HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"next": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/search?format=api&page=111",
"previous": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/search?format=api&page=109",
"count": 1105,
"total": 1105,
"language": "en",
"results": [
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124489,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/95162891-ff56-4031-82e5-c2941fe6f240/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "95162891-ff56-4031-82e5-c2941fe6f240",
"name": "Politieke Recherche Afdeling (Political Detective Agency)",
"name_nl": "Politieke Recherche Afdeling",
"name_en": "Politieke Recherche Afdeling (Political Detective Agency)",
"description": "<p>The <em>Politieke Recherche Afdeling</em> (PRA; Political Detective Agency ) was engaged in tracking down political offenders. In the first period just after liberation, this was done by the <em>Politieke Opsporingsdienst</em> (POD; Political Investigation Service). In <strong>March 1946</strong> the PRA took over that responsibility.<sup data-footnote-id=\"3993d\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>The Amsterdam PRA was located in the Hirsch building on Leidseplein. In <strong>July 1947</strong>, Johannes Kleiman wrote to the director mr. J.P. Engels informing him of the raid on the Prinsengracht 263 building on <strong>August 4, 1944</strong>, and asking him to take up the matter 'one more time'.<sup data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> The PRA made an official report against warehouseman Willem van Maaren.<sup data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>January 1, 1948</strong>, the PRA became part of the Metropolitan Police. During its existence, the service compiled 47,000 files in Amsterdam.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"3993d\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jan Kompagnie (eindred.), <em>De oorlogsgids. Met antwoorden op de 25 meest gestelde vragen over de oorlogsarchieven van het Nationaal Archief, </em>Den Haag: Nationaal Archief, 2005, p. 175-176.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), inv. nr. 23892: Johannes Kleiman aan Politieke Recherche Afdelng Amsterdam, 16 juli 1947.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>"Geen 'politieke recherche' meer", <em>De Telegraaf</em>, 3 november 1949.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>De Politieke Recherche Afdeling (PRA) hield zich bezig met het opsporen van politieke delinquenten. In de eerste periode na de bevrijding gebeurde dat door de Politieke Opsporingsdienst (POD). In <strong>maart ’46</strong> nam de PRA die taak over.<sup data-footnote-id=\"3993d\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>De Amsterdamse PRA was gevestigd in het Hirsch-gebouw aan het Leidseplein. In <strong>juli ‘47</strong> gaf Johannes Kleiman het hoofd mr. J.P. Engels schriftelijk inlichtingen over de inval in het pand Prinsengracht 263 op <strong>4 augustus 1944</strong>, en verzocht hem de zaak'nog eens' ter hand te nemen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> De PRA maakte een proces-verbaal op tegen magazijnknecht Willem van Maaren.<sup data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Op <strong>1 januari 1948 </strong>werd de PRA onderdeel van de hoofdstedelijke politie. Tijdens zijn bestaan stelde de dienst in Amsterdam 47.000 dossiers samen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"3993d\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jan Kompagnie (eindred.), <em>De oorlogsgids. Met antwoorden op de 25 meest gestelde vragen over de oorlogsarchieven van het Nationaal Archief, </em>Den Haag: Nationaal Archief, 2005, p. 175-176.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), inv. nr. 23892: Johannes Kleiman aan Politieke Recherche Afdelng Amsterdam, 16 juli 1947.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>"Geen 'politieke recherche' meer", <em>De Telegraaf</em>, 3 november 1949.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>The <em>Politieke Recherche Afdeling</em> (PRA; Political Detective Agency ) was engaged in tracking down political offenders. In the first period just after liberation, this was done by the <em>Politieke Opsporingsdienst</em> (POD; Political Investigation Service). In <strong>March 1946</strong> the PRA took over that responsibility.<sup data-footnote-id=\"3993d\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>The Amsterdam PRA was located in the Hirsch building on Leidseplein. In <strong>July 1947</strong>, Johannes Kleiman wrote to the director mr. J.P. Engels informing him of the raid on the Prinsengracht 263 building on <strong>August 4, 1944</strong>, and asking him to take up the matter 'one more time'.<sup data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> The PRA made an official report against warehouseman Willem van Maaren.<sup data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>January 1, 1948</strong>, the PRA became part of the Metropolitan Police. During its existence, the service compiled 47,000 files in Amsterdam.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"3993d\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jan Kompagnie (eindred.), <em>De oorlogsgids. Met antwoorden op de 25 meest gestelde vragen over de oorlogsarchieven van het Nationaal Archief, </em>Den Haag: Nationaal Archief, 2005, p. 175-176.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"u17yj\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), inv. nr. 23892: Johannes Kleiman aan Politieke Recherche Afdelng Amsterdam, 16 juli 1947.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"b1y8i\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8x4i9\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>"Geen 'politieke recherche' meer", <em>De Telegraaf</em>, 3 november 1949.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "De Politieke Recherche Afdeling hield zich bezig met het opsporen van politieke delinquenten.",
"summary_nl": "De Politieke Recherche Afdeling hield zich bezig met het opsporen van politieke delinquenten.",
"summary_en": "",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/corporaties/4998"
],
"parent": 396124654,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124423,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/3684c3f2-ba86-43cb-a9ed-73e6ec6c6189/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "3684c3f2-ba86-43cb-a9ed-73e6ec6c6189",
"name": "Auschwitz-Birkenau: the women in the Durchgangslager",
"name_nl": "Auschwitz-Birkenau: de vrouwen in het Durchgangslager",
"name_en": "Auschwitz-Birkenau: the women in the Durchgangslager",
