherche Afdeling van 14 januari 1948 geen details over de arrestatie.
\r\n\r\nOn 4 August 1944 around 10.30 am, an arrest team raided the building on Prinsengracht.[1] The policemen drove a car ahead, got out, whereupon one of the Dutch detectives asked the warehouse staff something, who directed him to the office floor upstairs. There they found the office staff working. At least Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies, both of whom knew about the people in hiding, were sitting there at the time.
\r\n\r\nIt is not entirely clear exactly where Kleiman was at the time of the raid. Miep and Bep stated in December 1963 that they were together in the front office and that Kleiman only entered when the Sicherheitsdienst (SD) was already in the building. According to them, when they entered, he gave his wallet to Bep with a request to deliver it to a drugstore owner friend nearby.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn January 1948, Kleiman mentioned the SD officer Karl Silberbauer and (detectives) Gezinus Gringhuis and Willem Grootendorst entering the office.[3] The detectives walked on from the front office to the office of Victor Kugler, who at the time was director of Opekta/Pectcon. The policemen questioned him and took him along while they searched the building. Initially, only Kugler went into the Secret Annex, but later Kleiman was also taken there.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to statements made by SS-Hauptscharführer Karl Silberbauer (who did not understand Dutch) after the war, Kugler was immediately taken into interrogation by one of the Dutch SD officers. Afterwards, Kugler allegedly led them straight to the bookcase. Years later, Kugler himself stated that he strung the SDs along for as long as possible. However, according to Kugler: "They knew".[4] Further statements regarding Kugler during the raid are second-hand, and vary considerably.
\r\n\r\nAccording to statements by Kugler, Edith Frank-Holländer was the first person he saw when, followed by the SDs, he entered the Secret Annexe. He said: "Ich konnte nur mit vieler Mühe sagen: die Gestapo ist da." [4]
\r\n\r\nKugler was eventually taken to the SD building at Adema van Scheltamaplein 1 along with the eight people in hiding and Johannes Kleiman.[5] In the SD building, they were locked together in a large room, to be interrogated one by one later.
\r\n\r\nThe Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. was set up because Pectacon, one of Otto Frank's companies, was in danger of being liquidated due to anti-Jewish measures. Initially, the company was called La Synthèse. This firm was founded on 23 October 1940 by Victor Kugler and Jan Gies. On 4 November 1940, the new firm was registered in the trade register with Victor Kugler as owner and director and Jan Gies as supervisory director and shareholder.[1] La Synthèse was located at Victor Kugler's private address in Hilversum. Kugler owned 15 shares worth 1,500 guilders in total; Jan Gies owned the rest of the shares worth 500 guilders.[2] Its representatives were Martin Brouwer and Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nLike Pectacon, the company focused on trading and manufacturing chemicals and foodstuffs.[1] On 8 May 1941, Kugler and Gies changed the company name to N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. This was by order of the secretary-general of Justice.[4] Otto Frank said about this in 1963 that the business "had to drop its French-sounding name, as it was a company of German origin.''[5] On 19 August 1941, the Trade Register registered the new company name, and Jan Gies was registered as a supervisory director of Gies & Co.[6] As supervisory director, Jan Gies had the authority to enter all the premises of the company. So it was also not uncommon for him to be present a lot and later speak to night watchman Slegers, for example, about the burglary in April 1944.
\r\n\r\nFrom September 1941, at the suggestion of Johannes Kleiman, Pectacon went into liquidation. Stocks and machinery were sold at a loss to Gies & Co. All kinds of other costs were also still charged to Pectacon.[7] That artifice prevented these goods, or their value, from benefiting German institutions.
\r\n\r\nWhen Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263 on 29 October 1941, it took over the lease from Opekta. Opekta then became a subtenant of Gies & Co.[8] It also received an advance of 5,000 guilders from Opekta.[9] With Opekta's advance and the costs borne by Pectacon, Gies & Co. was able to get off to a flying start.
\r\n\r\nAlmost certainly Gies & Co. was the most important factor in financing the period of hiding in the Secret Annex. There are three clues to the importance of Gies & Co. in this context. First, Otto Frank explicitly mentioned that Kugler sold spices off the books to finance the needs in the Secret Annex.[10] Second, Gies & Co. was completely 'Aryan', which made it easy to evade German scrutiny. Third, Van Pels and Otto Frank were furious when Kugler conducted laboratory tests instead of approving the supply by spice broker Westermann. All this underlines the fact that Gies & Co. was crucial to the period in hiding.
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Otto Frank obviously had no formal ties with the company. A note in the Hofhuis archives lists share ownership, presumably dated late 1943 or early 1944. On paper, Kleiman had shareholdings of 3,500 guilders, Gies 2,500 and Kugler 4,000. Kleiman and Otto Frank's investments in shares and deposit were so intermingled that it looks as if Otto's and Kleiman's money formed a single entity. Exactly who was entitled to what is not clear. What is clear, however, is that Otto invested in Gies & Co.[11] Otto Frank gave up owning Gies & Co. shares with a nominal value of 5,800 guilders as of 1 September 1945.[12] In 1948, he owned 58 per cent of the shares.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn April 1950, Otto Frank and Pal Klein joined the N.V. as supervisory directors.[14] In January 1954, Otto Frank owned 9,000 guilders worth of shares in Gies & Co (and 20,000 guilders worth of Opekta shares and 2,000 guilders worth of shares in Pectacon).[15] Indeed, Pectacon had not been liquidated in the end.
\r\n\r\nDe Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. werd opgezet omdat Pectacon, een van de bedrijven van Otto Frank, wegens ariseringsmaatregelen gevaar liep te worden geliquideerd. Aanvankelijk heette het bedrijf La Synthèse. Deze firma werd op 23 oktober 1940 opgericht door Victor Kugler en Jan Gies. Op 4 november 1940 werd de nieuwe firma ingeschreven in het handelsregister met Victor Kugler als eigenaar en directeur en Jan Gies als commissaris en aandeelhouder.[1] La Synthèse was gevestigd op het privé-adres van Victor Kugler in Hilversum. Kugler bezat vijftien aandelen ter waarde van 1.500 gulden in totaal; Jan Gies bezat de rest van de aandelen ter waarde van 500 gulden.[2] Vertegenwoordigers waren Martin Brouwer en Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nEvenals Pectacon legde het bedrijf zich toe op handel in en fabricage van chemicaliën en levensmiddelen.[1] Op 8 mei 1941 veranderden Kugler en Gies de bedrijfsnaam in N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. Dit op last van de secretaris-generaal van Justitie.[4] Otto Frank zei hierover in 1963 dat de zaak "haar Frans klinkende naam, wijl zij een onderneming was van Duitse afkomst, moest laten vallen."[5] Aanwijzingen dat het ministerie bezwaar tegen Frans klinkende namen had zijn er verder niet. Wel bepaalde het vaker dat wijziging nodig was, bijvoorbeeld wanneer een bedrijfsnaam teveel op een andere leek. Op 19 augustus 1941 registreerde het Handelsregister de nieuwe bedrijfsnaam, en werd Jan Gies ingeschreven als commissaris van Gies & Co.[6] Als commissaris had Jan Gies de bevoegdheid alle lokaliteiten van de onderneming te betreden. Zodoende was het ook niet ongewoon dat hij veel aanwezig was en later bijvoorbeeld met nachtwaker Slegers over de inbraak van april 1944 sprak.
\r\n\r\nVanaf september 1941 ging Pectacon, op voorstel van Johannes Kleiman, in liquidatie. De voorraden en machines werden met verlies aan Gies & Co. verkocht. Ook allerhande andere kosten kwamen nog ten laste van Pectacon.[7] Die kunstgreep voorkwam dat deze goederen, of hun waarde, ten goede kwamen van Duitse instellingen.
\r\n\r\nToen Gies & Co. op 29 oktober 1941 verhuisde naar de Prinsengracht 263, nam het het huurcontract over van Opekta. Opekta werd vervolgens onderhuurder van Gies & Co.[8] Ook ontving het een voorschot van 5.000 gulden van Opekta.[9] Met het voorschot van Opekta en de door Pectacon gedragen kosten kon Gies & Co. een vliegende start maken.
\r\n\r\nVrijwel zeker was Gies & Co. het belangrijkst voor de financiering van de onderduik in het Achterhuis. Voor het belang van Gies & Co. in dit verband zijn drie aanwijzingen. Als eerste benoemde Otto Frank expliciet dat Kugler specerijen verkocht buiten de boekhouding ter financiering van de noden in het Achterhuis.[10] Ten tweede was Gies & Co. volledig ‘arisch’ waardoor het zich makkelijk aan Duits toezicht kon onttrekken. Ten derde, Van Pels en Otto Frank waren woedend toen Kugler laboratoriumproefjes deed in plaats van de leverantie voor specerijenmakelaar Westermann in orde te maken. Dit alles onderstreept dat Gies & Co. van cruciaal belang was voor de onderduik.
\r\n\r\nTijdens de oorlogsjaren had Otto Frank uiteraard geen formele banden met het bedrijf. Een briefje in het Hofhuisarchief geeft een overzicht van het aandelenbezit, vermoedelijk gedateerd in eind 1943 of begin 1944. Op papier bezat Kleiman 3.500, Gies 2.500 en Kugler 4.000 gulden. De investeringen in aandelen en deposito van Kleiman en Otto Frank liepen zo door elkaar heen, dat het erop lijkt alsof Otto's en Kleimans geld één geheel vormden. Wie welke aanspraak precies kon maken is niet helder. Wel is duidelijk dat Otto in Gies & Co. heeft geïnvesteerd.[11] Otto Frank gaf op per 1 september 1945 aandelen Gies & Co. te bezitten met een nominale waarde van 5.800 gulden.[12] In 1948 beschikte hij over 58 procent van de aandelen.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn april ’50 traden Otto Frank en Pal Klein als commissarissen tot de N.V. toe.[14] In januari 1954 bezat Otto Frank voor 9.000 gulden aandelen in Gies & Co. (en 20.000 gulden aandelen Opekta en 2.000 gulden aandelen in Pectacon).[15] Pectacon was uiteindelijk namelijk niet geliquideerd.
\r\n\r\nThe Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. was set up because Pectacon, one of Otto Frank's companies, was in danger of being liquidated due to anti-Jewish measures. Initially, the company was called La Synthèse. This firm was founded on 23 October 1940 by Victor Kugler and Jan Gies. On 4 November 1940, the new firm was registered in the trade register with Victor Kugler as owner and director and Jan Gies as supervisory director and shareholder.[1] La Synthèse was located at Victor Kugler's private address in Hilversum. Kugler owned 15 shares worth 1,500 guilders in total; Jan Gies owned the rest of the shares worth 500 guilders.[2] Its representatives were Martin Brouwer and Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nLike Pectacon, the company focused on trading and manufacturing chemicals and foodstuffs.[1] On 8 May 1941, Kugler and Gies changed the company name to N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. This was by order of the secretary-general of Justice.[4] Otto Frank said about this in 1963 that the business "had to drop its French-sounding name, as it was a company of German origin.''[5] On 19 August 1941, the Trade Register registered the new company name, and Jan Gies was registered as a supervisory director of Gies & Co.[6] As supervisory director, Jan Gies had the authority to enter all the premises of the company. So it was also not uncommon for him to be present a lot and later speak to night watchman Slegers, for example, about the burglary in April 1944.
\r\n\r\nFrom September 1941, at the suggestion of Johannes Kleiman, Pectacon went into liquidation. Stocks and machinery were sold at a loss to Gies & Co. All kinds of other costs were also still charged to Pectacon.[7] That artifice prevented these goods, or their value, from benefiting German institutions.
\r\n\r\nWhen Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263 on 29 October 1941, it took over the lease from Opekta. Opekta then became a subtenant of Gies & Co.[8] It also received an advance of 5,000 guilders from Opekta.[9] With Opekta's advance and the costs borne by Pectacon, Gies & Co. was able to get off to a flying start.
\r\n\r\nAlmost certainly Gies & Co. was the most important factor in financing the period of hiding in the Secret Annex. There are three clues to the importance of Gies & Co. in this context. First, Otto Frank explicitly mentioned that Kugler sold spices off the books to finance the needs in the Secret Annex.[10] Second, Gies & Co. was completely 'Aryan', which made it easy to evade German scrutiny. Third, Van Pels and Otto Frank were furious when Kugler conducted laboratory tests instead of approving the supply by spice broker Westermann. All this underlines the fact that Gies & Co. was crucial to the period in hiding.
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Otto Frank obviously had no formal ties with the company. A note in the Hofhuis archives lists share ownership, presumably dated late 1943 or early 1944. On paper, Kleiman had shareholdings of 3,500 guilders, Gies 2,500 and Kugler 4,000. Kleiman and Otto Frank's investments in shares and deposit were so intermingled that it looks as if Otto's and Kleiman's money formed a single entity. Exactly who was entitled to what is not clear. What is clear, however, is that Otto invested in Gies & Co.[11] Otto Frank gave up owning Gies & Co. shares with a nominal value of 5,800 guilders as of 1 September 1945.[12] In 1948, he owned 58 per cent of the shares.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn April 1950, Otto Frank and Pal Klein joined the N.V. as supervisory directors.[14] In January 1954, Otto Frank owned 9,000 guilders worth of shares in Gies & Co (and 20,000 guilders worth of Opekta shares and 2,000 guilders worth of shares in Pectacon).[15] Indeed, Pectacon had not been liquidated in the end.
\r\n\r\nIn 1928, Austrian chemist Robert Feix[1] developed a natural binder that was applicable for household use. He gave it the trade name Opekta, which stands for Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, or fruit pectin from the apple. Making jam yourself could be shortened from many hours to 10 minutes with this pectin.[2] Feix set up Opekta GmbH in Cologne and was linked to the food group Pomosin, which took up production. The Pomosin representative in the Netherlands wanted to divest itself of Opekta imports. This gave Otto Frank the opportunity to set up his own branch here.[3] On 4 July 1933, he organised the first of many demonstrations in Heerlen, where Opekta had a local depot.[4] The same month, Victor Kugler joined Opekta. Otto had the Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV registered with the Chamber of Commerce on 15 September 1933.[5]
\r\n\r\nTo start the company, Otto Frank borrowed 15,000 guilders from his brother-in-law Erich Elias on 5 August 1933. His shares served as collateral for this. He also paid two and a half per cent of his turnover as a licence and undertook to buy all Pomosin's pectin. Erich Elias was managing director of Rovag, a Swiss-based Pomosin subsidiary that was to enable Opekta branches in several European countries.[6] When Elias was forced to leave in 1939 as a result of increasing National Socialist influence on Pomosin's leadership, the debt passed to his successor Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch company was housed in the modern Candida office building at Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in Amsterdam city centre.[8] Here Ottto Frank worked together with Victor Kugler to build up the business. On 16 October 1933, Miep Gies (then Santrouschitz) and Henk van Beusekom joined Opekta.[9] After the summer season of 1934, Opekta moved to the nearby address Singel 400. Here there was slightly more space, but it remained necessary to rent external storage.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch Opekta also controlled the British Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Applam was also part of the Pomosin group and went into liquidation in 1935. Otto Frank later undertook a restart attempt, but this failed.
\r\n\r\nTo promote its products, Opekta regularly attended trade fairs. The company placed advertisements in newspapers, published its own recipe booklets and published its own newspaper at least twice: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In the summer of 1936, a promotion was organised in collaboration with newspaper De Telegraaf, where participants could win a free Opekta preserving package.[11] From January 1938, film screenings were also organised across the country, showing a more than 10-minute commercial film. In it, the use of liquid Opekta is demonstrated by Miep Gies and it also features employee Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1940, Otto Frank moved into the vacant Prinsengracht 263 building with his other company Pectacon.[7] Opekta moved with it, with Pectacon bearing the costs. With the entire building available, space problems were a thing of the past. The ground floor housed Pectacon's machinery, including two heavy spice mills. The rooms on the first floor were used as offices. The second floor functioned as storage for both companies. The third floor of the back house initially housed a laboratory where tests for Opekta's jam-making took place.[13]
\r\n\r\nShortly before this move, the German Wirtschaftsprüfstelle got involved in the 'arisation' of Dutch business. Because of its Jewish director Otto Frank, this included Opekta. In the shareholders' meeting of 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director in favour of Johannes Kleiman. His other company Pectacon, he had earlier transferred to Victor Kugler and Jan Gies and had been replaced by Gies & Co, thus seeking to present both companies as non-Jewish property. Legal adviser Ton Dunselman, associated with Opekta since 1935, took Frank's shares into custody until the Wirtschafstprüfstelle and creditor Tosin approved their sale.[7] That issue got shelved and after his return from Auschwitz, Otto Frank got them back. The shareholders welcomed him back at their meeting on 25 June 1945. They awarded him compensation of 4800 guilders. After all, he had resigned in 1941 in the interests of the firm and had thus made 'great monetary sacrifices'.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta came under the management of parent company Pomosin during the occupation. Sugar shortages and acts of war - thirty thousand Opekta bottles were lost in a bombing raid on Cologne - adversely affected results. Interference from Frankfurt brought further tension and unrest. On several occasions, representatives of the Pomosin management came to Prinsengracht 263 for business meetings. Otto Frank, while in hiding, took part in their preparations. Anne Frank describes in her diary how on one occasion, lying with his ear to the floor, he quietly listened in on the meeting in the private office below their hiding place in the annex.[15]
\r\n\r\nAfter the 4 August 1944 raid, the Opekta and Gies & Co. firms were left without management. Because, besides the eight people in hiding, their helpers Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman were also arrested. The three other helpers Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl continued running the business together with the warehouse staff. Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort on 18 September 1944 and then returned to the office. It was not until after the liberation that Otto Frank and Victor Kugler also returned.
\r\n\r\nIn the post-war years, Opekta was still not always doing well. In the mid-1950s, the company left its badly run-down building on Prinsengracht and settled in new premises on Van Slingelandstraat in the Staatsliedenbuurt neighbourhood in Amsterdam's West district. Opekta remained active and tried to find larger customers at well-known chocolate factories. On the initiative of Johannes Kleiman, the new pectin product Supec entered the market. During the 1950s, Opekta faced competition from a pectin manufacturer in Denmark and lost a large share of the market partly as a result. Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman spent years negotiating with the sister company in Cologne to take over their shares. The time had come in 1959, but in January that year Johannes Kleiman died unexpectedly at his desk. Led from Cologne, Opekta continued to work in Amsterdam until the 1980s. The entire Opekta conglomerate merged into the Dr Oetker concern.[3]
\r\n\r\nAddresses: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nIn 1928 ontwikkelde de Oostenrijkse scheikundige Robert Feix[1] een natuurlijk bindmiddel dat toepasbaar was voor huishoudelijk gebruik. Hij gaf het de handelsnaam Opekta, wat staat voor Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, oftewel vruchtpectine uit de appel. Het zelf maken van jam kon met deze pectine worden verkort van vele uren tot tien minuten.[2] Feix vestigde zich met Opekta GmbH in Keulen en was verbonden aan het levensmiddelenconcern Pomosin, dat de productie ter hand nam. De Pomosin-vertegenwoordiger in Nederland wilde de import van Opekta afstoten. Daardoor kreeg Otto Frank de kans hier een eigen vestiging op te zetten.[3] Op 4 juli 1933 organiseerde hij in Heerlen, waar Opekta een plaatselijk depot had, de eerste van vele demonstraties.[4] Dezelfde maand trad Victor Kugler bij Opekta in dienst. Otto liet de Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV op 15 september 1933 inschrijven bij de Kamer van Koophandel.[5]
\r\n\r\nVoor het starten van het bedrijf leende Otto Frank van zijn zwager Erich Elias op 5 augustus 1933 vijftienduizend gulden. Zijn aandelen dienden daarbij als onderpand. Verder betaalde hij twee en een half procent van zijn omzet als licentie en verplichtte hij zich alle pectine van Pomosin af te nemen. Erich Elias was directeur van Rovag, een in Zwitserland gevestigde Pomosin-dochteronderneming die Opekta-vestigingen in diverse Europese landen mogelijk moest maken.[6] Toen Elias in 1939 als gevolg van toenemende nationaal-socialistische invloed op de leiding van Pomosin gedwongen moest vertrekken, ging de schuld over op zijn opvolger Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nHet Nederlandse bedrijf had onderdak in het moderne kantorengebouw Candida op Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in de Amsterdamse binnenstad.[8] Hier werkte Ottto Frank met Victor Kugler aan de opbouw van de zaak. Op 16 oktober 1933 kwamen Miep Gies (toen nog Santrouschitz) en Henk van Beusekom bij Opekta in dienst.[9] Na het zomerseizoen van 1934 verhuisde Opekta naar het nabijgelegen adres Singel 400. Hier was iets meer ruimte, maar het bleef nodig om externe opslag te huren.[7]
\r\n\r\nDe Nederlandse Opekta had ook de controle over de Britse Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Ook Applam maakte deel uit van het Pomosin-concern en ging in 1935 in liquidatie. Otto Frank ondernam later een poging tot doorstart, maar dit mislukte.
\r\n\r\nTer promotie van zijn producten was Opekta regelmatig te vinden op beursen. Het bedrijf plaatste advertenties in kranten, publiceerde eigen receptenboekjes en gaf minstens tweemaal een eigen krant uit: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In de zomer van 1936 werd in samenwerking met De Telegraaf een actie georganiseerd, waarbij deelnemers een gratis Opekta-inmaakpakket konden winnen.[11] Ook werden er vanaf januari 1938 door het hele land filmvertoningen georganiseerd, waarbij een ruim tien minuten durende reclamefilm werd vertoond. Hierin wordt de werking van vloeibare Opekta door Miep Gies gedemonstreerd en figureert ook medewerkster Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nEind 1940 betrok Otto Frank met zijn andere onderneming Pectacon het leegstaande pand Prinsengracht 263.[7] Opekta verhuisde mee, waarbij Pectacon de kosten droeg. Met het hele gebouw ter beschikking behoorden de ruimteproblemen tot het verleden. Op de begane grond stond het machinepark van Pectacon opgesteld, bestaande uit onder meer twee zware specerijenmolens. De ruimtes op de eerste verdieping werden gebruikt als kantoren. De tweede verdieping functioneerde als opslag voor beide bedrijven. Op de derde verdieping van het achterhuis was aanvankelijk een laboratorium ingericht waar proeven voor Opekta's jammakerij plaatsvonden.[13]
\r\n\r\nKort voor deze verhuizing ging de Duitse Wirtschaftsprüfstelle zich met de 'arisering' van het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven bezighouden. Vanwege de Joodse directeur Otto Frank, kwam daarbij ook Opekta in beeld. In de aandeelhoudersvergadering van 12 december 1941 trad Otto Frank als directeur terug ten gunste van Johannes Kleiman. Zijn andere onderneming Pectacon had hij eerder al overgedragen aan Victor Kugler en Jan Gies en was vervangen door Gies & Co. Zo wilde hij beide bedrijven als niet-Joods eigendom presenteren. Juridisch adviseur Ton Dunselman, sinds 1935 aan Opekta verbonden, nam Franks aandelen in bewaring totdat de Wirtschafstprüfstelle en schuldeiser Tosin de verkoop ervan zouden goedkeuren.[7] Die kwestie raakte op de lange baan en na zijn terugkeer uit Auschwitz kreeg Otto Frank ze weer terug. De aandeelhouders verwelkomden hem terug in hun vergadering van 25 juni 1945. Zij kenden hem een schadevergoeding van achtenveertighonderd gulden toe. Hij was tenslotte in 1941 in het belang van de firma teruggetreden en had zo 'groote geldelijke offers' gebracht.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta kwam tijdens de bezetting onder beheer van moedermaatschappij Pomosin te staan. Suikerschaarste en oorlogshandelingen - dertigduizend Opektaflesjes gingen verloren bij een bombardement op Keulen - waren van ongunstige invloed op de resultaten. De bemoeienissen vanuit Frankfurt brachten verdere spanning en onrust met zich mee. Verschillende keren kwamen vertegenwoordigers van de Pomosin-directie naar Prinsengracht 263 voor zakelijke besprekingen. Otto Frank nam, terwijl hij was ondergedoken, deel aan de voorbereidingen daarvan. Anne Frank beschrijft in haar dagboek hoe hij in een keer, liggend met zijn oor tegen de vloer, stilletjes meeluisterde met de vergadering in het privé-kantoor onder hun schuilplaats in het achterhuis.[15]
\r\n\r\nDe firma's Opekta en Gies & Co. bleven na de inval op 4 augustus 1944 zonder directie achter. Naast de acht onderduikers werden namelijk ook hun helpers Victor Kugler en Johannes Kleiman gearresteerd. De drie andere helpers Miep en Jan Gies en Bep Voskuijl zetten de zaken samen met het magazijnpersoneel voort. Johannes Kleiman kwam op 18 september 1944 vrij uit Kamp Amersfoort en keerde toen terug naar kantoor. Pas na de bevrijding keerden ook Otto Frank en Victor Kugler terug.
\r\n\r\nIn de naoorlogse jaren ging het nog steeds niet altijd goed met Opekta. Midden jaren vijftig verliet het bedrijf het sterk vervallen gebouw aan de Prinsengracht en streek neer in een nieuw bedrijfspand aan de Van Slingelandstraat in de Staatsliedenbuurt in Amsterdam-West. Opekta bleef actief en probeerde grotere afnemers te vinden bij bekende chocoladefabrieken. Met name op initiatief van Johannes Kleiman kwam het nieuwe pectineproduct Supec op de markt. In de loop van de jaren vijftig kreeg Opekta concurrentie te verduren van een pectinefabrikant in Denemarken en verloor mede daardoor een groot deel van de markt. Otto Frank en Johannes Kleiman onderhandelden jaren met het zusterbedrijf in Keulen over de overname van hun aandelen. In 1959 was het dan zover, maar in januari van dat jaar overleed onverwacht Johannes Kleiman achter zijn bureau. Onder leiding vanuit Keulen werkte Opekta in Amsterdam nog tot in de jaren tachtig voort. Het gehele Opekta-conglomeraat ging op in het concern Dr. Oetker.[3]
\r\n\r\nAdressen: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nIn 1928, Austrian chemist Robert Feix[1] developed a natural binder that was applicable for household use. He gave it the trade name Opekta, which stands for Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, or fruit pectin from the apple. Making jam yourself could be shortened from many hours to 10 minutes with this pectin.[2] Feix set up Opekta GmbH in Cologne and was linked to the food group Pomosin, which took up production. The Pomosin representative in the Netherlands wanted to divest itself of Opekta imports. This gave Otto Frank the opportunity to set up his own branch here.[3] On 4 July 1933, he organised the first of many demonstrations in Heerlen, where Opekta had a local depot.[4] The same month, Victor Kugler joined Opekta. Otto had the Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV registered with the Chamber of Commerce on 15 September 1933.[5]
\r\n\r\nTo start the company, Otto Frank borrowed 15,000 guilders from his brother-in-law Erich Elias on 5 August 1933. His shares served as collateral for this. He also paid two and a half per cent of his turnover as a licence and undertook to buy all Pomosin's pectin. Erich Elias was managing director of Rovag, a Swiss-based Pomosin subsidiary that was to enable Opekta branches in several European countries.[6] When Elias was forced to leave in 1939 as a result of increasing National Socialist influence on Pomosin's leadership, the debt passed to his successor Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch company was housed in the modern Candida office building at Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in Amsterdam city centre.[8] Here Ottto Frank worked together with Victor Kugler to build up the business. On 16 October 1933, Miep Gies (then Santrouschitz) and Henk van Beusekom joined Opekta.[9] After the summer season of 1934, Opekta moved to the nearby address Singel 400. Here there was slightly more space, but it remained necessary to rent external storage.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch Opekta also controlled the British Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Applam was also part of the Pomosin group and went into liquidation in 1935. Otto Frank later undertook a restart attempt, but this failed.
\r\n\r\nTo promote its products, Opekta regularly attended trade fairs. The company placed advertisements in newspapers, published its own recipe booklets and published its own newspaper at least twice: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In the summer of 1936, a promotion was organised in collaboration with newspaper De Telegraaf, where participants could win a free Opekta preserving package.[11] From January 1938, film screenings were also organised across the country, showing a more than 10-minute commercial film. In it, the use of liquid Opekta is demonstrated by Miep Gies and it also features employee Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1940, Otto Frank moved into the vacant Prinsengracht 263 building with his other company Pectacon.[7] Opekta moved with it, with Pectacon bearing the costs. With the entire building available, space problems were a thing of the past. The ground floor housed Pectacon's machinery, including two heavy spice mills. The rooms on the first floor were used as offices. The second floor functioned as storage for both companies. The third floor of the back house initially housed a laboratory where tests for Opekta's jam-making took place.[13]
\r\n\r\nShortly before this move, the German Wirtschaftsprüfstelle got involved in the 'arisation' of Dutch business. Because of its Jewish director Otto Frank, this included Opekta. In the shareholders' meeting of 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director in favour of Johannes Kleiman. His other company Pectacon, he had earlier transferred to Victor Kugler and Jan Gies and had been replaced by Gies & Co, thus seeking to present both companies as non-Jewish property. Legal adviser Ton Dunselman, associated with Opekta since 1935, took Frank's shares into custody until the Wirtschafstprüfstelle and creditor Tosin approved their sale.[7] That issue got shelved and after his return from Auschwitz, Otto Frank got them back. The shareholders welcomed him back at their meeting on 25 June 1945. They awarded him compensation of 4800 guilders. After all, he had resigned in 1941 in the interests of the firm and had thus made 'great monetary sacrifices'.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta came under the management of parent company Pomosin during the occupation. Sugar shortages and acts of war - thirty thousand Opekta bottles were lost in a bombing raid on Cologne - adversely affected results. Interference from Frankfurt brought further tension and unrest. On several occasions, representatives of the Pomosin management came to Prinsengracht 263 for business meetings. Otto Frank, while in hiding, took part in their preparations. Anne Frank describes in her diary how on one occasion, lying with his ear to the floor, he quietly listened in on the meeting in the private office below their hiding place in the annex.[15]
\r\n\r\nAfter the 4 August 1944 raid, the Opekta and Gies & Co. firms were left without management. Because, besides the eight people in hiding, their helpers Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman were also arrested. The three other helpers Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl continued running the business together with the warehouse staff. Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort on 18 September 1944 and then returned to the office. It was not until after the liberation that Otto Frank and Victor Kugler also returned.
\r\n\r\nIn the post-war years, Opekta was still not always doing well. In the mid-1950s, the company left its badly run-down building on Prinsengracht and settled in new premises on Van Slingelandstraat in the Staatsliedenbuurt neighbourhood in Amsterdam's West district. Opekta remained active and tried to find larger customers at well-known chocolate factories. On the initiative of Johannes Kleiman, the new pectin product Supec entered the market. During the 1950s, Opekta faced competition from a pectin manufacturer in Denmark and lost a large share of the market partly as a result. Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman spent years negotiating with the sister company in Cologne to take over their shares. The time had come in 1959, but in January that year Johannes Kleiman died unexpectedly at his desk. Led from Cologne, Opekta continued to work in Amsterdam until the 1980s. The entire Opekta conglomerate merged into the Dr Oetker concern.[3]
\r\n\r\nAddresses: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nAfter the August 4 raid, the firms Gies & Co and Opekta were left without management. The staff, Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies in the office and warehouse manager Willem van Maaren and his casual workers nevertheless kept the businesses running. And of course Jan Gies, who was still the supervisory director of Gies & Co.
\r\n\r\nIt was all rather improvised. Initially, German policeman Silberbauer gave the keys to the property to Miep, and she passed them back to Van Maaren. In 1963, Miep told the National Criminal Investigation Department that Van Maaren came to her for the keys because "they" (i.e. the SD) said he should have them. According to Van Maaren, she did it of her own accord. He also gave a practical reason: Kugler always opened the doors to the warehouse staff at eight-thirty, while Miep only came to the office at nine.[1]
\r\n\r\nKugler stated in September 1945 that representative Hendrik Pieter Daatzelaar had wanted to try to buy the freedom of the management, i.e. Kugler and Kleiman, on Euterpestraat at the time.[2] In a conversation with the journalist Ernst Schnabel in the late 1950s, Miep Gies confirmed Daatzelaar's initiative.[3] She referred at that time to the 'Verhafteten'. In 1963, she told the National Criminal Investigation Department again that she wanted to use money to buy the freedom of 'those arrested', without mentioning Daatzelaar at that time.[4] To what extent there was a real hope of also buying the freedom of the people from the Secret Annex is impossible to say. The directors had been arrested for what they had done, the people in hiding for who they were.
\r\n\r\nIn the days following the raid, Van Maaren went to the Detention Centre to ask Kugler for some preparation methods. When Kleiman and Kugler left the Detention Centre, it was initially unclear where they went. On 29 August, Miep Gies wrote to an aid worker in Camp Vught asking whether they might have been taken there. She also mentioned that one of them had stomach problems, referring to Kleiman.[5] An answer is not known, but it would later emerge that the pair had been imprisoned in Camp Amersfoort.
\r\n\r\nOn 18 September, Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort. Because of his stomach problems, the Red Cross had worked to secure his release.[6] He reappeared at Prinsengracht to take up his duties. Thus, the two companies slowly entered the last winter of the war.
\r\n\r\nAlthough none of the people in hiding knew Van Maaren, they regularly talked to the helpers about him. His possible involvement in thefts from the premises came up during these converstations. However, no police reports from the period in hiding are known. That changed in the later winter months. On 16 January 1945, representative Broks reported the theft of 70 kilos of sugar to the criminal investigation department at Singel police station on behalf of Gies & Co. Broks said he had 'no suspicions' regarding the culprit.[7] However, when Otto Frank and his associates filed a case against Van Maaren in 1948, it turned out he had been a suspect. His house had been searched by detectives, apparently in the presence of Broks.[8] That search yielded nothing.
\r\n\r\nThere are few records of how the businesses got through the last winter. On the personal front, it is worth mentioning that Jan Gies' mother died in December and Johannes Kleiman's father died in February. On the business front, sources are scarce. Opekta's 1944 annual report stated: 'The good relationship and cooperation with the firm of Gies & Co. remained as steady as ever'. It also mentioned that the air war had brought numerous German industries to a standstill, including pectin producer Pomosin.[9] Only after the liberation could serious work start on rebuilding the businesses - and the country.
\r\n\r\nNa de inval van vier augustus bleven de firma’s Gies & Co en Opekta zonder directie achter. Het personeel, Bep Voskuijl en Miep Gies op kantoor en magazijnchef Willem van Maaren en zijn los-vaste werkers, zette de zaken desondanks voort. En natuurlijk met Jan Gies, die altijd nog commissaris van Gies & Co was.