"description": "<p>Little is known about the time in Auschwitz of the women from the Secret Annex. The camp records are almost entirely lost. What we do know comes from various witnesses who stayed with Anne, Margot, Edith Frank and Auguste van Pels in Auschwitz-Birkenau.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Huts</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Bloeme Emden and Lenie de Jong-van Naarden formed a close-knit group in Auschwitz-Birkenau along with a dozen other Dutch women. They also had contact there with Anne, Margot and Edith. According to Bloeme, Anne, Margot and Edith formed an '<em>inseparable trinity</em>'.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> In hut 29, Anne, Margot and Edith were said to have shared a bed together.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Auguste van Pels also stayed in hut 29, but little is known about her stay there.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>How long the women were in the quarantine hut, we do not know. Indeed, according to witnesses, Anne and Margot ended up in the <em>Krätzeblock</em>: the hut for scabies sufferers and other sick people. Lenie de Jong-van Naarden remembered that it was actually Margot who had to be admitted, but that Anne wanted to stay with her sister and therefore went with her.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o762y\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Conditions in the scabies hut were appalling and many sick people were abandoned to their fate there. To help her daughters in the <em>Krätzeblock</em>, Edith Frank, together with Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester (the mother of Frieda Brommet, who was also in the scabies hut) and Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, dug a hole somewhere along the side of the hut to give food to the children.<sup data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In addition, Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester and Edith Frank were said to have hidden in order to avoid being taken on a transport and thus continue to care for their children. Frieda Brommet recalled:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>'They dug a hole together. (...) and one day my mother came and she could also speak through that hole, and she said, she would shout, 'Frieda! Frieda!' [...] And said: 'Mrs Frank and I are the only ones here in the camp now. We have been hiding because the group has gone on transport. But we hid because we wanted to stay with you. And we stole some bread and I am giving it to you now through the hole and you have to share it between the four of you.' And that four was with Margot and Anne.'<sup data-footnote-id=\"725df\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></blockquote>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Selections</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>When Anne and Margot were discharged from the scabies hut is unclear. What we do know is that Anne, Margot and Auguste were selected for work in Bergen-Belsen on the evening of <strong>30 October 1944</strong>.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Rosa de Winter-Levy was also in hut 29 with the Frank women. She wrote about her friendship with Edith Frank and her daughters in her book <em>Escaped the Gas Chamber! </em>in August 1945. She later recounted the selection of Anne and Margot in an interview with Ernst Schnabel:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>'Again Blocksperre, but this time we had to wait naked on the roll call court, and it took a very long time (...) And then it was the two girls' turn: Anne and Margot. And Anne stood with her face even still under the spotlight and nudged Margot. And Margot stood upright in the light and there they stood for a moment. Naked and bare. And Anne looked at us with her bright face as she stood upright, and then they went. What happened behind the spotlight could no longer be seen. And Mrs Frank screamed, "The children! Oh God..."'<sup data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup></blockquote>\r\n\r\n<p>The more than a thousand selected women were locked in a hut until the transport left on<strong> 1 November 1944</strong>. The women who had not been selected, such as Rosa de Winter-Levy and Edith Frank, were locked in a hut in the <em>B-Lager</em> and transferred two days later to the <em>A-Lager</em> - the part where the infirmary huts were located - obviously to be murdered soon. Several selections for transport followed, which Edith and Rosa did not pass, but with the help of the <em>Blockälteste</em> they managed to escape gassing.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>However, it was not long until Edith Frank was so ill that she was admitted to the infirmary hut. Some time later, Rosa also became so ill that she was put in the <em>Durchfallblock</em> (for diarhoea sufferers). One day there, she saw Edith Frank being brought into her hut. 'One morning new patients came in. Suddenly I recognise Edith, she comes from another ward. She is just a ghost. A few days later she dies, totally exhausted.'<sup data-footnote-id=\"rilye\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<div>\r\n<div>\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), Getuigenarchief, interview Bloeme Evers-Emden, 11 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, 250d, Kampen en gevangenissen, inv.nr. 583, I. Salomon. Ook andere vertelden hierover: Bloeme Evers-Emden, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef, Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, Frieda Menco-Brommet, Anita Mayer-Roos.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o762y\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, 22 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ook Frieda’s moeder Rebecca Brommet-Ritmeester overleefde de Holocaust. AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Frieda Menco-Brommet, 12 februari 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"725df\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, Getuigenarchief. De getuigenissen hierover van Frieda Menco-Brommet, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef en Lenie de Jong-van Naarden hebben allemaal dezelfde strekking en wijken slechts in enkele kleine details van elkaar af.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Origineel citaat: ‘Wieder Blocksperre, aber diesmal mussten wir nackt auf dem Apellplatz warten, und es dauerte sehr lange. (…) Und dann kamen die beiden Mädchen an die Reihe: Anne und Margot. Und An[1]ne hatte ihr Gesicht, sogar unter dem Scheinwerfer noch, und sie stieß Margot an, und Margot ging aufrecht ins Licht, und da standen sie einen Augenblick, nackt und kahl, und Anne sah zu uns herüber, mit ihrem ungetrübten Gesicht und gerade, und dann gingen sie. Was hinter dem Scheinwerfer war, war nicht mehr zu sehen. Und Frau Frank schrie: Die Kinder! O Gott...’ In: Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank, Spur eines Kindes. Ein Bericht</em>, Frankfurt/Main, 1958, p. 138-139.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie: Bas von Benda-Beckmann, <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderduikers in de kampen, </em>Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p.211-214.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rilye\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Rosa de Winter-Levy, <em>Aan de gaskamer ontsnapt! Het satanswerk van de S.S.: relaas van het lijden in de bevrijding uit het concentratiekamp "Birkenau" bij Auschwitz</em>, Doetinchem: Misset, 1945, 29. Zelf zou Rosa de Winter-Levy Auschwitz ternauwernood overleven.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>\r\n</div>\r\n</div>",