\r\n\r\nHet was een beetje improviseren. Aanvankelijk gaf de Duitse politieman Silberbauer de sleutels van het pand aan Miep, en zij gaf ze weer door aan Van Maaren. In 1963 zei Miep tegen de Rijksrecherche dat Van Maaren bij haar om de sleutels kwam omdat ‘ze’ (d.w.z. de SD) zeiden dat hij ze moest hebben. Volgens Van Maaren deed zij het uit eigen beweging. Hij gaf ook een praktisch argument: Kugler opende de deuren altijd om half negen voor het magazijnpersoneel, terwijl Miep pas om negen uur op kantoor kwam.[1]
\r\n\r\nKugler verklaarde in september 1945 dat vertegenwoordiger Hendrik Pieter Daatzelaar destijds had willen proberen de directie, dat wil zeggen Kugler en Kleiman, op de Euterpestraat vrij te kopen.[2] In een gesprek met de journalist Ernst Schnabel eind jaren vijftig bevestigde Miep Gies het initiatief van Daatzelaar.[3] Zij sprak daar over de ‘Verhafteten’. In 1963 vertelde ze nog eens aan de Rijksrecherche dat zij met geld ‘de gearresteerden’ wilde vrijkopen, zonder daarbij Daatzelaar nog te noemen.[4] In hoeverre echt de hoop leefde ook de onderduikers vrij te kunnen kopen is niet te zeggen. De directeuren waren opgepakt om wat ze hadden gedaan, de onderduikers om wie ze waren.
\r\n\r\nIn de dagen na de inval ging Van Maaren nog naar het Huis van Bewaring (HvB) toe om wat receptuur aan Kugler te vragen. Toen Kleiman en Kugler uit het HvB vertrokken, was het aanvankelijk onduidelijk waar zij naartoe gingen. Op 29 augustus schreef Miep Gies aan een hulpverleenster in Kamp Vught met de vraag of zij daar wellicht waren heengebracht. Zij schreef daarbij dat een van hen maaglijder was, en doelde daarmee op Kleiman.[5] Een antwoord is niet bekend, maar later zou blijken dat het tweetal in Kamp Amersfoort was opgesloten.
\r\n\r\nOp 18 september kwam Johannes Kleiman weer vrij uit Kamp Amersfoort. Vanwege zijn maagklachten had het Rode Kruis zich voor zijn vrijlating ingespannen.[6] Hij verscheen weer op de Prinsengracht om zijn taak op zich te nemen. Zo gingen de twee bedrijven langzaamaan de laatste oorlogswinter tegemoet.
\r\n\r\nHoewel geen van de onderduikers Van Maaren kende, spraken zij met de helpers geregeld over hem. Zijn mogelijke betrokkenheid bij diefstallen uit het pand kwam daarbij naar voren. Er zijn echter geen aangiften uit de onderduikperiode bekend. Dat werd in de latere wintermaanden anders. Op 16 januari 1945 deed vertegenwoordiger Broks bij de recherche op politiebureau Singel namens Gies & Co. aangifte van diefstal van zeventig kilo suiker. Broks zei ‘geen vermoeden’ te hebben van de dader.[7] Toen Otto Frank en zijn medewerkers in 1948 een zaak tegen Van Maaren aanspanden bleek deze echter wel verdacht te zijn geweest. Zijn huis was door rechercheurs, kennelijk in het bijzijn van Broks, doorzocht.[8] Die huiszoeking leverde niets op.
\r\n\r\nEr zijn weinig gegevens over hoe de bedrijven de laatste winter verder doorkwamen. In de persoonlijke sfeer valt te vermelden dat in december de moeder van Jan Gies en in februari de vader van Johannes Kleiman overleden. In zakelijk opzicht zijn de bronnen schaars. Het jaarverslag van Opekta over 1944 vermeldde: ‘De goede verstandhouding en samenwerking met de firma Gies & Co., bleef even als voorheen bestendigd.’ Het vermeldde eveneens dat door de luchtoorlog tal van Duitse industrieën, waaronder pectineproducent Pomosin, waren stilgevallen.[9] Pas na de bevrijding kon serieus werk worden gemaakt van de wederopbouw van de bedrijven. En van het land.
\r\n\r\nAfter the August 4 raid, the firms Gies & Co and Opekta were left without management. The staff, Bep Voskuijl and Miep Gies in the office and warehouse manager Willem van Maaren and his casual workers nevertheless kept the businesses running. And of course Jan Gies, who was still the supervisory director of Gies & Co.
\r\n\r\nIt was all rather improvised. Initially, German policeman Silberbauer gave the keys to the property to Miep, and she passed them back to Van Maaren. In 1963, Miep told the National Criminal Investigation Department that Van Maaren came to her for the keys because "they" (i.e. the SD) said he should have them. According to Van Maaren, she did it of her own accord. He also gave a practical reason: Kugler always opened the doors to the warehouse staff at eight-thirty, while Miep only came to the office at nine.[1]
\r\n\r\nKugler stated in September 1945 that representative Hendrik Pieter Daatzelaar had wanted to try to buy the freedom of the management, i.e. Kugler and Kleiman, on Euterpestraat at the time.[2] In a conversation with the journalist Ernst Schnabel in the late 1950s, Miep Gies confirmed Daatzelaar's initiative.[3] She referred at that time to the 'Verhafteten'. In 1963, she told the National Criminal Investigation Department again that she wanted to use money to buy the freedom of 'those arrested', without mentioning Daatzelaar at that time.[4] To what extent there was a real hope of also buying the freedom of the people from the Secret Annex is impossible to say. The directors had been arrested for what they had done, the people in hiding for who they were.
\r\n\r\nIn the days following the raid, Van Maaren went to the Detention Centre to ask Kugler for some preparation methods. When Kleiman and Kugler left the Detention Centre, it was initially unclear where they went. On 29 August, Miep Gies wrote to an aid worker in Camp Vught asking whether they might have been taken there. She also mentioned that one of them had stomach problems, referring to Kleiman.[5] An answer is not known, but it would later emerge that the pair had been imprisoned in Camp Amersfoort.
\r\n\r\nOn 18 September, Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort. Because of his stomach problems, the Red Cross had worked to secure his release.[6] He reappeared at Prinsengracht to take up his duties. Thus, the two companies slowly entered the last winter of the war.
\r\n\r\nAlthough none of the people in hiding knew Van Maaren, they regularly talked to the helpers about him. His possible involvement in thefts from the premises came up during these converstations. However, no police reports from the period in hiding are known. That changed in the later winter months. On 16 January 1945, representative Broks reported the theft of 70 kilos of sugar to the criminal investigation department at Singel police station on behalf of Gies & Co. Broks said he had 'no suspicions' regarding the culprit.[7] However, when Otto Frank and his associates filed a case against Van Maaren in 1948, it turned out he had been a suspect. His house had been searched by detectives, apparently in the presence of Broks.[8] That search yielded nothing.
\r\n\r\nThere are few records of how the businesses got through the last winter. On the personal front, it is worth mentioning that Jan Gies' mother died in December and Johannes Kleiman's father died in February. On the business front, sources are scarce. Opekta's 1944 annual report stated: 'The good relationship and cooperation with the firm of Gies & Co. remained as steady as ever'. It also mentioned that the air war had brought numerous German industries to a standstill, including pectin producer Pomosin.[9] Only after the liberation could serious work start on rebuilding the businesses - and the country.
\r\n\r\nIt has been home to the Anne Frank House since 1960.
","content_nl":"Vanaf 1960 is hier het Anne Frank Huis gevestigd.
","content_en":"It has been home to the Anne Frank House since 1960.
","position":"SRID=4326;POINT (4.884037 52.3753)","summary":"Office and warehouse-workshop of Opekta, Pectacon and Gies & Co. from 1940 to 1955. The back of the house was the hiding place of the Frank family, Van Pels and Fritz Pfeffer from July 1942 to August 1944.","summary_nl":"Kantoor en magazijn-werkplaats van Opekta, Pectacon en Gies & Co. van 1940 tot 1955. Het achterhuis was van juli 1942 tot augustus 1944 de schuilplaats van de familie Frank, Van Pels en Fritz Pfeffer.","summary_en":"Office and warehouse-workshop of Opekta, Pectacon and Gies & Co. from 1940 to 1955. The back of the house was the hiding place of the Frank family, Van Pels and Fritz Pfeffer from July 1942 to August 1944.","same_as":null,"street":"Prinsengracht 263","zipcode":"","city":"Amsterdam","state":"","land":"Nederland","location_events":[284,302,161,105]},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/bf2de677-9784-493d-b179-c4034e48c92f/","published":true,"uuid":"bf2de677-9784-493d-b179-c4034e48c92f","name":"Break-in at Otto Frank's business premises","name_nl":"Inbraak in het bedrijfspand van Otto Frank","name_en":"Break-in at Otto Frank's business premises","content":"Hans Wijnberg and his sister Els, who both lived at Prinsengracht 251 during this period, said in an interview that they had entered the building on 24 March 1943 and that they took some nutmeg while they were there. They had already taken the nuts when they heard the toilet being flushed. They understood that there were people in the building and quickly ran off.[1]
\r\n\r\nHans Wijnberg en zijn zus Els, die tijdens de onderduikperiode op Prinsengracht 251 woonden, vertelden in een interview dat ze op 24 maart 1943 als kind in het pand geweest waren en dat ze daar muskaatnoten hadden weggenomen. Ze hadden de noten al gepakt toen ze hoorden dat het toilet werd doorgetrokken. Ze begrepen toen dat er mensen in het pand waren en maakten zich snel uit de voeten.[1]
\r\n\r\nHans Wijnberg and his sister Els, who both lived at Prinsengracht 251 during this period, said in an interview that they had entered the building on 24 March 1943 and that they took some nutmeg while they were there. They had already taken the nuts when they heard the toilet being flushed. They understood that there were people in the building and quickly ran off.[1]
\r\n\r\nWerthauer lived at two addresses in Frankfurt before ending up at the address Wiesenau 8 in 1932.[1] From there he left for Amsterdam, followed a few months later by his wife and children.
\r\n\r\nWerthauer woonde op twee adressen in Frankfurt alvorens in 1932 terecht te komen op het adres Wiesenau 8.[1] Van daaruit vertrok hij naar Amsterdam, na enkele maanden gevolgd door vrouw en kinderen.
\r\n\r\nWerthauer lived at two addresses in Frankfurt before ending up at the address Wiesenau 8 in 1932.[1] From there he left for Amsterdam, followed a few months later by his wife and children.
\r\n\r\nAccommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","description_nl":"Onder verblijf wordt verstaan een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.
","description_en":"Accommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","summary":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","summary_nl":"Verblijf is een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.","summary_en":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","same_as":null,"parent":396124413,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c05767e4-ac67-4d2e-a8f1-fdcfc93c3cdc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f4d47668-4071-4530-95f0-5c463fddbc60","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b654804b-25a1-4c46-affd-0de941f99790","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05463aca-21a7-4238-8686-0a4a606e10f5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8eb86b87-b516-415d-a0de-410bb88a0ab6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5f77d005-c71e-437e-8877-2ec3088e2031","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/03c56548-11fe-4e75-9a79-f1585bd2372a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b4236d95-43dd-42e6-93d5-c44eaba41b23","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1194af60-b60a-49ae-8762-cf8567fd21fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36022488-7682-43ff-918c-a2b970789006","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c730f47b-7508-4ea2-978e-331073f46ee4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4a5dbef2-cafa-46af-acfe-3470825a92a7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/07627e87-1438-47e2-a29c-847e27ce51c8","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa3cb90f-e2cc-4611-b0cb-316c6202e75b","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4837c7f7-8098-4daf-8fb4-3408adb041fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/59a5ed20-0f01-42b5-a1da-785936de9c47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84d67272-953d-4e09-8014-20cd8a55bd15","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c65659a4-793a-47f1-a7c5-ee2f49ee46b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/cc6c2172-d1f5-49c4-86b0-c31aa8bd02ea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/903ba158-f1e0-4d0f-b613-eae91df2893e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bd069b91-d876-4eb7-99e7-e62aa158eae4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/995b7432-6739-42b0-9434-5c3801327d6a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b6bed785-6178-42d2-9f90-a90e7730c21e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c9289eb-d4f6-46b8-afe7-5c15df9164c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f3ea591a-9ec2-49fa-aede-0308f0c1ea5e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aab06445-fe04-4578-9fba-19e679b65d6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8f078d07-0749-4824-9317-cca40a1f8c17","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/49fb0306-d233-4742-8133-c98fdba59175","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c6d71313-a017-4e4e-b05c-f56259c2bf72","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/592362c0-d64f-42be-8319-f7e3973610d3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6a58ce7e-02e2-4517-85ce-5b03eb20b753","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0bfa905d-38bd-4422-85ed-a4f2ecc7b506","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7e61c0df-f509-437a-8f9f-5d70bdd92934","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b7c73757-981c-409e-95cc-cc8eab873a93","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/150fa41e-02ba-4cae-9f32-62460252007f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/043a50b5-46ac-4222-8001-6ad28d51a1e2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/da7429b4-b23f-4947-b6d8-e5e6c0f143c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6660d32e-d2b0-468d-b7e7-01ceefc4376d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05693431-6b99-47b4-8e47-59ab3e95a889","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04f5ebdc-fe09-4ce6-991b-cf851a81c198","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a423c2ce-aac1-4ff6-86b1-f5233e4b77ff","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0ccf3db9-1774-4848-ad11-627e3fc64cea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bd22a6-e3e0-45e6-9bef-449b9894f0db","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db15398a-d845-4147-9ceb-1530e7e9a4e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b5ad5b8d-2494-42ad-bf1f-d2a1f9250bb2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2c4e9ad5-bb38-4440-ae2f-7b3fc3fba34a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/697cb023-79af-4e61-864a-49adce1e8f82","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db594671-5a23-4c77-94e5-719f47bf03e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7d0da592-ac93-4786-b1c3-932a0fd9dcf5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ff53ce1-d866-4190-a138-16c32a9eca43"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47/","published":true,"name":"Home of Werthauer family in Frankfurt","name_nl":"Woning Werthauer in Frankfurt","name_en":"Home of Werthauer family in Frankfurt","uuid":"e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47","content":"The Werthauer family lived on on two addresses in Frankfurt before moving to this address in 1932. [1]
\r\n\r\nDe Werthauers woonden op twee adressen in Frankfurt alvorens in 1932 terecht te komen op dit adres.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe Werthauer family lived on on two addresses in Frankfurt before moving to this address in 1932. [1]
\r\n\r\nWerthauer lived at two addresses in Frankfurt before ending up at the address Wiesenau 8 in 1932.[1] From there he left for Amsterdam, followed a few months later by his wife and children.
\r\n\r\nWerthauer woonde op twee adressen in Frankfurt alvorens in 1932 terecht te komen op het adres Wiesenau 8.[1] Van daaruit vertrok hij naar Amsterdam, na enkele maanden gevolgd door vrouw en kinderen.
\r\n\r\nWerthauer lived at two addresses in Frankfurt before ending up at the address Wiesenau 8 in 1932.[1] From there he left for Amsterdam, followed a few months later by his wife and children.
\r\n\r\nDuring his employment at the Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck, Kugler trained as an electrician. He received his certificate on 7 September 1920 from the Handwerkskammer Müster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nTijdens zijn dienstverband bij de Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck volgde Kugler een opleiding tot elektrotechnicus. Het certificaat hiervoor ontving hij op 7 september 1920 van de Handwerkskammer Münster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring his employment at the Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck, Kugler trained as an electrician. He received his certificate on 7 September 1920 from the Handwerkskammer Müster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring his employment at the Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck, Kugler trained as an electrician. He received his certificate on 7 September 1920 from the Handwerkskammer Müster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nTijdens zijn dienstverband bij de Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck volgde Kugler een opleiding tot elektrotechnicus. Het certificaat hiervoor ontving hij op 7 september 1920 van de Handwerkskammer Münster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring his employment at the Schachtanlage Scholven in Zweckel-Gladbeck, Kugler trained as an electrician. He received his certificate on 7 September 1920 from the Handwerkskammer Müster i/Westpf.[1]
\r\n\r\nVictor Kugler successfully completed a course in Dutch commercial correspondence. His diploma was signed in Leiden on 21 May 1923 by H. Vissinga, teacher of bookkeeping, Dutch and French language and commercial correspondence.[1]
\r\n\r\nVissinga offered written courses in bookkeeping, commercial accounting and Dutch commercial correspondence.[2]
\r\n\r\nVictor Kugler volgde met goed resultaat een cursus Nederlandse handelscorrespondentie. Zijn diploma werd op 21 mei 1923 in Leiden ondertekend door H. Vissinga, leraar boekhouden en onderwijzer Nederlandse en Franse taal en handelscorrespondentie.[1] Vissinga bood schriftelijke cursussen boekhouden, handelsrekenen en Nederlandse handelscorrespondentie aan.[2]
\r\n\r\nVictor Kugler successfully completed a course in Dutch commercial correspondence. His diploma was signed in Leiden on 21 May 1923 by H. Vissinga, teacher of bookkeeping, Dutch and French language and commercial correspondence.[1]
\r\n\r\nVissinga offered written courses in bookkeeping, commercial accounting and Dutch commercial correspondence.[2]
\r\n\r\nAccommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","description_nl":"Onder verblijf wordt verstaan een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.
","description_en":"Accommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","summary":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","summary_nl":"Verblijf is een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.","summary_en":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","same_as":null,"parent":396124413,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c05767e4-ac67-4d2e-a8f1-fdcfc93c3cdc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f4d47668-4071-4530-95f0-5c463fddbc60","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b654804b-25a1-4c46-affd-0de941f99790","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05463aca-21a7-4238-8686-0a4a606e10f5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8eb86b87-b516-415d-a0de-410bb88a0ab6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5f77d005-c71e-437e-8877-2ec3088e2031","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/03c56548-11fe-4e75-9a79-f1585bd2372a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b4236d95-43dd-42e6-93d5-c44eaba41b23","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1194af60-b60a-49ae-8762-cf8567fd21fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36022488-7682-43ff-918c-a2b970789006","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c730f47b-7508-4ea2-978e-331073f46ee4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4a5dbef2-cafa-46af-acfe-3470825a92a7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/07627e87-1438-47e2-a29c-847e27ce51c8","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa3cb90f-e2cc-4611-b0cb-316c6202e75b","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4837c7f7-8098-4daf-8fb4-3408adb041fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/59a5ed20-0f01-42b5-a1da-785936de9c47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84d67272-953d-4e09-8014-20cd8a55bd15","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c65659a4-793a-47f1-a7c5-ee2f49ee46b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/cc6c2172-d1f5-49c4-86b0-c31aa8bd02ea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/903ba158-f1e0-4d0f-b613-eae91df2893e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bd069b91-d876-4eb7-99e7-e62aa158eae4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/995b7432-6739-42b0-9434-5c3801327d6a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b6bed785-6178-42d2-9f90-a90e7730c21e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c9289eb-d4f6-46b8-afe7-5c15df9164c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f3ea591a-9ec2-49fa-aede-0308f0c1ea5e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aab06445-fe04-4578-9fba-19e679b65d6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8f078d07-0749-4824-9317-cca40a1f8c17","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/49fb0306-d233-4742-8133-c98fdba59175","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c6d71313-a017-4e4e-b05c-f56259c2bf72","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/592362c0-d64f-42be-8319-f7e3973610d3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6a58ce7e-02e2-4517-85ce-5b03eb20b753","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0bfa905d-38bd-4422-85ed-a4f2ecc7b506","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7e61c0df-f509-437a-8f9f-5d70bdd92934","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b7c73757-981c-409e-95cc-cc8eab873a93","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/150fa41e-02ba-4cae-9f32-62460252007f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/043a50b5-46ac-4222-8001-6ad28d51a1e2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/da7429b4-b23f-4947-b6d8-e5e6c0f143c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6660d32e-d2b0-468d-b7e7-01ceefc4376d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05693431-6b99-47b4-8e47-59ab3e95a889","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04f5ebdc-fe09-4ce6-991b-cf851a81c198","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a423c2ce-aac1-4ff6-86b1-f5233e4b77ff","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0ccf3db9-1774-4848-ad11-627e3fc64cea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bd22a6-e3e0-45e6-9bef-449b9894f0db","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db15398a-d845-4147-9ceb-1530e7e9a4e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b5ad5b8d-2494-42ad-bf1f-d2a1f9250bb2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2c4e9ad5-bb38-4440-ae2f-7b3fc3fba34a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/697cb023-79af-4e61-864a-49adce1e8f82","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db594671-5a23-4c77-94e5-719f47bf03e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7d0da592-ac93-4786-b1c3-932a0fd9dcf5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ff53ce1-d866-4190-a138-16c32a9eca43"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0/","published":true,"name":"Utrecht","name_nl":"Utrecht","name_en":"Utrecht","uuid":"92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0","content":"","content_nl":"","content_en":"","position":"SRID=4326;POINT (5.12265 52.078156)","summary":"Victor Kugler lived at various addresses in Utrecht for 13 years after moving to the Netherlands.","summary_nl":"Victor Kugler woonde na zijn verhuizing naar Nederland dertien jaar op verschillende adressen in Utrecht.","summary_en":"Victor Kugler lived at various addresses in Utrecht for 13 years after moving to the Netherlands.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/locations/9587"],"street":"","zipcode":"","city":"Utrecht","state":"","land":"Nederland","location_events":[226,202]},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/3b50e1bd-9f2f-440d-a5b5-412d51b71dae/","published":true,"uuid":"3b50e1bd-9f2f-440d-a5b5-412d51b71dae","name":"Victor Kugler takes a course in Dutch commercial correspondence","name_nl":"Victor Kugler volgt cursus Nederlandse handelscorrespondentie","name_en":"Victor Kugler takes a course in Dutch commercial correspondence","content":"Victor Kugler successfully completed a course in Dutch commercial correspondence. His diploma was signed in Leiden on 21 May 1923 by H. Vissinga, teacher of bookkeeping, Dutch and French language and commercial correspondence.[1]
\r\n\r\nVissinga offered written courses in bookkeeping, commercial accounting and Dutch commercial correspondence.[2]
\r\n\r\nVictor Kugler volgde met goed resultaat een cursus Nederlandse handelscorrespondentie. Zijn diploma werd op 21 mei 1923 in Leiden ondertekend door H. Vissinga, leraar boekhouden en onderwijzer Nederlandse en Franse taal en handelscorrespondentie.[1] Vissinga bood schriftelijke cursussen boekhouden, handelsrekenen en Nederlandse handelscorrespondentie aan.[2]
\r\n\r\nVictor Kugler successfully completed a course in Dutch commercial correspondence. His diploma was signed in Leiden on 21 May 1923 by H. Vissinga, teacher of bookkeeping, Dutch and French language and commercial correspondence.[1]
\r\n\r\nVissinga offered written courses in bookkeeping, commercial accounting and Dutch commercial correspondence.[2]
\r\n\r\nDue to the advance of Allied troops, the prisoners were sent on foot towards Germany at the end of March. During this march, Victor Kugler managed to escape. About his escape and journey home, Kugler wrote the following in 1963:
\r\n\r\n'On that day [28 March] about 600 prisoners left Wageningen and marched across Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort to Zevenaar, with the intention of proceeding to Germany the next day. On the outskirts of Zevenaar, our column was attacked and fired on by English Spitfires. There were unfortunately some casualties. I took advantage of the confusion and fled into the field.'[1]\r\n\r\n
After Kugler fled into the field, he reportedly went into hiding 'with a farmer, Mr Barends' and then left by bicycle heading towards the IJssel River. In Lathum, he waited several days in a brickworks until he could be ferried across the river. In Barneveld, he almost fell into the hands of the Gestapo, but on Good Friday he returned home to Hilversum, where he hid until the liberation.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe chronology of Kugler's escape as he describes it himself may not be entirely accurate. Good Friday fell on 30 March in 1945. That would mean that everything would have to have taken place in two days, while he wrote that he spent several days at Barends and also several days at the brickworks. Either he escaped earlier than 28 March, or he only got home after Good Friday.
\r\n\r\nA diarist from Barneveld noted that on 27 March 1945, people were taken off the streets there to dig tank barriers.[2] Possibly this was the moment Kugler managed to escape what he called the Gestapo in Barneveld.
\r\n\r\nRecords from the Historical Society in Zevenaar indicate that the day of Kugler's escape may have been 24 March 1945:
\r\n\r\n'24-03-1945 Around noon, a German car was destroyed by an Allied fighter. At half past three an Allied fighter carried out an attack on artillery on Arnhemseweg. A column of OT diggers returning from Oosterbeek was hit by 2 bombs. W. Donk (aged 44) and W. Nagtegaal (aged 24) from Utrecht and a German soldier were killed.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Door de opmars van de geallieerde troepen werden de gevangenen eind maart te voet richting Duitsland gestuurd. Tijdens deze tocht wist Victor Kugler te ontsnappen. Over zijn ontvluchting en thuisreis schreef Kugler in 1963 het volgende:
\r\n\r\n‘Op die dag [28 maart] vertrokken ongeveer 600 gevangen uit Wageningen en marcheerden over Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort naar Zevenaar, met de bedoeling de volgende dag naar Duitsland te gaan. Bij de ingang van Zevenaar werd onze colonne door Engelse Spitfires aangevallen en beschoten. Er vielen helaas enige doden. Ik maakte van de verwarring gebruik en vluchtte in het veld.’[1]\r\n\r\n
Nadat Kugler het veld in was gevlucht zou hij zijn ondergedoken ‘bij een boer, de heer Barends’ en vervolgens per fiets naar de IJssel zijn vertrokken. In Lathum wachtte hij enkele dagen in een steenbakkerij tot hij de rivier kon worden overgezet. In Barneveld viel hij bijna in handen van de Gestapo, maar op Goede Vrijdag zou hij weer zijn thuisgekomen in Hilversum, waar hij zich tot de bevrijding verborgen hield.[1]
\r\n\r\nDe chronologie van Kuglers ontsnapping zoals hij die zelf beschrijft kan niet helemaal kloppen. Goede Vrijdag viel in 1945 op 30 maart. Alles zou dan in twee dagen hebben moeten plaatsvinden, terwijl hij schreef enkele dagen bij Barends en ook enkele dagen in de steenfabriek te zijn geweest. Ofwel hij ontsnapt eerder dan 28 maart, ofwel hij was pas na Goede Vrijdag thuis.
\r\n\r\nEen dagboekschrijfster uit Barneveld noteerde dat daar op 27 maart 1945 mensen van de straat zijn geplukt om tankversperringen te graven.[2] Mogelijk was dit het moment dat Kugler in Barneveld aan wat hij de Gestapo noemde wist te ontsnappen.
\r\n\r\nUit gegevens van de Historische Vereniging in Zevenaar blijkt dat de dag van Kuglers ontsnapping mogelijk 24 maart 1945 was:
\r\n\r\n‘24-03-1945 Tegen 12 uur wordt een Duitse auto vernietigd door een Geallieerde jager. Om half vier voert een Geallieerde jager een aanval uit op geschut aan de Arnhemseweg. Een colonne OT gravers die uit Oosterbeek terugkomt wordt getroffen door 2 bommen. W. Donk (44 jaar) en W. Nagtegaal (24 jaar) uit Utrecht en een Duitse soldaat komen hierbij om het leven.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Due to the advance of Allied troops, the prisoners were sent on foot towards Germany at the end of March. During this march, Victor Kugler managed to escape. About his escape and journey home, Kugler wrote the following in 1963:
\r\n\r\n'On that day [28 March] about 600 prisoners left Wageningen and marched across Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort to Zevenaar, with the intention of proceeding to Germany the next day. On the outskirts of Zevenaar, our column was attacked and fired on by English Spitfires. There were unfortunately some casualties. I took advantage of the confusion and fled into the field.'[1]\r\n\r\n
After Kugler fled into the field, he reportedly went into hiding 'with a farmer, Mr Barends' and then left by bicycle heading towards the IJssel River. In Lathum, he waited several days in a brickworks until he could be ferried across the river. In Barneveld, he almost fell into the hands of the Gestapo, but on Good Friday he returned home to Hilversum, where he hid until the liberation.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe chronology of Kugler's escape as he describes it himself may not be entirely accurate. Good Friday fell on 30 March in 1945. That would mean that everything would have to have taken place in two days, while he wrote that he spent several days at Barends and also several days at the brickworks. Either he escaped earlier than 28 March, or he only got home after Good Friday.
\r\n\r\nA diarist from Barneveld noted that on 27 March 1945, people were taken off the streets there to dig tank barriers.[2] Possibly this was the moment Kugler managed to escape what he called the Gestapo in Barneveld.
\r\n\r\nRecords from the Historical Society in Zevenaar indicate that the day of Kugler's escape may have been 24 March 1945:
\r\n\r\n'24-03-1945 Around noon, a German car was destroyed by an Allied fighter. At half past three an Allied fighter carried out an attack on artillery on Arnhemseweg. A column of OT diggers returning from Oosterbeek was hit by 2 bombs. W. Donk (aged 44) and W. Nagtegaal (aged 24) from Utrecht and a German soldier were killed.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Due to the advance of Allied troops, the prisoners were sent on foot towards Germany at the end of March. During this march, Victor Kugler managed to escape. About his escape and journey home, Kugler wrote the following in 1963:
\r\n\r\n'On that day [28 March] about 600 prisoners left Wageningen and marched across Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort to Zevenaar, with the intention of proceeding to Germany the next day. On the outskirts of Zevenaar, our column was attacked and fired on by English Spitfires. There were unfortunately some casualties. I took advantage of the confusion and fled into the field.'[1]\r\n\r\n
After Kugler fled into the field, he reportedly went into hiding 'with a farmer, Mr Barends' and then left by bicycle heading towards the IJssel River. In Lathum, he waited several days in a brickworks until he could be ferried across the river. In Barneveld, he almost fell into the hands of the Gestapo, but on Good Friday he returned home to Hilversum, where he hid until the liberation.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe chronology of Kugler's escape as he describes it himself may not be entirely accurate. Good Friday fell on 30 March in 1945. That would mean that everything would have to have taken place in two days, while he wrote that he spent several days at Barends and also several days at the brickworks. Either he escaped earlier than 28 March, or he only got home after Good Friday.
\r\n\r\nA diarist from Barneveld noted that on 27 March 1945, people were taken off the streets there to dig tank barriers.[2] Possibly this was the moment Kugler managed to escape what he called the Gestapo in Barneveld.
\r\n\r\nRecords from the Historical Society in Zevenaar indicate that the day of Kugler's escape may have been 24 March 1945:
\r\n\r\n'24-03-1945 Around noon, a German car was destroyed by an Allied fighter. At half past three an Allied fighter carried out an attack on artillery on Arnhemseweg. A column of OT diggers returning from Oosterbeek was hit by 2 bombs. W. Donk (aged 44) and W. Nagtegaal (aged 24) from Utrecht and a German soldier were killed.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Door de opmars van de geallieerde troepen werden de gevangenen eind maart te voet richting Duitsland gestuurd. Tijdens deze tocht wist Victor Kugler te ontsnappen. Over zijn ontvluchting en thuisreis schreef Kugler in 1963 het volgende:
\r\n\r\n‘Op die dag [28 maart] vertrokken ongeveer 600 gevangen uit Wageningen en marcheerden over Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort naar Zevenaar, met de bedoeling de volgende dag naar Duitsland te gaan. Bij de ingang van Zevenaar werd onze colonne door Engelse Spitfires aangevallen en beschoten. Er vielen helaas enige doden. Ik maakte van de verwarring gebruik en vluchtte in het veld.’[1]\r\n\r\n
Nadat Kugler het veld in was gevlucht zou hij zijn ondergedoken ‘bij een boer, de heer Barends’ en vervolgens per fiets naar de IJssel zijn vertrokken. In Lathum wachtte hij enkele dagen in een steenbakkerij tot hij de rivier kon worden overgezet. In Barneveld viel hij bijna in handen van de Gestapo, maar op Goede Vrijdag zou hij weer zijn thuisgekomen in Hilversum, waar hij zich tot de bevrijding verborgen hield.[1]
\r\n\r\nDe chronologie van Kuglers ontsnapping zoals hij die zelf beschrijft kan niet helemaal kloppen. Goede Vrijdag viel in 1945 op 30 maart. Alles zou dan in twee dagen hebben moeten plaatsvinden, terwijl hij schreef enkele dagen bij Barends en ook enkele dagen in de steenfabriek te zijn geweest. Ofwel hij ontsnapt eerder dan 28 maart, ofwel hij was pas na Goede Vrijdag thuis.
\r\n\r\nEen dagboekschrijfster uit Barneveld noteerde dat daar op 27 maart 1945 mensen van de straat zijn geplukt om tankversperringen te graven.[2] Mogelijk was dit het moment dat Kugler in Barneveld aan wat hij de Gestapo noemde wist te ontsnappen.
\r\n\r\nUit gegevens van de Historische Vereniging in Zevenaar blijkt dat de dag van Kuglers ontsnapping mogelijk 24 maart 1945 was:
\r\n\r\n‘24-03-1945 Tegen 12 uur wordt een Duitse auto vernietigd door een Geallieerde jager. Om half vier voert een Geallieerde jager een aanval uit op geschut aan de Arnhemseweg. Een colonne OT gravers die uit Oosterbeek terugkomt wordt getroffen door 2 bommen. W. Donk (44 jaar) en W. Nagtegaal (24 jaar) uit Utrecht en een Duitse soldaat komen hierbij om het leven.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Due to the advance of Allied troops, the prisoners were sent on foot towards Germany at the end of March. During this march, Victor Kugler managed to escape. About his escape and journey home, Kugler wrote the following in 1963:
\r\n\r\n'On that day [28 March] about 600 prisoners left Wageningen and marched across Renkum, Heelsum, Oosterbeek, Arnhem, Westervoort to Zevenaar, with the intention of proceeding to Germany the next day. On the outskirts of Zevenaar, our column was attacked and fired on by English Spitfires. There were unfortunately some casualties. I took advantage of the confusion and fled into the field.'[1]\r\n\r\n
After Kugler fled into the field, he reportedly went into hiding 'with a farmer, Mr Barends' and then left by bicycle heading towards the IJssel River. In Lathum, he waited several days in a brickworks until he could be ferried across the river. In Barneveld, he almost fell into the hands of the Gestapo, but on Good Friday he returned home to Hilversum, where he hid until the liberation.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe chronology of Kugler's escape as he describes it himself may not be entirely accurate. Good Friday fell on 30 March in 1945. That would mean that everything would have to have taken place in two days, while he wrote that he spent several days at Barends and also several days at the brickworks. Either he escaped earlier than 28 March, or he only got home after Good Friday.
\r\n\r\nA diarist from Barneveld noted that on 27 March 1945, people were taken off the streets there to dig tank barriers.[2] Possibly this was the moment Kugler managed to escape what he called the Gestapo in Barneveld.
\r\n\r\nRecords from the Historical Society in Zevenaar indicate that the day of Kugler's escape may have been 24 March 1945:
\r\n\r\n'24-03-1945 Around noon, a German car was destroyed by an Allied fighter. At half past three an Allied fighter carried out an attack on artillery on Arnhemseweg. A column of OT diggers returning from Oosterbeek was hit by 2 bombs. W. Donk (aged 44) and W. Nagtegaal (aged 24) from Utrecht and a German soldier were killed.’[3]\r\n\r\n
Johan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl en Christina Sodenkamp trouwden op 20 februari 1919 in Amsterdam. De ouders stemden met het huwelijk in en twee zwagers traden op als getuigen.[1] Hun eerste kind werd viereneenhalve maand later geboren. Uiteindelijk kwamen er acht kinderen, op één na allen in Amsterdam geboren. Van de jongsten zijn de geboortedata om privacyredenen niet vermeld.