"description_nl": "<p>Over het verblijf van de vrouwelijke onderduikers in Auschwitz is weinig bekend. De kampadministratie is bijna geheel verloren gegaan. Wat we wel weten is afkomstig van verschillende getuigen die samen met Anne, Margot, Edith Frank en Auguste van Pels in Auschwitz-Birkenau verbleven.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Barakken</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Bloeme Emden en Lenie de Jong-van Naarden vormden samen met een tiental andere Nederlandse vrouwen een hecht groepje in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Ook hadden ze daar contact met Anne, Margot en Edith. Volgens Bloeme vormden Anne, Margot en Edith een ‘<em>onafscheidelijke drie-eenheid</em>’.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> In barak 29 zouden Anne, Margot en Edith samen een bed hebben gedeeld.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Ook Auguste van Pels verbleef in barak 29, maar over haar verblijf daar is weinig bekend.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Hoe lang de vrouwen in de quarantainebarak zaten, weten we niet. Volgens getuigenissen kwamen Anne en Margot namelijk in het <em>Krätzeblock</em> terecht: de barak voor schurftlijders en andere zieken. Lenie de Jong-van Naarden herinnerde zich dat het eigenlijk Margot was die moest worden opgenomen, maar dat Anne bij haar zus wilde blijven en daarom met haar meeging.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o762y\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> De omstandigheden in de schurftbarak waren erbarmelijk en veel zieken werden aan hun lot overgelaten. Om haar dochters in het <em>Krätzeblock </em>te helpen groef Edith Frank samen met Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester (de moeder van Frieda Brommet, die ook in de schurftbarak lag) en Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, ergens aan de zijkant van de barak een gat om eten aan de kinderen te geven.<sup data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Bovendien zouden Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester en Edith Frank zich hebben verstopt om niet mee te hoeven op transport en zo voor hun kinderen te kunnen blijven zorgen. Frieda Brommet herinnerde zich:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>\r\n<p>'Ze hebben samen een gat gegraven. (…) en op een dag kwam mijn moeder en die kon ook spreken door dat gat, en die zei, die riep dan: ‘Frieda! Frieda!’ […] En zei: ‘Mevrouw Frank en ik zijn de enigen die nu hier in het kamp zijn. We hebben ons verstopt want de groep is op transport gegaan. Maar wij hebben ons verstopt, want we wilden bij jullie blijven. En we hebben wat brood gestolen en dat geef ik nu aan door het gat en dat moeten jullie maar met z’n vieren delen.’ En met z’n vieren was met Margot en Anne.'<sup data-footnote-id=\"725df\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n</blockquote>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Selecties</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Wanneer Anne en Margot weer uit de schurftbarak kwamen is onduidelijk. Wat we wel weten is dat Anne, Margot en Auguste op de avond van <strong>30 oktober 1944</strong> geselecteerd werden voor tewerkstelling in Bergen-Belsen.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Ook Rosa de Winter-Levy zat met de vrouwen Frank in barak 29. Ze schreef in augustus 1945 in haar boek <em>Aan de gaskamer ontsnapt! </em>over haar vriendschap met Edith Frank en haar dochters. Later vertelde ze in een interview met Ernst Schnabel over de selectie van Anne en Margot:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>\r\n<p>'Opnieuw Blocksperre, maar ditmaal moesten we naakt op de appelplaats wachten, en het duurde heel lang. (…) En toen kwamen de beide meisjes aan de beurt: Anne en Margot. En Anne stond met haar gezicht zelfs nog onder de schijnwerper en stootte Margot aan. En Margot ging rechtop in het licht staan en daar stonden ze een ogenblik. Naakt en kaal. En Anne keek naar ons met haar heldere gezicht, terwijl ze rechtop stond, en toen gingen ze. Wat achter de schijnwerper gebeurde was niet meer te zien. En mevrouw Frank schreeuwde: "De kinderen! O God..."’<sup data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup></p>\r\n</blockquote>\r\n\r\n<p>De meer dan duizend geselecteerde vrouwen werden in een barak opgesloten totdat het transport op<strong> 1 november 1944</strong> vertrok. De niet-geselecteerde vrouwen, zoals Rosa de Winter-Levy en Edith Frank, werden opgesloten in een barak in het <em>B-Lager</em> en twee dagen later overgebracht naar het <em>A-Lager</em> – het deel waar de ziekenbarakken stonden – duidelijk om binnenkort te worden vermoord. Er volgenden verschillende selecties voor transport, waar Edith en Rosa niet doorheen kwamen, maar met behulp van de Blockälteste wisten ze aan vergassing te ontkomen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Het duurde echter niet lang tot Edith Frank zo ziek was dat ze in de ziekenbarak werd opgenomen. Enige tijd later werd ook Rosa zo ziek dat ze in het Durchfallblock (voor diareepatienten) terecht kwam. Op een dag zag zij daar hoe Edith Frank haar barak werd binnengebracht. ‘Op een morgen komen nieuwe patiënten binnen. Ineens herken ik Edith, zij komt uit een andere ziekenafdeling. Zij is nog maar een schim. Enkele dagen nadien sterft zij, totaal uitgeput.’<sup data-footnote-id=\"rilye\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<div>\r\n<div>\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), Getuigenarchief, interview Bloeme Evers-Emden, 11 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, 250d, Kampen en gevangenissen, inv.nr. 583, I. Salomon. Ook andere vertelden hierover: Bloeme Evers-Emden, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef, Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, Frieda Menco-Brommet, Anita Mayer-Roos.