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door Johans overlijden op 27 november 1945 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
De trouwdag van Johannes Kleiman en Johanna Catharina Reuman vond plaats op 12 juli 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' broer Cornelis en een broer van Johanna waren getuigen.[1] Het echtpaar kreeg een dochter, genaamd Johanna. Het gezin, bestaande uit Johannes (Jo), echtgenote Johanna (Jo en later Joke) en dochter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), stond ook wel bekend als: Jo, Jo en Jo.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Johannes Kleiman op 28 januari 1959 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
The wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nDe trouwdag van Jan Gies en Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten vond plaats op 13 december 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] Het huwelijk was mogelijk door tussenkomst van de kantonrechter. Jans zwager J.H.A. van Steenvelt was getuige, samen met de verloofde van een zus van de bruid.[1] Bij het huwelijk van de laatsten in 1931 was Jan op zijn beurt getuige.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk bleef kinderloos en werd op 7 november 1940 door scheiding ontbonden. Sinds 14 januari 1936 stonden zij al niet meer op hetzelfde adres ingeschreven.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Jan Gies en Miep Santrouschitz vond plaats op 16 juli 1941. Jans eerdere huwelijke was door scheiding ontbonden op 7 november 1940.[1] Getuigen waren Miep haar pleegvader Laurens Nieuwenburg en Otto Frank.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp overgeleverde trouwfoto’s zijn de volgende gasten te zien: Laurens en Anna Nieuwenburg, hun kleindochter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman en Branca Boom.[3] Op een andere foto staan Hermann en Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler en twee onbekenden.[4] Er zijn ook twee foto’s gemaakt in en voor het Opektagebouw op de Prinsengracht. Hierop staan Jan en Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl en een onbekende man en vrouw.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep beschreef in haar Herinneringen hoeveel moeite het haar kostte om een geboortebewijs uit Wenen te krijgen.[6] Een afschrift van haar Geburts- und Tauf-Schein werd op 29 januari 1941 afgegeven; een afschrift van de officiële bevestiging van het vaderschap door Eipeldauer uit 1909 werd afgegeven op 2 mei 1941.[7] In de twee jaar voorafgaand aan het huwelijk werden ook de geboorte- en doopbewijzen van Mieps moeder (afschrift 29 november 1940), grootvader (afschrift 17 februari 1939) en grootmoeder (afschrift 23 februari 1939) afgegeven. Op het laatste afschrift stond gestempeld: 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung.[8] Deze documenten waren zeer waarschijnlijk met het oog op het voorgenomen huwelijk verstrekt.
\r\n\r\nIn een interview vertelde Miep dat de worst voor op het bruiloftsfeest was geregeld door Daatzelaar, vertegenwoordiger van Gies & Co. en later bonnenleverancier van het Achterhuis.[9]
\r\n\r\nTer gelegenheid van hun éénjarige huwelijk op 18 juli 1942 werd er een etentje georganiseerd in het Achterhuis. Het menukaartje is bewaard gebleven:
\r\n\r\naangeboden door "HET ACHTERHUIS" ter gelegenheid\r\n\r\n
\r\nvan het eenjarig bestaan van het huwelijk van
\r\nden Weled. heer en Mevrouw GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoastbeef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF (JUS)
\r\nzeer miniem gebruiken svp. in verband
\r\nmet verlaging v.h.boterrantsoen.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogaat)
\r\nSuiker, Kaneel, Frambozensap
\r\n
\r\nKO F F I E met suiker, room
\r\nen div. verrassingen. [10]
Ze kregen een zoon, genaamd Paul. Het huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Jan in 1993 ontbonden.
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn juli 1942 trouwden Rosel Goldschmidt en Paul Wronker, een voormalig huishoudster en een voormalig onderhuurder van de familie Frank. Fritz Pfeffer, op dat moment nog niet ondergedoken, was getuige bij het huwelijk.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nIn de oorlogsjaren was Bep Voskuijl verloofd met A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). Daarna ontmoette zij Cor van Wijk. Zij trouwden op 15 mei 1946 om 14.40 uur in Amsterdam. De getuigen waren Otto Frank en Cornelis Groen, de echtgenoot van Beps jongere zus Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Verder waren onder de gasten ook Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna en Jopie Kleiman, Miep en Jan Gies.[2] Cors familie was niet aanwezig op deze dag. Zij hadden bezwaren tegen het huwelijk omdat Bep Nederlands-Hervormd was en de familie Van Wijk Rooms-Katholiek. Toen Bep beloofde de kinderen naar catechisatie en katholieke scholen te sturen, vond er acht jaar later toch ook nog een kerkelijke inzegening plaats op 26 mei 1954 in de kerk van de H.H. Martelaren van Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in de Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank stuurde op 13 mei 1971 een brief aan Bep en Cor van Wijk dat hij wegens gezondheidsredenen niet bij het zilveren huwelijksfeest aanwezig kon zijn.[4] Ter gelegenheid van de zilveren bruiloft stuurden Otto en Fritzi Frank op 15 mei 1971 een telegram aan hen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Victor Kugler en Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen vond plaats op 22 oktober 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noteerde deze dag in zijn agenda als volgt: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nOp 10 november 1953 trouwden Otto Frank en Elfriede Edith (Fritzi) Markovits in Amsterdam. Het was voor allebei hun tweede huwelijk. De getuigen waren Jo Kleiman en Miep Gies.[1] Net als Otto had Fritzi haar partner verloren in een concentratiekamp. Op de dag van het huwelijk lieten zij bij notaris Jacob van Hasselt een akte van huwelijkse voorwaarden opstellen. Ook maakten allebei bij hem een testament op.[2]
\r\n\r\nHoewel Fritzi vanaf begin 1940 met haar gezin tegenover de familie Frank op Merwedeplein woonde, leerden zij en Otto elkaar pas kennen tijdens de terugreis uit Auschwitz. Volgens de dochter van Fritzi, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, bracht zij haar moeder en Otto tijdens de treinreis van Auschwitz naar Odessa in de buurt van Czernowitz met elkaar in contact.[3] Volgens Fritzi zelf ontmoette zij Otto tijdens een oponthoud vlakbij Lvov toen Eva Otto Frank bij de trein herkende als de vader van Anne met wie ze op het Merwedeplein had gespeeld.[4] Later vertelde Fritzi in haar opstel Mein Leben mit Otto Frank dat Otto haar al was opgevallen bij een door de Sovjettroepen georganiseerde 'herdenking van de revolutie' in het net bevrijde Auschwitz.[5] Volgens Otto's notitieboekje uit 1945 zou dit dan 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee kunnen zijn geweest.[6] Terug in Amsterdam ging Otto bij Fritzi langs omdat haar naam op een overlevendenlijst stond. Hij hoopte dat zij iets over Margot en Anne wist. Hij herinnerde zich de ontmoeting bij de trein niet.[3]
\r\n\r\nUit de briefwisseling tussen Otto en Fritzi in het najaar van 1952, toen Otto in verband met de toneelbewerking van het dagboek langere tijd in de Verenigde Staten verbleef, blijkt dat hun huwelijk aanstaande was.[7]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nWorld War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","description_nl":"De Tweede Wereldoorlog kostte aan ongeveer 110.000 Amsterdammers het leven. Van de omvangrijke Joodse gemeenschap overleefde het merendeel, ongeveer 75.000 Joden, de Duitse bezetting niet. Anne Frank dook in de stad onder en schreef er haar wereldberoemde dagboek. Ook de Hongerwinter eiste, zoals in heel West-Nederland, een hoge tol in de stad.
","description_en":"World War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","summary":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","summary_nl":"Amsterdam is de hoofdstad van Nederland.","summary_en":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/locations/9577"],"parent":396124554,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/63dce380-73c4-4db6-b629-d9e9b21c8dd0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa71d2a7-0c30-4015-b90a-a791f0cb4049"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901/","published":true,"name":"Amsterdam City Hall","name_nl":"Stadhuis Amsterdam","name_en":"Amsterdam City Hall","uuid":"4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901","content":"","content_nl":"","content_en":"","position":"SRID=4326;POINT (4.89523 52.37098)","summary":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","summary_nl":"Het stadhuis van Amsterdam was de plek waar in die stad de huwelijken werden gesloten.","summary_en":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","same_as":null,"street":"Oudezijds Voorburgwal 197","zipcode":"","city":"Amsterdam","state":"Noord-Holland","land":"Nederland","location_events":[238,237,239,230,236,234,220]},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/7a8d4735-9369-49ee-af86-7f33d76e9822/","published":true,"uuid":"7a8d4735-9369-49ee-af86-7f33d76e9822","name":"Wedding-day of Victor Kugler and Lysia van Langen","name_nl":"Trouwdag Victor Kugler en Lysia van Langen","name_en":"Wedding-day of Victor Kugler and Lysia van Langen","content":"The wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Victor Kugler en Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen vond plaats op 22 oktober 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noteerde deze dag in zijn agenda als volgt: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl en Christina Sodenkamp trouwden op 20 februari 1919 in Amsterdam. De ouders stemden met het huwelijk in en twee zwagers traden op als getuigen.[1] Hun eerste kind werd viereneenhalve maand later geboren. Uiteindelijk kwamen er acht kinderen, op één na allen in Amsterdam geboren. Van de jongsten zijn de geboortedata om privacyredenen niet vermeld.
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door Johans overlijden op 27 november 1945 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
De trouwdag van Johannes Kleiman en Johanna Catharina Reuman vond plaats op 12 juli 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' broer Cornelis en een broer van Johanna waren getuigen.[1] Het echtpaar kreeg een dochter, genaamd Johanna. Het gezin, bestaande uit Johannes (Jo), echtgenote Johanna (Jo en later Joke) en dochter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), stond ook wel bekend als: Jo, Jo en Jo.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Johannes Kleiman op 28 januari 1959 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
The wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nDe trouwdag van Jan Gies en Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten vond plaats op 13 december 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] Het huwelijk was mogelijk door tussenkomst van de kantonrechter. Jans zwager J.H.A. van Steenvelt was getuige, samen met de verloofde van een zus van de bruid.[1] Bij het huwelijk van de laatsten in 1931 was Jan op zijn beurt getuige.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk bleef kinderloos en werd op 7 november 1940 door scheiding ontbonden. Sinds 14 januari 1936 stonden zij al niet meer op hetzelfde adres ingeschreven.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Jan Gies en Miep Santrouschitz vond plaats op 16 juli 1941. Jans eerdere huwelijke was door scheiding ontbonden op 7 november 1940.[1] Getuigen waren Miep haar pleegvader Laurens Nieuwenburg en Otto Frank.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp overgeleverde trouwfoto’s zijn de volgende gasten te zien: Laurens en Anna Nieuwenburg, hun kleindochter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman en Branca Boom.[3] Op een andere foto staan Hermann en Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler en twee onbekenden.[4] Er zijn ook twee foto’s gemaakt in en voor het Opektagebouw op de Prinsengracht. Hierop staan Jan en Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl en een onbekende man en vrouw.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep beschreef in haar Herinneringen hoeveel moeite het haar kostte om een geboortebewijs uit Wenen te krijgen.[6] Een afschrift van haar Geburts- und Tauf-Schein werd op 29 januari 1941 afgegeven; een afschrift van de officiële bevestiging van het vaderschap door Eipeldauer uit 1909 werd afgegeven op 2 mei 1941.[7] In de twee jaar voorafgaand aan het huwelijk werden ook de geboorte- en doopbewijzen van Mieps moeder (afschrift 29 november 1940), grootvader (afschrift 17 februari 1939) en grootmoeder (afschrift 23 februari 1939) afgegeven. Op het laatste afschrift stond gestempeld: 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung.[8] Deze documenten waren zeer waarschijnlijk met het oog op het voorgenomen huwelijk verstrekt.
\r\n\r\nIn een interview vertelde Miep dat de worst voor op het bruiloftsfeest was geregeld door Daatzelaar, vertegenwoordiger van Gies & Co. en later bonnenleverancier van het Achterhuis.[9]
\r\n\r\nTer gelegenheid van hun éénjarige huwelijk op 18 juli 1942 werd er een etentje georganiseerd in het Achterhuis. Het menukaartje is bewaard gebleven:
\r\n\r\naangeboden door "HET ACHTERHUIS" ter gelegenheid\r\n\r\n
\r\nvan het eenjarig bestaan van het huwelijk van
\r\nden Weled. heer en Mevrouw GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoastbeef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF (JUS)
\r\nzeer miniem gebruiken svp. in verband
\r\nmet verlaging v.h.boterrantsoen.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogaat)
\r\nSuiker, Kaneel, Frambozensap
\r\n
\r\nKO F F I E met suiker, room
\r\nen div. verrassingen. [10]
Ze kregen een zoon, genaamd Paul. Het huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Jan in 1993 ontbonden.
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn juli 1942 trouwden Rosel Goldschmidt en Paul Wronker, een voormalig huishoudster en een voormalig onderhuurder van de familie Frank. Fritz Pfeffer, op dat moment nog niet ondergedoken, was getuige bij het huwelijk.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nIn de oorlogsjaren was Bep Voskuijl verloofd met A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). Daarna ontmoette zij Cor van Wijk. Zij trouwden op 15 mei 1946 om 14.40 uur in Amsterdam. De getuigen waren Otto Frank en Cornelis Groen, de echtgenoot van Beps jongere zus Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Verder waren onder de gasten ook Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna en Jopie Kleiman, Miep en Jan Gies.[2] Cors familie was niet aanwezig op deze dag. Zij hadden bezwaren tegen het huwelijk omdat Bep Nederlands-Hervormd was en de familie Van Wijk Rooms-Katholiek. Toen Bep beloofde de kinderen naar catechisatie en katholieke scholen te sturen, vond er acht jaar later toch ook nog een kerkelijke inzegening plaats op 26 mei 1954 in de kerk van de H.H. Martelaren van Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in de Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank stuurde op 13 mei 1971 een brief aan Bep en Cor van Wijk dat hij wegens gezondheidsredenen niet bij het zilveren huwelijksfeest aanwezig kon zijn.[4] Ter gelegenheid van de zilveren bruiloft stuurden Otto en Fritzi Frank op 15 mei 1971 een telegram aan hen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Victor Kugler en Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen vond plaats op 22 oktober 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noteerde deze dag in zijn agenda als volgt: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nOp 10 november 1953 trouwden Otto Frank en Elfriede Edith (Fritzi) Markovits in Amsterdam. Het was voor allebei hun tweede huwelijk. De getuigen waren Jo Kleiman en Miep Gies.[1] Net als Otto had Fritzi haar partner verloren in een concentratiekamp. Op de dag van het huwelijk lieten zij bij notaris Jacob van Hasselt een akte van huwelijkse voorwaarden opstellen. Ook maakten allebei bij hem een testament op.[2]
\r\n\r\nHoewel Fritzi vanaf begin 1940 met haar gezin tegenover de familie Frank op Merwedeplein woonde, leerden zij en Otto elkaar pas kennen tijdens de terugreis uit Auschwitz. Volgens de dochter van Fritzi, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, bracht zij haar moeder en Otto tijdens de treinreis van Auschwitz naar Odessa in de buurt van Czernowitz met elkaar in contact.[3] Volgens Fritzi zelf ontmoette zij Otto tijdens een oponthoud vlakbij Lvov toen Eva Otto Frank bij de trein herkende als de vader van Anne met wie ze op het Merwedeplein had gespeeld.[4] Later vertelde Fritzi in haar opstel Mein Leben mit Otto Frank dat Otto haar al was opgevallen bij een door de Sovjettroepen georganiseerde 'herdenking van de revolutie' in het net bevrijde Auschwitz.[5] Volgens Otto's notitieboekje uit 1945 zou dit dan 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee kunnen zijn geweest.[6] Terug in Amsterdam ging Otto bij Fritzi langs omdat haar naam op een overlevendenlijst stond. Hij hoopte dat zij iets over Margot en Anne wist. Hij herinnerde zich de ontmoeting bij de trein niet.[3]
\r\n\r\nUit de briefwisseling tussen Otto en Fritzi in het najaar van 1952, toen Otto in verband met de toneelbewerking van het dagboek langere tijd in de Verenigde Staten verbleef, blijkt dat hun huwelijk aanstaande was.[7]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nWorld War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","description_nl":"De Tweede Wereldoorlog kostte aan ongeveer 110.000 Amsterdammers het leven. Van de omvangrijke Joodse gemeenschap overleefde het merendeel, ongeveer 75.000 Joden, de Duitse bezetting niet. Anne Frank dook in de stad onder en schreef er haar wereldberoemde dagboek. Ook de Hongerwinter eiste, zoals in heel West-Nederland, een hoge tol in de stad.
","description_en":"World War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","summary":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","summary_nl":"Amsterdam is de hoofdstad van Nederland.","summary_en":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/locations/9577"],"parent":396124554,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/63dce380-73c4-4db6-b629-d9e9b21c8dd0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa71d2a7-0c30-4015-b90a-a791f0cb4049"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901/","published":true,"name":"Amsterdam City Hall","name_nl":"Stadhuis Amsterdam","name_en":"Amsterdam City Hall","uuid":"4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901","content":"","content_nl":"","content_en":"","position":"SRID=4326;POINT (4.89523 52.37098)","summary":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","summary_nl":"Het stadhuis van Amsterdam was de plek waar in die stad de huwelijken werden gesloten.","summary_en":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","same_as":null,"street":"Oudezijds Voorburgwal 197","zipcode":"","city":"Amsterdam","state":"Noord-Holland","land":"Nederland","location_events":[238,237,239,230,236,234,220]},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/d8510570-4cf8-4bd9-9c2e-8c7eb0164885/","published":true,"uuid":"d8510570-4cf8-4bd9-9c2e-8c7eb0164885","name":"Wedding-day of Jan Gies and Maria Netten","name_nl":"Trouwdag Jan Gies en Maria Netten","name_en":"Wedding-day of Jan Gies and Maria Netten","content":"The wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nDe trouwdag van Jan Gies en Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten vond plaats op 13 december 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] Het huwelijk was mogelijk door tussenkomst van de kantonrechter. Jans zwager J.H.A. van Steenvelt was getuige, samen met de verloofde van een zus van de bruid.[1] Bij het huwelijk van de laatsten in 1931 was Jan op zijn beurt getuige.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk bleef kinderloos en werd op 7 november 1940 door scheiding ontbonden. Sinds 14 januari 1936 stonden zij al niet meer op hetzelfde adres ingeschreven.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 6 April 1927, Jan Gies moved from Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam to Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. He listed his occupation as office clerk.[1] The Van Gemert family was registered at this same address between 1925 and 1930.[2] Why Jan stayed with this family for six months is unknown.
\r\n\r\nJan moved back to Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam on 24 October 1927.[3]
\r\n\r\nOp 6 april 1927 verhuisde Jan Gies van de Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam naar de Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. Als beroep gaf hij kantoorbediende op.[1] Op ditzelfde adres stond tussen 1925 en 1930 de familie Van Gemert ingeschreven.[2] Waarom Jan een half jaar bij deze familie in huis verbleef is niet bekend.
\r\n\r\nJan verhuisde per 24 oktober 1927 weer terug naar de Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 6 April 1927, Jan Gies moved from Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam to Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. He listed his occupation as office clerk.[1] The Van Gemert family was registered at this same address between 1925 and 1930.[2] Why Jan stayed with this family for six months is unknown.
\r\n\r\nJan moved back to Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam on 24 October 1927.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 6 April 1927, Jan Gies moved from Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam to Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. He listed his occupation as office clerk.[1] The Van Gemert family was registered at this same address between 1925 and 1930.[2] Why Jan stayed with this family for six months is unknown.
\r\n\r\nJan moved back to Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam on 24 October 1927.[3]
\r\n\r\nOp 6 april 1927 verhuisde Jan Gies van de Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam naar de Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. Als beroep gaf hij kantoorbediende op.[1] Op ditzelfde adres stond tussen 1925 en 1930 de familie Van Gemert ingeschreven.[2] Waarom Jan een half jaar bij deze familie in huis verbleef is niet bekend.
\r\n\r\nJan verhuisde per 24 oktober 1927 weer terug naar de Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOn 6 April 1927, Jan Gies moved from Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam to Kruisstraat 7 in Eindhoven. He listed his occupation as office clerk.[1] The Van Gemert family was registered at this same address between 1925 and 1930.[2] Why Jan stayed with this family for six months is unknown.
\r\n\r\nJan moved back to Eikenweg 20 in Amsterdam on 24 October 1927.[3]
\r\n\r\nDuring his life, Jan Gies lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam:
\r\n\r\nHe returned to Amsterdam on 15 May 1919.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage of Jan Gies's parents was dissolved by divorce on 2 January 1925. According to the population records, he continued to live with his father, except for the short period in Eindhoven.
\r\n\r\nOn 13 December 1928, Jan Gies married M.M.G. Netten.
\r\n\r\nJan Gies woonde gedurende zijn leven op de volgende Amsterdamse adressen:
\r\n\r\nOp 15 mei 1919 kwam hij in Amsterdam terug.
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk van Jan Gies zijn ouders werd 2 januari 1925 door scheiding ontbonden. Volgens de bevolkingskaarten bleef hij bij zijn vader wonen, behoudens de korte periode in Eindhoven.
\r\n\r\nOp 13 december 1928 trouwde Jan Gies met M.M.G. Netten.
\r\n\r\nDuring his life, Jan Gies lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam:
\r\n\r\nHe returned to Amsterdam on 15 May 1919.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage of Jan Gies's parents was dissolved by divorce on 2 January 1925. According to the population records, he continued to live with his father, except for the short period in Eindhoven.
\r\n\r\nOn 13 December 1928, Jan Gies married M.M.G. Netten.
\r\n\r\nDuring her life, Bep Voskuijl lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam (with the exception of the two years she lived in Hilversum):
\r\n\r\nBep's aunt Alida C. Sodenkamp lived at the address Da Costakade 77-I. She moved to Eindhoven on 15 April 1943.[3] Bep had probably moved back to Lumeystraat by then. If these registration dates are correct, Bep did not live at home during the first ten months of the hiding period.
\r\n\r\nIn the summer of 1942, Da Costakade was renamed Goeverneurkade. This change was also noted on Bep's personal card (PB).[4]
\r\n\r\nThese are the addresses as they appear from official records. According to her son Ton van Wijk, Bep did not return to her own home after the raid on the Secret Annex on 4 August 1944, but hid in the parental home of Cor van Wijk (her later husband). Cor himself was then in Osterode in the Harz region. It is not clear why and how she came to be at that address.[5]
\r\n\r\nBep Voskuijl heeft tijdens haar leven op de volgende adressen in Amsterdam gewoond (met uitzondering van de twee jaar dat zij in Hilversum woonde):
\r\n\r\nOp het adres Da Costakade 77-I woonde Beps tante Alida C. Sodenkamp. Zij vertrok op 15 april 1943 naar Eindhoven.[4] Bep was toen waarschijnlijk alweer terug naar de Lumeystraat. Als deze inschrijfdata juist zijn, woonde Bep de eerste tien maanden van de onderduiktijd niet thuis.
\r\n\r\nDit zijn de adressen zoals ze uit officiële stukken naar voren zijn gekomen. Volgens zoon Ton van Wijk ging Bep na de inval in het Achterhuis van 4 augustus 1944 niet terug naar haar eigen huis, maar hield ze zich schuil in het ouderlijk huis van Cor van Wijk (haar latere echtgenoot). Cor zelf bevond zich dan in Osterode in de Harz. Het is niet duidelijk waarom en hoe ze op dat adres terecht is gekomen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDuring her life, Bep Voskuijl lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam (with the exception of the two years she lived in Hilversum):
\r\n\r\nBep's aunt Alida C. Sodenkamp lived at the address Da Costakade 77-I. She moved to Eindhoven on 15 April 1943.[3] Bep had probably moved back to Lumeystraat by then. If these registration dates are correct, Bep did not live at home during the first ten months of the hiding period.
\r\n\r\nIn the summer of 1942, Da Costakade was renamed Goeverneurkade. This change was also noted on Bep's personal card (PB).[4]
\r\n\r\nThese are the addresses as they appear from official records. According to her son Ton van Wijk, Bep did not return to her own home after the raid on the Secret Annex on 4 August 1944, but hid in the parental home of Cor van Wijk (her later husband). Cor himself was then in Osterode in the Harz region. It is not clear why and how she came to be at that address.[5]
\r\n\r\nNothing is known about how and to what extent Edith Frank-Holländer mastered the Dutch language.[1] Books belonging to her that have survived are in German and French. In letters to Gertrud Naumann, Edith did write about Margot and Anne's progress in the Dutch language, but not about her own.[2]
\r\n\r\nEdith did occasionally write in Dutch, as some documents show. Around August 1934, she wrote a reference for Renate Wolf: "We hereby confirm that Miss Renate Wolf is employed by us. Salary NLG 5 per week for ½ day. Mrs Otto Frank Merwedeplein 37 II".[3] And in 1935 she wrote extensive congratulations in Dutch on the occasion of the birth of a son of the Hofhuis family, friends of the family.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Anne, her mother spoke very poor Dutch. In her diary, she writes:
\r\n\r\n"Please bear in mind, Kitty, that the two ladies here speak outrageous Dutch (I wouldn't dare say anything about the gentlemen, they would be very offended), if you heard that mess you would laugh; we don't even pay attention to it anymore, it doesn't help anyway. When I write about mother or Mrs v. P., I won't use the original language but proper Dutch."[5]\r\n\r\n
Over de manier waarop en de mate waarin Edith Frank-Holländer zich de Nederlandse taal eigen gemaakte, is niets bekend.[1] Boeken van haar die bewaard zijn gebleven zijn in het Duits en Frans. In de brieven aan Gertrud Naumann schreef Edith wel over de vorderingen in de Nederlandse taal van Margot en Anne, maar niet over die van haarzelf.[2]
\r\n\r\nEdith schreef af en toe wel in het Nederlands, zoals blijkt uit enkele documenten. Omstreeks augustus 1934 schreef zij een referentie voor Renate Wolf: Hiermede bevestigen wij dat mejuffrouw Renate Wolf bij ons werkzaam is. Salaris fl. 5.- p. week voor ½ dage. Mevr. Otto Frank Merwedeplein 37 II.[3] En in 1935 schreef zij een uitgebreide Nederlandse gelukwens ter gelegenheid van de geboorte van een zoon van de bevriende familie Hofhuis.[4]
\r\n\r\nVolgens Anne sprak haar moeder erg slecht Nederlands. In haar dagboek schrijft ze:
\r\n\r\n'Houd er alsje't blieft rekening mee, Kitty, dat de twee dames hier, schandelijk Nederlands spreken (van de heren durf ik niets te zeggen, die zouden erg beledigd zijn.), als je dat gehaspel eens zou horen zou je schateren; wij letten er niet eens meer op, verbeteren helpt toch niet. ik zal als ik over moeder of mevr.v.P. schrijf maar niet het originele taaltje weergeven doch behoorlijk Nederlands’.[5]\r\n\r\n
Nothing is known about how and to what extent Edith Frank-Holländer mastered the Dutch language.[1] Books belonging to her that have survived are in German and French. In letters to Gertrud Naumann, Edith did write about Margot and Anne's progress in the Dutch language, but not about her own.[2]
\r\n\r\nEdith did occasionally write in Dutch, as some documents show. Around August 1934, she wrote a reference for Renate Wolf: "We hereby confirm that Miss Renate Wolf is employed by us. Salary NLG 5 per week for ½ day. Mrs Otto Frank Merwedeplein 37 II".[3] And in 1935 she wrote extensive congratulations in Dutch on the occasion of the birth of a son of the Hofhuis family, friends of the family.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Anne, her mother spoke very poor Dutch. In her diary, she writes:
\r\n\r\n"Please bear in mind, Kitty, that the two ladies here speak outrageous Dutch (I wouldn't dare say anything about the gentlemen, they would be very offended), if you heard that mess you would laugh; we don't even pay attention to it anymore, it doesn't help anyway. When I write about mother or Mrs v. P., I won't use the original language but proper Dutch."[5]\r\n\r\n
At Viktoriaschule, the secondary school Edith attended, English was part of the regular curriculum.[1] In the Netherlands, Edith was taught English by Rosey Pool.[2] Otto Frank described Rosey Pool to Nathan Straus as an "English lady, who lived here before the war and shortly after the war and is now living in London. I know her personally and she gave lessons to Edith and knew the children".[3]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Anne, Edith also learnt English through written courses while in hiding.[4]
\r\n\r\nOp de Viktoriaschule, de middelbare school die Edith bezocht, behoorde Engels tot het gewone lesprogramma.[1] In Nederland kreeg Edith Engelse les van Rosey Pool.[2] Otto Frank beschreef Rosey Pool aan Nathan Straus als een "English lady, who lived here before the war and shortly after the war and is now living in London. I know her personally and she gave lessons to Edith and knew the children.''[3]
\r\n\r\nVolgens Anne leerde Edith tijdens de onderduik ook Engels uit schriftelijke cursussen.[4]
\r\n\r\nAt Viktoriaschule, the secondary school Edith attended, English was part of the regular curriculum.[1] In the Netherlands, Edith was taught English by Rosey Pool.[2] Otto Frank described Rosey Pool to Nathan Straus as an "English lady, who lived here before the war and shortly after the war and is now living in London. I know her personally and she gave lessons to Edith and knew the children".[3]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Anne, Edith also learnt English through written courses while in hiding.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","description_nl":"Onder verblijf wordt verstaan een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.
","description_en":"Accommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","summary":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","summary_nl":"Verblijf is een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.","summary_en":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","same_as":null,"parent":396124413,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c05767e4-ac67-4d2e-a8f1-fdcfc93c3cdc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f4d47668-4071-4530-95f0-5c463fddbc60","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b654804b-25a1-4c46-affd-0de941f99790","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05463aca-21a7-4238-8686-0a4a606e10f5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8eb86b87-b516-415d-a0de-410bb88a0ab6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5f77d005-c71e-437e-8877-2ec3088e2031","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/03c56548-11fe-4e75-9a79-f1585bd2372a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b4236d95-43dd-42e6-93d5-c44eaba41b23","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1194af60-b60a-49ae-8762-cf8567fd21fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36022488-7682-43ff-918c-a2b970789006","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c730f47b-7508-4ea2-978e-331073f46ee4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4a5dbef2-cafa-46af-acfe-3470825a92a7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/07627e87-1438-47e2-a29c-847e27ce51c8","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa3cb90f-e2cc-4611-b0cb-316c6202e75b","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4837c7f7-8098-4daf-8fb4-3408adb041fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/59a5ed20-0f01-42b5-a1da-785936de9c47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84d67272-953d-4e09-8014-20cd8a55bd15","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c65659a4-793a-47f1-a7c5-ee2f49ee46b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/cc6c2172-d1f5-49c4-86b0-c31aa8bd02ea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/903ba158-f1e0-4d0f-b613-eae91df2893e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bd069b91-d876-4eb7-99e7-e62aa158eae4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/995b7432-6739-42b0-9434-5c3801327d6a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b6bed785-6178-42d2-9f90-a90e7730c21e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c9289eb-d4f6-46b8-afe7-5c15df9164c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f3ea591a-9ec2-49fa-aede-0308f0c1ea5e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aab06445-fe04-4578-9fba-19e679b65d6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8f078d07-0749-4824-9317-cca40a1f8c17","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/49fb0306-d233-4742-8133-c98fdba59175","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c6d71313-a017-4e4e-b05c-f56259c2bf72","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/592362c0-d64f-42be-8319-f7e3973610d3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6a58ce7e-02e2-4517-85ce-5b03eb20b753","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0bfa905d-38bd-4422-85ed-a4f2ecc7b506","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7e61c0df-f509-437a-8f9f-5d70bdd92934","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b7c73757-981c-409e-95cc-cc8eab873a93","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/150fa41e-02ba-4cae-9f32-62460252007f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/043a50b5-46ac-4222-8001-6ad28d51a1e2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/da7429b4-b23f-4947-b6d8-e5e6c0f143c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6660d32e-d2b0-468d-b7e7-01ceefc4376d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05693431-6b99-47b4-8e47-59ab3e95a889","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04f5ebdc-fe09-4ce6-991b-cf851a81c198","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a423c2ce-aac1-4ff6-86b1-f5233e4b77ff","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0ccf3db9-1774-4848-ad11-627e3fc64cea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bd22a6-e3e0-45e6-9bef-449b9894f0db","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db15398a-d845-4147-9ceb-1530e7e9a4e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b5ad5b8d-2494-42ad-bf1f-d2a1f9250bb2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2c4e9ad5-bb38-4440-ae2f-7b3fc3fba34a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/697cb023-79af-4e61-864a-49adce1e8f82","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db594671-5a23-4c77-94e5-719f47bf03e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7d0da592-ac93-4786-b1c3-932a0fd9dcf5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ff53ce1-d866-4190-a138-16c32a9eca43"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09/","published":true,"name":"Amsterdam","name_nl":"Amsterdam","name_en":"Amsterdam","uuid":"bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09","content":"During the 1930s, all the protagonists of the hiding in the Secret Annex gathered in the city: the Frank and Van Pels families, and Fritz Pfeffer. Apart from the commuter Kugler, all were also living there. Miep Gies had lived there since 1924.
\r\n\r\nSince 1923, Amsterdam was the location of several businesses of Otto Frank and his family. It was the birthplace of Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn de loop van de jaren dertig verzamelden alle hoofdrolspelers van de onderduik in het Achterhuis zich in de stad: de families Frank en Van Pels, en Fritz Pfeffer. Behalve de forens Kugler waren allen er ook woonachtig. Miep Gies woonde er al sinds 1924.
\r\n\r\nSinds 1923 was Amsterdam de vestigingsplaats van verschillende bedrijven van Otto Frank en zijn familie. Het is de geboorteplaats van Jan Gies en Bep Voskuijl.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring the 1930s, all the protagonists of the hiding in the Secret Annex gathered in the city: the Frank and Van Pels families, and Fritz Pfeffer. Apart from the commuter Kugler, all were also living there. Miep Gies had lived there since 1924.
\r\n\r\nSince 1923, Amsterdam was the location of several businesses of Otto Frank and his family. It was the birthplace of Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring her life, Bep Voskuijl lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam (with the exception of the two years she lived in Hilversum):
\r\n\r\nBep's aunt Alida C. Sodenkamp lived at the address Da Costakade 77-I. She moved to Eindhoven on 15 April 1943.[3] Bep had probably moved back to Lumeystraat by then. If these registration dates are correct, Bep did not live at home during the first ten months of the hiding period.