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o762y\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, 22 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ook Frieda’s moeder Rebecca Brommet-Ritmeester overleefde de Holocaust. AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Frieda Menco-Brommet, 12 februari 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"725df\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, Getuigenarchief. De getuigenissen hierover van Frieda Menco-Brommet, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef en Lenie de Jong-van Naarden hebben allemaal dezelfde strekking en wijken slechts in enkele kleine details van elkaar af.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Origineel citaat: ‘Wieder Blocksperre, aber diesmal mussten wir nackt auf dem Apellplatz warten, und es dauerte sehr lange. (…) Und dann kamen die beiden Mädchen an die Reihe: Anne und Margot. Und An[1]ne hatte ihr Gesicht, sogar unter dem Scheinwerfer noch, und sie stieß Margot an, und Margot ging aufrecht ins Licht, und da standen sie einen Augenblick, nackt und kahl, und Anne sah zu uns herüber, mit ihrem ungetrübten Gesicht und gerade, und dann gingen sie. Was hinter dem Scheinwerfer war, war nicht mehr zu sehen. Und Frau Frank schrie: Die Kinder! O Gott...’ In: Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank, Spur eines Kindes. Ein Bericht</em>, Frankfurt/Main, 1958, p. 138-139.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie: Bas von Benda-Beckmann, <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderduikers in de kampen, </em>Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p.211-214.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rilye\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Rosa de Winter-Levy, <em>Aan de gaskamer ontsnapt! Het satanswerk van de S.S.: relaas van het lijden in de bevrijding uit het concentratiekamp "Birkenau" bij Auschwitz</em>, Doetinchem: Misset, 1945, 29. Zelf zou Rosa de Winter-Levy Auschwitz ternauwernood overleven.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>\r\n</div>\r\n</div>",
"description_en": "<p>Little is known about the time in Auschwitz of the women from the Secret Annex. The camp records are almost entirely lost. What we do know comes from various witnesses who stayed with Anne, Margot, Edith Frank and Auguste van Pels in Auschwitz-Birkenau.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Huts</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Bloeme Emden and Lenie de Jong-van Naarden formed a close-knit group in Auschwitz-Birkenau along with a dozen other Dutch women. They also had contact there with Anne, Margot and Edith. According to Bloeme, Anne, Margot and Edith formed an '<em>inseparable trinity</em>'.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> In hut 29, Anne, Margot and Edith were said to have shared a bed together.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Auguste van Pels also stayed in hut 29, but little is known about her stay there.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>How long the women were in the quarantine hut, we do not know. Indeed, according to witnesses, Anne and Margot ended up in the <em>Krätzeblock</em>: the hut for scabies sufferers and other sick people. Lenie de Jong-van Naarden remembered that it was actually Margot who had to be admitted, but that Anne wanted to stay with her sister and therefore went with her.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o762y\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Conditions in the scabies hut were appalling and many sick people were abandoned to their fate there. To help her daughters in the <em>Krätzeblock</em>, Edith Frank, together with Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester (the mother of Frieda Brommet, who was also in the scabies hut) and Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, dug a hole somewhere along the side of the hut to give food to the children.<sup data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In addition, Rebbeca Brommet-Ritmeester and Edith Frank were said to have hidden in order to avoid being taken on a transport and thus continue to care for their children. Frieda Brommet recalled:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>'They dug a hole together. (...) and one day my mother came and she could also speak through that hole, and she said, she would shout, 'Frieda! Frieda!' [...] And said: 'Mrs Frank and I are the only ones here in the camp now. We have been hiding because the group has gone on transport. But we hid because we wanted to stay with you. And we stole some bread and I am giving it to you now through the hole and you have to share it between the four of you.' And that four was with Margot and Anne.'<sup data-footnote-id=\"725df\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></blockquote>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Selections</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>When Anne and Margot were discharged from the scabies hut is unclear. What we do know is that Anne, Margot and Auguste were selected for work in Bergen-Belsen on the evening of <strong>30 October 1944</strong>.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Rosa de Winter-Levy was also in hut 29 with the Frank women. She wrote about her friendship with Edith Frank and her daughters in her book <em>Escaped the Gas Chamber! </em>in August 1945. She later recounted the selection of Anne and Margot in an interview with Ernst Schnabel:</p>\r\n\r\n<blockquote>'Again Blocksperre, but this time we had to wait naked on the roll call court, and it took a very long time (...) And then it was the two girls' turn: Anne and Margot. And Anne stood with her face even still under the spotlight and nudged Margot. And Margot stood upright in the light and there they stood for a moment. Naked and bare. And Anne looked at us with her bright face as she stood upright, and then they went. What happened behind the spotlight could no longer be seen. And Mrs Frank screamed, "The children! Oh God..."'<sup data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup></blockquote>\r\n\r\n<p>The more than a thousand selected women were locked in a hut until the transport left on<strong> 1 November 1944</strong>. The women who had not been selected, such as Rosa de Winter-Levy and Edith Frank, were locked in a hut in the <em>B-Lager</em> and transferred two days later to the <em>A-Lager</em> - the part where the infirmary huts were located - obviously to be murdered soon. Several selections for transport followed, which Edith and Rosa did not pass, but with the help of the <em>Blockälteste</em> they managed to escape gassing.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>However, it was not long until Edith Frank was so ill that she was admitted to the infirmary hut. Some time later, Rosa also became so ill that she was put in the <em>Durchfallblock</em> (for diarhoea sufferers). One day there, she saw Edith Frank being brought into her hut. 'One morning new patients came in. Suddenly I recognise Edith, she comes from another ward. She is just a ghost. A few days later she dies, totally exhausted.'<sup data-footnote-id=\"rilye\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<div>\r\n<div>\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ej5op\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), Getuigenarchief, interview Bloeme Evers-Emden, 11 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eg46k\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, 250d, Kampen en gevangenissen, inv.nr. 583, I. Salomon. Ook andere vertelden hierover: Bloeme Evers-Emden, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef, Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, Frieda Menco-Brommet, Anita Mayer-Roos.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o762y\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Lenie de Jong-van Naarden, 22 maart 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"aa35f\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ook Frieda’s moeder Rebecca Brommet-Ritmeester overleefde de Holocaust. AFS, AFC, Getuigenarchief, interview Frieda Menco-Brommet, 12 februari 2010.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"725df\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, Getuigenarchief. De getuigenissen hierover van Frieda Menco-Brommet, Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef en Lenie de Jong-van Naarden hebben allemaal dezelfde strekking en wijken slechts in enkele kleine details van elkaar af.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9u98v\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Origineel citaat: ‘Wieder Blocksperre, aber diesmal mussten wir nackt auf dem Apellplatz warten, und es dauerte sehr lange. (…) Und dann kamen die beiden Mädchen an die Reihe: Anne und Margot. Und An[1]ne hatte ihr Gesicht, sogar unter dem Scheinwerfer noch, und sie stieß Margot an, und Margot ging aufrecht ins Licht, und da standen sie einen Augenblick, nackt und kahl, und Anne sah zu uns herüber, mit ihrem ungetrübten Gesicht und gerade, und dann gingen sie. Was hinter dem Scheinwerfer war, war nicht mehr zu sehen. Und Frau Frank schrie: Die Kinder! O Gott...’ In: Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank, Spur eines Kindes. Ein Bericht</em>, Frankfurt/Main, 1958, p. 138-139.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bo3vk\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie: Bas von Benda-Beckmann, <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderduikers in de kampen, </em>Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p.211-214.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rilye\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Rosa de Winter-Levy, <em>Aan de gaskamer ontsnapt! Het satanswerk van de S.S.: relaas van het lijden in de bevrijding uit het concentratiekamp "Birkenau" bij Auschwitz</em>, Doetinchem: Misset, 1945, 29. Zelf zou Rosa de Winter-Levy Auschwitz ternauwernood overleven.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>\r\n</div>\r\n</div>",
"summary": "Anne, Margot and Edith Frank and Auguste van Pels were imprisoned in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Anne, Margot and Auguste were transported back to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp after two months. Edith stayed behind and died two months later.",
"summary_nl": "Anne, Margot en Edith Frank en Auguste van Pels zaten gevangen in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Anne, Margot en Auguste gingen na twee maanden weer op transport naar concentratiekamp Bergen-Belsen. Edith bleef achter en stierf twee maanden later.",
"summary_en": "Anne, Margot and Edith Frank and Auguste van Pels were imprisoned in Auschwitz-Birkenau. Anne, Margot and Auguste were transported back to Bergen-Belsen concentration camp after two months. Edith stayed behind and died two months later.",
"same_as": null,
"parent": 396124393,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124395,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/9a6b6ce9-b049-43c0-b2da-cdd092501d17/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "9a6b6ce9-b049-43c0-b2da-cdd092501d17",
"name": "Camp Westerbork",
"name_nl": "Kamp Westerbork",
"name_en": "Camp Westerbork",
"description": "<p>Camp Westerbork was built in <strong>1939</strong> as Central Refugee Camp Westerbork. German-Jewish refugees were housed there from <strong>October 1939</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"z320c\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> After the German occupation in <strong>May 1940</strong>, the camp remained in Dutch hands, but the regime became stricter under the leadership of the new director Jacques Schol.<sup data-footnote-id=\"4o6in\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>1942</strong>, the camp was expanded by the Nazis and from <strong>1 July 1942</strong> the camp officially functioned as a <em>Polizeiliches Judendurchgangslager. </em>Jewish people were gathered in the camp and then deported to concentration camps in Eastern Europe. Thus, Camp Westerbork became part of the extensive system of German concentration camps and functioned as an important transit point for the systematic murder of Jews from the Netherlands.<sup data-footnote-id=\"fn5gd\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>8 August 1944</strong>, the eight people from the Secret Annex were also taken to Westerbork from Amsterdam. They stayed there for almost a month. On <strong>3 September 1944, </strong>they were put on a transport to Auschwitz concentration camp.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Of the 107,000 Jewish people deported from the Netherlands, only 5,000 returned alive.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"z320c\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Dick Houwaart, <em>Westerbork. Het begon in 1933 ...</em>, Den Haag: Omniboek, 1983; Dirk Mulder & Ben Prinsen (red.), <em>Uitgeweken. De voorgeschiedenis van kamp Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 1989.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"4o6in\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Bas von Benda-Beckmann <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderuikers in de kampen, </em>Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p. 69.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"fn5gd\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jacob Boas, <em>Boulevard des Misères. Het verhaal van doorgangskamp Westerbork</em>, Amsterdam: Nijgh en Van Ditmar, 1988; Willy Lindwer, <em>Kamp van hoop en wanhoop. Getuigen van Westerbork, 1939-1945</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 1990; Harm van der Veen, <em>Westerbork 1939 - 1945. Het verhaal van vluchtelingenkamp en Durchgangslager Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 2003.