\r\n\r\nIn the summer of 1942, Da Costakade was renamed Goeverneurkade. This change was also noted on Bep's personal card (PB).[4]
\r\n\r\nThese are the addresses as they appear from official records. According to her son Ton van Wijk, Bep did not return to her own home after the raid on the Secret Annex on 4 August 1944, but hid in the parental home of Cor van Wijk (her later husband). Cor himself was then in Osterode in the Harz region. It is not clear why and how she came to be at that address.[5]
\r\n\r\nBep Voskuijl heeft tijdens haar leven op de volgende adressen in Amsterdam gewoond (met uitzondering van de twee jaar dat zij in Hilversum woonde):
\r\n\r\nOp het adres Da Costakade 77-I woonde Beps tante Alida C. Sodenkamp. Zij vertrok op 15 april 1943 naar Eindhoven.[4] Bep was toen waarschijnlijk alweer terug naar de Lumeystraat. Als deze inschrijfdata juist zijn, woonde Bep de eerste tien maanden van de onderduiktijd niet thuis.
\r\n\r\nDit zijn de adressen zoals ze uit officiële stukken naar voren zijn gekomen. Volgens zoon Ton van Wijk ging Bep na de inval in het Achterhuis van 4 augustus 1944 niet terug naar haar eigen huis, maar hield ze zich schuil in het ouderlijk huis van Cor van Wijk (haar latere echtgenoot). Cor zelf bevond zich dan in Osterode in de Harz. Het is niet duidelijk waarom en hoe ze op dat adres terecht is gekomen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDuring her life, Bep Voskuijl lived at the following addresses in Amsterdam (with the exception of the two years she lived in Hilversum):
\r\n\r\nBep's aunt Alida C. Sodenkamp lived at the address Da Costakade 77-I. She moved to Eindhoven on 15 April 1943.[3] Bep had probably moved back to Lumeystraat by then. If these registration dates are correct, Bep did not live at home during the first ten months of the hiding period.
\r\n\r\nIn the summer of 1942, Da Costakade was renamed Goeverneurkade. This change was also noted on Bep's personal card (PB).[4]
\r\n\r\nThese are the addresses as they appear from official records. According to her son Ton van Wijk, Bep did not return to her own home after the raid on the Secret Annex on 4 August 1944, but hid in the parental home of Cor van Wijk (her later husband). Cor himself was then in Osterode in the Harz region. It is not clear why and how she came to be at that address.[5]
\r\n\r\nOn the night of 11 to 12 January 1943, unknown persons broke the cellar lock and made off with 24 cases of wine. Six hundred bottles in all, which, according to the owner, represented a total value of nine thousand guilders. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller reported the theft to the Marnixstraat police station on the afternoon of 12 January 1943. The 'atelier' was also notified, meaning that the criminal investigation department started looking for fingerprints and other traces at the scene.[1] It is not known to what extent the criminal investigation extended to the surrounding area.
\r\n\r\nIn de nacht van 11 op 12 januari 1943 braken onbekenden het kelderslot open en verdwenen met 24 kisten wijn. Bij elkaar ging het om zeshonderd flessen, die volgens de eigenaar een totale waarde van negenduizend gulden vertegenwoordigden. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller deed er in de middag van 12 januari op bureau Marnixstraat aangifte van. Ook werd het 'atelier' ingelicht, wat betekent dat de recherche er naar vingerafdrukken en andere sporen ging zoeken.[1] In hoeverre het rechercheonderzoek zich tot de omgeving uitstrekte is niet bekend.
\r\n\r\nOn the night of 11 to 12 January 1943, unknown persons broke the cellar lock and made off with 24 cases of wine. Six hundred bottles in all, which, according to the owner, represented a total value of nine thousand guilders. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller reported the theft to the Marnixstraat police station on the afternoon of 12 January 1943. The 'atelier' was also notified, meaning that the criminal investigation department started looking for fingerprints and other traces at the scene.[1] It is not known to what extent the criminal investigation extended to the surrounding area.
\r\n\r\nOne of the neighboring buildings next to the Secret Annex was home to the upholsterer's store Elhoek. In November 1941, money had already been stolen from the electric meter at Elhoek. In the night of 7-8 April 1943, money and a typewriter were stolen from the business.
","content_nl":"In de een van de buurpanden naast het Achterhuis was stoffeerderzaak Elhoek gevestigd. In november 1941 was er bij Elhoek al eens geld uit de elektrameter gestolen. In de nacht van 7 op 8 april 1943 werd er geld en een schrijfmachine uit het bedrijf gestolen.
","content_en":"One of the neighboring buildings next to the Secret Annex was home to the upholsterer's store Elhoek. In November 1941, money had already been stolen from the electric meter at Elhoek. In the night of 7-8 April 1943, money and a typewriter were stolen from the business.
","date":null,"date_start":"1943-04-07","date_end":"1943-04-08","summary":"Burglars stole six hundred guilders and a typewriter from the business.","summary_nl":"Insluipers ontvreemdden zeshonderd gulden en een schrijfmachine uit het bedrijf.","summary_en":"Burglars stole six hundred guilders and a typewriter from the business.","same_as":null,"files":[]}],"subjects":[{"id":196,"image":null,"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/29abb87c-1833-4c97-9fc9-33c21427ac82/","published":true,"uuid":"29abb87c-1833-4c97-9fc9-33c21427ac82","name":"Threats: outsiders, burglars, fire, embezzlement and threats from the air","name_nl":"Bedreigingen: buitenstaanders, inbrekers, brand, verduistering en luchtgevaar","name_en":"Threats: outsiders, burglars, fire, embezzlement and threats from the air","description":"Staying unnoticed in the Secret Annex was threatened in several ways. Besides the chance that unwitting visitors or neighbours of the building might notice something, there was the possibility of burglars, fire in or near the building, light escaping and airborne threats. The people in hiding and the helpers were very alert to risky situations and did a lot to avoid risks.
\r\n\r\nEspecially in the early days, Anne repeatedly expressed her fear of outsiders in the building. In some cases these were strangers, but certainly not always. The sales representatives, pharmacist Arthur Lewinsohn, the accountant and some warehouse men were more or less acquaintances. The plumber, the cleaner, the carpenter and the other warehouse men were strangers to the people in hiding - as far as we know. The acquaintances also posed a threat in Anne's eyes. There was unease when Ans Broks said that she wanted to come to the office for coffee every day at two o'clock.[1] From time to time, Anne's diary provides clues showing that the people in hiding also took into account the possibility that people living or working in neighbouring premises would discover their presence.
\r\n\r\nOne morning, when Peter van Pels had forgotten to open the bolt on the inside of the street door, Victor Kugler and the warehousemen could not get in. Kugler had to go through the premises of wholesaler Keg on Prinsengracht 265 and only just managed to prevent one of the neighbours from climbing in via a ladder.[2]
\r\n\r\nSeveral break-ins and attempted break-ins are referred to in Anne's diaries and narratives. Brother and sister Wijnberg, who lived at Prinsengracht 251 during the period in hiding, said in an interview that they had been in the building as children on 24 March 1943 and had stolen muscatel nuts there.[3] Anne writes a day later about her first encounter with the phenomenon of burglars.[4] The break-in of 9 April 1944 is also confirmed by a police report, when the passing night watchman Martonus Slegers noticed the kicked-in door.[5] The B-version mentions a burglary on the night of 15-16 July 1943. According to the same passage, there had also been an unsuccessful attempt six weeks earlier.[6] In the A-version, Anne writes about a thief who may have entered with a false key, or at least nothing could be seen on the outside door.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe wider area, of course, also had to deal with crime. At Keg at Prinsengracht 265, police reports do not reveal any burglaries during the hiding period, but according to the 1963 official report of the National Criminal Investigation Department, there were burglaries. According to the State Investigation Department, by necessity, staff were even regularly present at night.[8] The daughter of branch manager Jacob Boon knew that her father spent the night in his office more than once during the war years.[9] In the night of 7-8 April 1943, burglars broke into Elhoek furniture factory at number 261 and stole six hundred guilders and a typewriter.[10] In November 1941, a coin meter of the Municipal Energy Company (GEB) had also been emptied there.[11] A few years earlier, the contents of a coin meter in the later Opekta premises had also been stolen by burglars.[12] Given GEB's policy in the 'small business' market, it was highly plausible that that meter had stayed behind after Opekta's arrival in the late 1940s.[13] Theft from coin meters was a very common phenomenon. So the presence of such meters certainly posed an additional risk.
\r\n\r\nJohannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler reported no burglaries or thefts on their premises during the period in hiding, as far as can be verified. Then, in January 1945, Johan Broks - Kugler was still in prison at the time - reported the theft of seventy kilos of sugar from Gies & Co.[14]
\r\n\r\nBuilding plans for Elhoek's premises at Prinsengracht 261, made in June 1940, show that people there were working with flammable materials and techniques, as they included extensive recommendations on self-closing doors, escape routes and a fire-extinguishing riser.[15] In the Opekta premises, fire hazards were also taken into account. A few months before going into hiding, there was a small fire when packaging material lying too close to a stove caught fire.[16] There were 'Minimax' appliances in several places. One was mounted on the landing in front of the bookcase. That location was 'peripheral' from a company point of view, and might have been chosen with the people in hiding in mind: outside the bookcase, allowing periodic maintenance to take place without problems - at least in theory. In the B-version of the diary, Anne writes, with the date 20 October 1942, that they 'got' these devices in the house, which she later changes to 'have'. It is therefore possible that they were fitted in the autumn of 1942, but there is no clarity on this.
\r\n\r\nDue to war conditions, strict blackout measures applied. Users of residential and other buildings were obliged to take measures to prevent light escaping between sunset and sunrise. In winter, curtains had to remain closed for up to 14 hours a day.[17] Police and Air Protection were quick to take action against violators. In the evening of 4 March 1941, officers kicked in the entrance door of the Opekta premises because a light was on in the hall.[18] Of course, when the period of hiding began, the people in hiding and helpers had not yet forgotten this. Anne's writings often refer to the closing and opening of the blackout curtains.[19] During the 1958 restoration, many window frames were replaced. However, some original frames from the Van Pels room are still in the museum collection, and the added constructions for blackout curtains are still attached.[20]
\r\n\r\nAnne's frequent comments on shots, sirens and alarms have been compared, where possible, with the air hazard reports preserved in the Amsterdam police archives. A few significant instances of 'air hazard' are shown here.
\r\n\r\nIn the event of an air siren, everyone was obliged to go to the nearest shelter or otherwise take cover. "If the air siren sounds [...] get off the streets!", Nieuws van den Dag, 13 September 1940. On the morning of 6 July 1942, there was no air siren, which would have meant a serious complication for the Franks on their way to Prinsengracht.
\r\n\r\nStarting on 10 July 1943, Rauter introduced an 'pre-alarm', which indicated that Allied aircraft were entering Dutch airspace without any immediate bomb attacks being expected. The alert was designated an 'air hazard warning'.[21] A week or two later, Anne mentions the use of this pre-alarm in the B-version when she writes about the air attacks on the Fokker factory in Amsterdam-Noord.[22] The repeated alarms she lists in her retrospectively written B note that day correspond to the alarms noted by the police in their register.[23] This makes it plausible that she used her original - and vanished - notes from July 1943 for this B note.
\r\n\r\nIn March 1944, a bomber crashed into a school in Spaarndammerstraat, less than one and a half kilometres from the Secret Annex.[24] During the air battle Anne witnessed on 3 May 1944, a plane crashed in Van Bossestraat.[25] This was also a short distance from the Secret Annex. Planes also crashed in Tuindorp Oostzaan and Grote IJpolder that day.[26] Finally, a plane also crashed into the Carlton Hotel at the end of April.[25]
\r\n\r\nRelated to the dangers from the air and from anti-aircraft guns was the threat of acts of war and evacuations in the west of the Netherlands. Anne writes at length in early 1944 about the discussions between the people in hiding and the helpers when this danger threatened to take concrete forms.[27]
\r\n\r\nThe people in hiding were very concerned with their safety. They had all kinds of agreements and arrangements to avoid drawing attention to themselves. Although compliance slackened from time to time, they kept them reasonably well. Neither they nor the people helping them had any control over some dangers: there was obviously nothing they could have done about falling bombs or crashing aircraft. There are no reasons to suspect that laxity or underestimation of security measures contributed to their eventual arrest.
\r\n\r\nHet onopgemerkte verblijf in het Achterhuis werd op verschillende manieren bedreigd. Naast de kans dat onwetende bezoekers of omwonenden van het pand iets merkten, was er nog de kans op inbrekers, brand in of bij het gebouw, lichtuitstraling en luchtgevaar. Onderduikers en helpers waren zeer alert op riskante situaties en deden er veel aan om risico’s te vermijden.
\r\n\r\nVooral in de beginperiode kwam Annes angst voor buitenstaanders in het gebouw herhaaldelijk tot uitdrukking. In sommige gevallen waren dit vreemden, maar zeker niet altijd. De vertegenwoordigers, apotheker Arthus Lewinsohn, de accountant en sommige pakhuismannen waren min of meer bekenden. De loodgieter, de werkster, de timmerman en de andere pakhuismannen waren voor de onderduikers – voor zover we weten – onbekenden. Ook de bekenden vormden in Annes ogen een bedreiging. Er ontstond onrust toen Ans Broks te kennen gaf dat ze elke dag om twee uur op kantoor koffie wilde komen drinken.[1] Annes dagboek geeft af en toe aanwijzingen waaruit blijkt dat de onderduikers eveneens rekening hielden met de mogelijkheid dat mensen die in de buurpanden woonden of werkten hun aanwezigheid zouden ontdekken.
\r\n\r\nToen op een ochtend Peter van Pels was vergeten de grendel aan de binnenkant van de straatdeur te halen, konden Victor Kugler en de magazijnmannen niet naar binnen. Kugler moest via het pand van groothandel Keg op de Prinsengracht 265 en kon maar op het nippertje voorkomen dat een van de buren langs een ladder naar binnen klom.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn Annes dagboeken en verhaaltjes komen verschillende inbraken en pogingen daartoe voor. Broer en zus Wijnberg, die tijdens de onderduikperiode op Prinsengracht 251 woonden, vertelden in een interview dat ze op 24 maart 1943 als kind in het pand geweest waren en dat ze daar muskaatnoten hadden weggenomen.[3] Anne schrijft een dag later over haar eerste kennismaking met het fenomeen inbrekers.[4] De inbraak van 9 april 1944 wordt ook door een politierapport bevestigd, en wel doordat de passerende nachtwaker Martinus Slegers de ingetrapte deur opmerkte.[5] De B-versie vermeldt in de nacht van 15 op 16 juli 1943 een inbraak. Volgens diezelfde notitie was er zes weken eerder ook al een mislukte poging geweest.[6] In de A-versie schrijft Anne over een dief die mogelijk met een valse sleutel binnenkwam, althans er was aan de buitendeur niets te zien.[7]
\r\n\r\nDe wijdere omgeving kreeg uiteraard eveneens met criminaliteit te maken. Bij Keg op de Prinsengracht 265 zijn uit de politierapporten geen inbraken tijdens de onderduikperiode bekend, maar volgens het proces-verbaal van de Rijksrecherche uit 1963 zijn die er wel geweest. Volgens de Rijksrecherche was het personeel noodgedwongen zelfs geregeld ’s nachts aanwezig.[8] De dochter van filiaalchef Jacob Boon wist dat haar vader in de oorlogsjaren meer dan eens in zijn kantoor overnachtte.[9] In de nacht van 7 op 8 april 1943 drongen insluipers bij meubelfabriek Elhoek op nummer 261 binnen en stalen daar zeshonderd gulden en een schrijfmachine.[10] In november 1941 was daar ook al eens een muntmeter van het Gemeentelijk Energiebedrijf (GEB) leeggehaald.[11] Enkele jaren eerder was ook in het latere Opekta-pand de inhoud van een muntmeter door inbrekers gestolen.[12] Gezien het beleid van het GEB in de ‘klein-zakelijke’ markt was het zeer aannemelijk dat die meter na de komst van Opekta eind 1940 was blijven hangen.[13] Diefstal uit muntmeters was een zeer veel voorkomend verschijnsel. De aanwezigheid van zulke meters leverde dus zeker een extra risico op.
\r\n\r\nJohannes Kleiman en Victor Kugler maakten tijdens de onderduikperiode, voor zover na te gaan, geen melding van inbraken en diefstallen in hun pand. Daarna, in januari 1945, gaf Johan Broks - Kugler zat dan nog gevangen - namens Gies & Co. de diefstal van zeventig kilo suiker aan.[14]
\r\n\r\nBouwplannen voor het pand van Elhoek op Prinsengracht 261, gemaakt in juni 1940, tonen dat men daar met brandgevaarlijke materialen en technieken werkte, daar er uitgebreide adviezen omtrent zelfsluitende deuren, vluchtwegen en een brandblusleiding in waren opgenomen.[15] In het Opekta-pand werd ook rekening gehouden met brandgevaar. Een paar maanden voor de onderduik was er een klein brandje, toen verpakkingsmateriaal dat te dicht bij een kachel lag vlam vatte.[16] Er bevonden zich op verschillende plaatsen zogenaamde Minimax-toestellen. Een ervan hing op het overloopje voor de boekenkast. Die locatie was vanuit bedrijfsoogpunt ‘perifeer’, en zou met het oog op de onderduikers kunnen zijn gekozen: buiten de boekenkast, waardoor periodiek onderhoud – althans in theorie – probleemloos kon gebeuren. In de B-versie van het dagboek schrijft Anne, met de datum 20 oktober 1942, dat ze deze toestellen in huis ‘krijgen’, wat ze later wijzigt in ‘hebben’. Mogelijk zijn deze dus in de herfst van 1942 aangebracht, maar duidelijkheid is daar niet over.