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Von Benda-Beckmann <em>Na het Achterhuis,</em> p. 68, 101.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>Kamp Westerbork werd in <strong>1939</strong> gebouwd als Centraal Vluchtelingenkamp Westerbork. Vanaf <strong>oktober 1939</strong> werden er Duits-Joodse vluchtelingen opgevangen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"smy6e\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Na de Duitse bezetting in <strong>mei 1940</strong>, bleef het kamp in Nederlandse handen, maar werd het regime strenger onder leiding van de nieuwe directeur Jacques Schol.<sup data-footnote-id=\"x19bc\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>1942</strong> werd het kamp door de nazi's uitgebreid en vanaf <strong>1 juli 1942</strong> functioneerde het kamp officieel een <em>Polizeiliches Judendurchgangslager </em>Joodse mensen werden in het kamp verzameld en werden vervolgens naar concentratiekampen in Oost-Europa gedeporteerd. Zo werd kamp Westerbork deel van het uitgebreide systeem van Duitse concentratiekampen en functioneerde het als belangrijk doorganspunt voor de systematische moord op de Joden uit Nederland.<sup data-footnote-id=\"k03go\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Op <strong>8 augustus 1944</strong> werden ook de acht onderduikers vanuit Amsterdam naar Westerbork gebracht. Ze verbleven er bijna een maand. Op <strong>3 september 1944 </strong>gingen zij op transport naar concentratiekamp Auschwitz.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Van de 107.000 Joodse mensen die uit Nederland gedeporteerd waren, keerden er slechts 5.000 levend terug.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"smy6e\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Dick Houwaart, <em>Westerbork. Het begon in 1933 ...</em>, Den Haag: Omniboek, 1983; Dirk Mulder & Ben Prinsen (red.), <em>Uitgeweken. De voorgeschiedenis van kamp Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 1989.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"x19bc\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Bas von Benda-Beckmann, <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderduikers in de kampen</em>, Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p. 69.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"k03go\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jacob Boas, <em>Boulevard des Misères. Het verhaal van doorgangskamp Westerbork</em>, Amsterdam: Nijgh en Van Ditmar, 1988; Willy Lindwer, <em>Kamp van hoop en wanhoop. Getuigen van Westerbork, 1939-1945</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 1990; Harm van der Veen, <em>Westerbork 1939 - 1945. Het verhaal van vluchtelingenkamp en Durchgangslager Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 2003.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Von Benda-Beckmann <em>Na het Achterhuis, </em>p. 68, 101.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>Camp Westerbork was built in <strong>1939</strong> as Central Refugee Camp Westerbork. German-Jewish refugees were housed there from <strong>October 1939</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"z320c\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> After the German occupation in <strong>May 1940</strong>, the camp remained in Dutch hands, but the regime became stricter under the leadership of the new director Jacques Schol.<sup data-footnote-id=\"4o6in\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>1942</strong>, the camp was expanded by the Nazis and from <strong>1 July 1942</strong> the camp officially functioned as a <em>Polizeiliches Judendurchgangslager. </em>Jewish people were gathered in the camp and then deported to concentration camps in Eastern Europe. Thus, Camp Westerbork became part of the extensive system of German concentration camps and functioned as an important transit point for the systematic murder of Jews from the Netherlands.<sup data-footnote-id=\"fn5gd\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>8 August 1944</strong>, the eight people from the Secret Annex were also taken to Westerbork from Amsterdam. They stayed there for almost a month. On <strong>3 September 1944, </strong>they were put on a transport to Auschwitz concentration camp.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Of the 107,000 Jewish people deported from the Netherlands, only 5,000 returned alive.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"z320c\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Dick Houwaart, <em>Westerbork. Het begon in 1933 ...</em>, Den Haag: Omniboek, 1983; Dirk Mulder & Ben Prinsen (red.), <em>Uitgeweken. De voorgeschiedenis van kamp Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 1989.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"4o6in\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Bas von Benda-Beckmann <em>Na het Achterhuis. Anne Frank en de andere onderuikers in de kampen, </em>Amsterdam: Querido, 2020, p. 69.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"fn5gd\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jacob Boas, <em>Boulevard des Misères. Het verhaal van doorgangskamp Westerbork</em>, Amsterdam: Nijgh en Van Ditmar, 1988; Willy Lindwer, <em>Kamp van hoop en wanhoop. Getuigen van Westerbork, 1939-1945</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 1990; Harm van der Veen, <em>Westerbork 1939 - 1945. Het verhaal van vluchtelingenkamp en Durchgangslager Westerbork</em>, Hooghalen: Herinneringscentrum Kamp Westerbork, 2003.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t58jf\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Von Benda-Beckmann <em>Na het Achterhuis,</em> p. 68, 101.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "Camp Westerbork was the largest German prison camp in the Netherlands.",
"summary_nl": "Kamp Westerbork was het grootste Duitse gevangenkamp in Nederland.",
"summary_en": "Camp Westerbork was the largest German prison camp in the Netherlands.",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/1983"
],
"parent": 396124393,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 192,
"image": {
"id": 960,
"uuid": "2329e575-c78d-4159-a479-53bc76b76293",
"name": "Bonnenboekje",
"title": "Bonnenboekje",
"alt": "Collectie: Anne Frank Stichting",
"url": "",
"path": "https://research.annefrank.org/media/Bonnenboekje.jpg",
"filetype": "image",
"description": "Tijdens de bezetting waren allerlei goederen 'op de bon', zodat iedereen een deel van de schaarse producten kon kopen.",
"author": "De collectie kan worden ingezet voor publiek",
"copyright": "AFS rechthebbende"
},
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/2cb4ec5b-d423-4255-8b7c-0c667a54f33c/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "2cb4ec5b-d423-4255-8b7c-0c667a54f33c",
"name": "The food supply of the Secret Annex",
"name_nl": "De voedselvoorziening van het Achterhuis",
"name_en": "The food supply of the Secret Annex",
"description": "<p>The theme of food is closely related to the topics of Rationing and Supply in general. After all, what was eaten, and how much, partly depended on these aspects. Food was not initially lacking in the Secret Annex. Sufficient food was available through regular and clandestine distribution channels.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>From <strong>8 August 1943</strong>, a 'customer loyalty' scheme for fruit and vegetables came into effect in many places, including Amsterdam. This meant that every household had to commit to a regular greengrocer for each four-week period. The latter issued a 'family card' by name and had to ensure collection of vouchers and reasonable distribution of his supply, depending on the number of family members.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> How the helpers solved this complication in practice is not known.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Vegetables and potatoes came from greengrocer Van Hoeve on Leliegracht; for bread, an arrangement was made with baker Siemons.<sup data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Meat came from a butcher in the area known to Hermann van Pels, probably - based on the menu mentioned below with 'Roastbeaf SCHOLTE' - Piet Scholte's branch on Elandsgracht.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> As time passed, difficulties arose, which had several causes. Victor Kugler wrote years later in his recollections that gradually the problems grew; food in particular became scarce.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> Austerity of meals and rations repeatedly gave rise to quarrels. Using Anne's notes and various external sources, various aspects of the issue can be well described and also explained.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Diet and its shifts</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>At the start of the hiding period, a substantial stock of food had been established, including one hundred and fifty tins of canned vegetables. Through business contacts, powdered milk, wheat starch and sugar were always available in ample quantities, with which, according to Kugler, nutritious puddings could be made.<sup data-footnote-id=\"33qes\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In the <strong>late summer and autumn of 1942,</strong> Anne writes that she and Hermann van Pels ate heavily.<sup data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> At the same time, fat rations steadily decreased in the <strong>second half of 1942</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> On <strong>7 October</strong> that year, we can read about the tensions caused by whether or not butter was spread on bread in the Secret Annex.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> At the time, the official butter/fat ration amounted to 62½ grams per person per week.<sup data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Anne reports the delivery of 135 kilos of pulses in November.<sup data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\"><a href=\"#footnote-10\" id=\"footnote-marker-10-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[10]</a></sup> In <strong>March 1943</strong>, she writes that her mother arranged for the children to receive extra butter.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> However, it was the rationing system that determined that the youth between the ages of 4 and 21 received a higher fat ration.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\"><a href=\"#footnote-12\" id=\"footnote-marker-12-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[12]</a></sup> On the same day, she writes that she got tired of white and brown beans, and that the 'evening bread ration' had been withdrawn.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> The abundance of beans can be explained by the aforementioned 135 kilos. Given the lenient arrangement with Siemons, why bread consumption was reduced is unclear.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>It became especially apparent in the <strong>first months of 1944</strong> that external factors had a major influence. The arrest of voucher suppliers Brouwer and Daatzelaar in March jeopardised the supply of potatoes and butter, among other things.<sup data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\"><a href=\"#footnote-13\" id=\"footnote-marker-13-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[13]</a></sup> Fried potatoes for breakfast were therefore replaced by porridge.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\"><a href=\"#footnote-14\" id=\"footnote-marker-14-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[14]</a></sup> It proved possible to buy extra whole milk, which was done at Mrs Van Pels' insistence. Whole milk was officially reserved for children under 14, so that purchase was clandestine. Black market milk prices <strong>in early 1944</strong> were around 40 to 50 cents per litre in Amsterdam-Noord and up to 1.30 to 1.50 guilders per litre in Zuid.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\"><a href=\"#footnote-15\" id=\"footnote-marker-15-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[15]</a></sup> So it's likely the people in hiding incurred relatively high costs for extra milk. This suggests that shortages in the Secret Annex were due more to scarcity and distribution problems than to lack of money.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Anne complained on <strong>8 May 1944</strong> that they were constantly eating<em> 'lettuce, stewing lettuce, spinach, spinach and more spinach</em> '. During this period, a shortage of fertilisers led to crop restrictions. Especially the so-called 'mass products' were widely available then, a category that included the controversial leafy vegetables.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\"><a href=\"#footnote-16\" id=\"footnote-marker-16-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[16]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Problems did grow after the arrest of greengrocer Van Hoeve in <strong>late May 1944</strong>. The growing shortage of potatoes and vegetables led to the gradual abolition of breakfast.<sup data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\"><a href=\"#footnote-17\" id=\"footnote-marker-17-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[17]</a></sup> Compensating by bringing lunch forward could not conceal the fact that scarcity had increased.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Extras</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>There was room to do something extra now and then. In the early days, the Franks, at that time alone in the Secret Annex, received rhubarb, strawberries and cherries from the helpers.