\r\n\r\nVanwege de oorlogsomstandigheden golden er strikte verduisteringsmaatregelen. Gebruikers van woonhuizen en andere gebouwen waren verplicht maatregelen te treffen die tussen zonsondergang en zonsopgang lichtuitstraling moesten voorkomen. In de winter moesten de gordijnen tot veertien uur per etmaal gesloten blijven.[17] Optreden van politie en Luchtbescherming tegen overtreders was aan de orde van de dag. In de avond van 4 maart 1941 trapten agenten de toegangsdeur van het Opekta-pand in omdat in de hal een lamp brandde.[18] Toen de onderduik begon, ware onderduikers en helpers dat uiteraard nog niet vergeten. Het ver- en ontduisteren is in Annes geschriften herhaaldelijk aanwezig.[19] Tijdens de restauratie van 1958 zijn veel raamkozijnen vervangen. Van de Van Pels-kamer zijn enkele originelen echter nog in de museale collectie aanwezig en de hulpconstructies voor de verduistering zitten er nog aan.[20]
\r\n\r\nDe regelmatig terugkerende opmerkingen van Anne over schieten, sirenes en alarmeringen zijn waar mogelijk vergeleken met de luchtgevaarmeldingen die in het Amsterdamse politiearchief zijn bewaard. Een aantal in het oog lopende gevallen van ‘luchtgevaar’ is hier weergegeven.
\r\n\r\nIn geval van luchtalarm is een ieder verplicht naar de dichtstbijzijnde schuilkelder te gaan of op andere wijze dekking te zoeken.“Bij luchtalarm [...] van de straat!”, Nieuws van den Dag, 13 september 1940. In de ochtend van 6 juli 1942 is er geen luchtalarm, wat voor de Franks op weg naar de Prinsengracht een ernstige complicatie zou hebben betekend.
\r\n\r\nMet ingang van 10 juli 1943 introduceerde Rauter een ‘vooralarm’, dat aangaf dat geallieerde vliegtuigen het Nederlandse luchtruim binnenkwamen zonder dat direct bomaanvallen waren te verwachten. Het signaal droeg de benaming “waarschuwing luchtgevaar”.[21] Een week of twee later noemt Anne in de B-versie het gebruik van dit vooralarm als ze schrijft over de luchtaanvallen op de Fokker-fabriek in Amsterdam-Noord.[22] De herhaaldelijke alarmeringen die ze die dag in haar in retrospectief geschreven B-notitie opsomt, stemmen overeen met de alarmeringen die de politie in haar register noteert.[23] Dat maakt aannemelijk dat ze voor deze B-notitie haar originele - en verdwenen - notities uit juli ’43 gebruikte.
\r\n\r\nIn maart 1944 kwam een bommenwerper neer op een school in de Spaarndammerstraat, op nog geen anderhalve kilometer van het Achterhuis.[24] Tijdens het luchtgevecht waar Anne op 3 mei 1944 getuige van was, stortte een vliegtuig in de Van Bossestraat neer.[25] Dit was ook op korte afstand van het Achterhuis. Ook in Tuindorp Oostzaan en de Grote IJpolder kwamen die dag vliegtuigen neer.[26] Ten slotte stortte er eind april ook nog een vliegtuig neer op het Carlton Hotel.[25]
\r\n\r\nVerwant aan de gevaren vanuit de lucht en van afweergeschut was de dreiging van oorlogshandelingen en evacuaties in het westen van Nederland. Anne schrijft begin ‘44 uitvoerig over de discussies tussen onderduikers en helpers als dit gevaar concrete vormen dreigt aan te nemen.[27]
\r\n\r\nDe onderduikers waeen erg bezig met hun veiligheid. Ze hadden allerlei afspraken en regelingen om te voorkomen dat ze de aandacht op zich zouden vestigen. Hoewel het handhaven af en toe verslapte, hielden ze zich daar redelijk aan. Op sommige gevaren hadden zij noch de helpers enige invloed: tegen vallende bommen of neerstortende vliegtuigen was uiteraard geen kruid gewassen. Er zijn geen redenen om te vermoeden dat laksheid of onderschatting van de veiligheidsmaatregelen aan de uiteindelijke arrestatie hebben bijgedragen.
\r\n\r\nStaying unnoticed in the Secret Annex was threatened in several ways. Besides the chance that unwitting visitors or neighbours of the building might notice something, there was the possibility of burglars, fire in or near the building, light escaping and airborne threats. The people in hiding and the helpers were very alert to risky situations and did a lot to avoid risks.
\r\n\r\nEspecially in the early days, Anne repeatedly expressed her fear of outsiders in the building. In some cases these were strangers, but certainly not always. The sales representatives, pharmacist Arthur Lewinsohn, the accountant and some warehouse men were more or less acquaintances. The plumber, the cleaner, the carpenter and the other warehouse men were strangers to the people in hiding - as far as we know. The acquaintances also posed a threat in Anne's eyes. There was unease when Ans Broks said that she wanted to come to the office for coffee every day at two o'clock.[1] From time to time, Anne's diary provides clues showing that the people in hiding also took into account the possibility that people living or working in neighbouring premises would discover their presence.
\r\n\r\nOne morning, when Peter van Pels had forgotten to open the bolt on the inside of the street door, Victor Kugler and the warehousemen could not get in. Kugler had to go through the premises of wholesaler Keg on Prinsengracht 265 and only just managed to prevent one of the neighbours from climbing in via a ladder.[2]
\r\n\r\nSeveral break-ins and attempted break-ins are referred to in Anne's diaries and narratives. Brother and sister Wijnberg, who lived at Prinsengracht 251 during the period in hiding, said in an interview that they had been in the building as children on 24 March 1943 and had stolen muscatel nuts there.[3] Anne writes a day later about her first encounter with the phenomenon of burglars.[4] The break-in of 9 April 1944 is also confirmed by a police report, when the passing night watchman Martonus Slegers noticed the kicked-in door.[5] The B-version mentions a burglary on the night of 15-16 July 1943. According to the same passage, there had also been an unsuccessful attempt six weeks earlier.[6] In the A-version, Anne writes about a thief who may have entered with a false key, or at least nothing could be seen on the outside door.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe wider area, of course, also had to deal with crime. At Keg at Prinsengracht 265, police reports do not reveal any burglaries during the hiding period, but according to the 1963 official report of the National Criminal Investigation Department, there were burglaries. According to the State Investigation Department, by necessity, staff were even regularly present at night.[8] The daughter of branch manager Jacob Boon knew that her father spent the night in his office more than once during the war years.[9] In the night of 7-8 April 1943, burglars broke into Elhoek furniture factory at number 261 and stole six hundred guilders and a typewriter.[10] In November 1941, a coin meter of the Municipal Energy Company (GEB) had also been emptied there.[11] A few years earlier, the contents of a coin meter in the later Opekta premises had also been stolen by burglars.[12] Given GEB's policy in the 'small business' market, it was highly plausible that that meter had stayed behind after Opekta's arrival in the late 1940s.[13] Theft from coin meters was a very common phenomenon. So the presence of such meters certainly posed an additional risk.
\r\n\r\nJohannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler reported no burglaries or thefts on their premises during the period in hiding, as far as can be verified. Then, in January 1945, Johan Broks - Kugler was still in prison at the time - reported the theft of seventy kilos of sugar from Gies & Co.[14]
\r\n\r\nBuilding plans for Elhoek's premises at Prinsengracht 261, made in June 1940, show that people there were working with flammable materials and techniques, as they included extensive recommendations on self-closing doors, escape routes and a fire-extinguishing riser.[15] In the Opekta premises, fire hazards were also taken into account. A few months before going into hiding, there was a small fire when packaging material lying too close to a stove caught fire.[16] There were 'Minimax' appliances in several places. One was mounted on the landing in front of the bookcase. That location was 'peripheral' from a company point of view, and might have been chosen with the people in hiding in mind: outside the bookcase, allowing periodic maintenance to take place without problems - at least in theory. In the B-version of the diary, Anne writes, with the date 20 October 1942, that they 'got' these devices in the house, which she later changes to 'have'. It is therefore possible that they were fitted in the autumn of 1942, but there is no clarity on this.
\r\n\r\nDue to war conditions, strict blackout measures applied. Users of residential and other buildings were obliged to take measures to prevent light escaping between sunset and sunrise. In winter, curtains had to remain closed for up to 14 hours a day.[17] Police and Air Protection were quick to take action against violators. In the evening of 4 March 1941, officers kicked in the entrance door of the Opekta premises because a light was on in the hall.[18] Of course, when the period of hiding began, the people in hiding and helpers had not yet forgotten this. Anne's writings often refer to the closing and opening of the blackout curtains.[19] During the 1958 restoration, many window frames were replaced. However, some original frames from the Van Pels room are still in the museum collection, and the added constructions for blackout curtains are still attached.[20]
\r\n\r\nAnne's frequent comments on shots, sirens and alarms have been compared, where possible, with the air hazard reports preserved in the Amsterdam police archives. A few significant instances of 'air hazard' are shown here.
\r\n\r\nIn the event of an air siren, everyone was obliged to go to the nearest shelter or otherwise take cover. "If the air siren sounds [...] get off the streets!", Nieuws van den Dag, 13 September 1940. On the morning of 6 July 1942, there was no air siren, which would have meant a serious complication for the Franks on their way to Prinsengracht.
\r\n\r\nStarting on 10 July 1943, Rauter introduced an 'pre-alarm', which indicated that Allied aircraft were entering Dutch airspace without any immediate bomb attacks being expected. The alert was designated an 'air hazard warning'.[21] A week or two later, Anne mentions the use of this pre-alarm in the B-version when she writes about the air attacks on the Fokker factory in Amsterdam-Noord.[22] The repeated alarms she lists in her retrospectively written B note that day correspond to the alarms noted by the police in their register.[23] This makes it plausible that she used her original - and vanished - notes from July 1943 for this B note.
\r\n\r\nIn March 1944, a bomber crashed into a school in Spaarndammerstraat, less than one and a half kilometres from the Secret Annex.[24] During the air battle Anne witnessed on 3 May 1944, a plane crashed in Van Bossestraat.[25] This was also a short distance from the Secret Annex. Planes also crashed in Tuindorp Oostzaan and Grote IJpolder that day.[26] Finally, a plane also crashed into the Carlton Hotel at the end of April.[25]
\r\n\r\nRelated to the dangers from the air and from anti-aircraft guns was the threat of acts of war and evacuations in the west of the Netherlands. Anne writes at length in early 1944 about the discussions between the people in hiding and the helpers when this danger threatened to take concrete forms.[27]
\r\n\r\nThe people in hiding were very concerned with their safety. They had all kinds of agreements and arrangements to avoid drawing attention to themselves. Although compliance slackened from time to time, they kept them reasonably well. Neither they nor the people helping them had any control over some dangers: there was obviously nothing they could have done about falling bombs or crashing aircraft. There are no reasons to suspect that laxity or underestimation of security measures contributed to their eventual arrest.
\r\n\r\nThe objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","description_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.
","description_en":"The objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","summary":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","summary_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.","summary_en":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2210"],"parent":null,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a699d98a-eab0-4e27-a4a1-f2c76df56892","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04bc398b-9132-421d-be07-26d89aecf727","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e81eeb71-37e6-4299-9a32-d4d419af2117","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84898f4e-5c32-47d1-bff4-d377c343c5b2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5e6e4c0b-e255-4b81-9abc-a8b22fd9d87c","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/17e62508-f7db-41ee-bf60-e7f87d4dd63c","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2aaa7b1a-46b7-49f3-9908-dd3a35052bd6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fca17b8f-5066-4200-a73e-76bccc6ef720","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1a319571-a93e-4566-9396-a4d6e61833ed","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/41740528-a1d2-4a88-8b7c-c78e01a8ee6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aedb3425-3b2c-4479-9d12-9ff63918c0b7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/ea19e0cf-5fd7-4bb6-9dd9-63c328018639","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4caabcc8-204b-438d-915c-1e6ea54630bb","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/83d54925-63d3-43a3-9f96-a9535224eb3d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0f90d12e-14ef-4acb-b44f-c3692319565a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6e7854d3-c834-44c4-9129-c742ff899d22","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0cfff667-b7b7-42e2-b01b-848d60758275","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/18a78a8e-12a1-4e8c-b38f-20ab70ff1da5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f2e450aa-840f-4dd8-84cf-548ce515e6d0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ce70ffc-474f-4743-a9a8-dd4ed4e59c77","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/56d301cf-e04e-47fd-884b-6685a83f00b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa46b11f-7c2b-4fbc-ac9b-82fb58e805a6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/22e16ce9-e2a5-476f-b517-7e48026e719e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f9bad9c3-50bb-41b5-b528-74c36e40d028","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6b0dbaa0-4815-4f3e-ab1c-e0ee6196188e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c885285f-6d92-48fc-817f-543f6f20f9bf","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c893854-c6f4-4ec1-8bc7-3f53d91174cc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/19fd3ff2-9edf-450d-8b63-bba458913e9f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/45c5caab-86df-4b28-91ba-f2d9fd02d20e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/ce8468a7-c299-43c3-a730-4b3009a56059","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a4257fc0-726f-49b3-9912-80a4aacbacbb","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bc55a0-7741-4259-a387-42959e20d899","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/caa75771-165a-46ed-a848-c3a9df9eb52c","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/ceacea5d-5d1a-4618-9cdc-de7c26765040","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f0eef6aa-3307-4bab-899c-0d69504e3eb0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6e696049-a72e-459b-beba-e66fc4cbf66f"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/6ef7b88e-bdae-4edb-8265-23201452f19b/","published":true,"name":"Elhoek","name_nl":"Elhoek, Firma","name_en":"Elhoek","uuid":"6ef7b88e-bdae-4edb-8265-23201452f19b","content":"Address: Prinsengracht 261, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe company was located in the neighbouring building at Prinsengracht 263. Elhoek was also a leather goods manufacturer.[2] The name was a combination of the names of business partners Van Elburg and Hoekstra. The workshops were on the second and third floors. When the weather was nice, the staff sometimes ate on the roof at lunchtime. They sometimes heard voices and therefore knew that there were people in the Secret Annex. However, they did not realize that these were people in hiding and they thought that the part of the building belonged to the Keg Tea and Coffee company.[3]
\r\n\r\nHendrik Johan van Elburg, one of the business partners, reported that intruders had stolen an amount of six hundred guilders and a typewriter from the company during the night of 7-8 April 1943.[4]
\r\n\r\nAdres: Prinsengracht 261, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nDe firma was gevestid in het buurpand van Prinsengracht 263. Elhoek was ook lederwarenfabrikant.[2] De naam was een samentrekking van de namen Van Elburg en Hoekstra. De werkplaatsen waren op de tweede en derde verdieping. Het personeel at bij mooi weer tussen de middag wel eens in de dakgoot. Ze hoorden soms stemmen en wisten daardoor dat er mensen in het Achterhuis waren. Ze realiseerden zich echter niet dat het hier om onderduikers ging en ze dachten dat het deel van het pand van de firma Keg Thee en Koffie was.[3]
\r\n\r\nFirmant Hendrik Johan van Elburg meldde dat insluipers in de nacht van 7 op 8 april 1943 een bedrag van zeshonderd gulden en een schrijfmachine uit het bedrijf hadden gestolen.[4]
\r\n\r\nAddress: Prinsengracht 261, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe company was located in the neighbouring building at Prinsengracht 263. Elhoek was also a leather goods manufacturer.[2] The name was a combination of the names of business partners Van Elburg and Hoekstra. The workshops were on the second and third floors. When the weather was nice, the staff sometimes ate on the roof at lunchtime. They sometimes heard voices and therefore knew that there were people in the Secret Annex. However, they did not realize that these were people in hiding and they thought that the part of the building belonged to the Keg Tea and Coffee company.[3]
\r\n\r\nHendrik Johan van Elburg, one of the business partners, reported that intruders had stolen an amount of six hundred guilders and a typewriter from the company during the night of 7-8 April 1943.[4]
\r\n\r\nOn the night of 11 to 12 January 1943, unknown persons broke the cellar lock and made off with 24 cases of wine. Six hundred bottles in all, which, according to the owner, represented a total value of nine thousand guilders. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller reported the theft to the Marnixstraat police station on the afternoon of 12 January 1943. The 'atelier' was also notified, meaning that the criminal investigation department started looking for fingerprints and other traces at the scene.[1] It is not known to what extent the criminal investigation extended to the surrounding area.
\r\n\r\nIn de nacht van 11 op 12 januari 1943 braken onbekenden het kelderslot open en verdwenen met 24 kisten wijn. Bij elkaar ging het om zeshonderd flessen, die volgens de eigenaar een totale waarde van negenduizend gulden vertegenwoordigden. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller deed er in de middag van 12 januari op bureau Marnixstraat aangifte van. Ook werd het 'atelier' ingelicht, wat betekent dat de recherche er naar vingerafdrukken en andere sporen ging zoeken.[1] In hoeverre het rechercheonderzoek zich tot de omgeving uitstrekte is niet bekend.
\r\n\r\nOn the night of 11 to 12 January 1943, unknown persons broke the cellar lock and made off with 24 cases of wine. Six hundred bottles in all, which, according to the owner, represented a total value of nine thousand guilders. Hotelier Friedrich Schiller reported the theft to the Marnixstraat police station on the afternoon of 12 January 1943. The 'atelier' was also notified, meaning that the criminal investigation department started looking for fingerprints and other traces at the scene.[1] It is not known to what extent the criminal investigation extended to the surrounding area.
\r\n\r\n