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\"><a href=\"#footnote-18\" id=\"footnote-marker-18-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[18]</a></sup> To mark Jan and Miep's wedding anniversary, there was a dinner in the Secret Annex on <strong>18 July 1942</strong>, just after the Van Pels family arrived. A typed menu of this has been preserved, and on the table were broth, roast beef, various salads and one 'pomme de terre' per person. Also gravy, 'to be used very minimally' because of the butter ration, riz à la Trautmannsdorf ('surrogate') and coffee with sugar and cream.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Bouillon and gravy powders were part of Gies & Co's core range. Given the prevailing scarcity and therefore very high prices, the coffee must also have been 'surrogate'. When Jan and Miep came to stay in October, soup, meatballs, potatoes, carrots and coffee with gingerbread and Maria biscuits were served, according to Anne.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\"><a href=\"#footnote-19\" id=\"footnote-marker-19-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[19]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Through the story <em>Sausage Day</em> and from the B-version, the episode situated by Anne in <strong>December 1942</strong> is known in which Van Pels had managed to get hold of a large quantity of meat and made sausage from it.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\"><a href=\"#footnote-20\" id=\"footnote-marker-20-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[20]</a></sup> Through food distribution, the people in hiding sometimes benefited from occasional windfalls, as in the provision of extra sweets, oil and syrup at Christmas.<sup data-footnote-id=\"418fw\"><a href=\"#footnote-21\" id=\"footnote-marker-21-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[21]</a></sup> On the other hand, they also noticed when a butter coupon was withheld as a sanction for the <strong>1943</strong> strikes. From the same note comes the list of foodstuffs apparently sent to Pfeffer by Charlotte Kaletta on his birthday in <strong>1943</strong>: eggs, butter, biscuits, lemonade, bread, brandy, oranges, gingerbread and chocolate.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\"><a href=\"#footnote-22\" id=\"footnote-marker-22-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[22]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p><strong>In late 1943,</strong> the helpers managed to get 'pre-war' butter biscuits for the people in the Secret Annex, and on Edith's birthday a few weeks later, a 'pre-war' mocha cake.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\"><a href=\"#footnote-23\" id=\"footnote-marker-23-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[23]</a></sup> On Otto Frank's 55th birthday there was beer, and through Siemons there were even fifty 'pre-war' petit fours.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\"><a href=\"#footnote-24\" id=\"footnote-marker-24-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[24]</a></sup> In the case of the cake and pie, this meant that the relevant bakers must have been provided with necessary ingredients such as butter, sugar and eggs in advance via the helpers. As bakers were sparsely supplied with these, this was a common method of obtaining decent - 'pre-war' - pastries at the time.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\"><a href=\"#footnote-25\" id=\"footnote-marker-25-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[25]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>July 1944</strong>, Mrs Van Hoeve - her husband was imprisoned at that time for hiding the Jewish couple Weisz - delivered nine kilos of peas. The pods of these were also eaten. On the same day, Anne notes the delivery of a large batch of strawberries, taken by Broks directly from the Beverwijk auction.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\"><a href=\"#footnote-26\" id=\"footnote-marker-26-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[26]</a></sup> Given the quantities, these must also have been non-regular transactions. Clandestine trade in strawberries was also closely monitored in Amsterdam around this time.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gaose\"><a href=\"#footnote-27\" id=\"footnote-marker-27-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[27]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Finally, there was Peter's cat Mouschi. After much deliberation and ambiguity, the government decided that food could only be available for economically useful cats, such as warehouse cats.<sup data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\"><a href=\"#footnote-28\" id=\"footnote-marker-28-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[28]</a></sup> This meant that Mouschi's food, unlike that of warehouse cat Moffie, had to come through other channels, or he ate what the people in hiding ate.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>This overview shows that external factors played a greater role in the impoverishment of the food position in the Secret Annex than internal ones. The decline in variety and quantities kept pace with the disappearance of suppliers of coupons and foodstuffs. Financial concerns undoubtedly made themselves felt, yet repeatedly it appears that occasional opportunities to purchase extras remained for a long time. Lack of money therefore does not seem to have been a decisive factor in the decline of the food position.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Klantenbinding voor groente en fruit”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 24 juli 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 5 November 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works, </em>transl. from the Dutch by Susan Massotty, London [etc.]: Bloomsbury Continuum, 2019.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), reg. code A_Gies_I_032: Menukaartje.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, reg. code A_Kugler_I_048: Getypte herinneringen Victor Kugler.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"33qes\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach, Archief Ernst Schnabel; Victor Kugler aan Ernst Schnabel, 17 september 1957.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 30 September and 6 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite><em>Rantsoeneering van levensmiddelen in de bezettingsjaren</em>, [S.l.] : Ministerie van Landbouw, Visscherij en Voedselvoorziening, Afdeeling Voorlichting, [ca. 1945], p. 4-5.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 7 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Boter op bon 51”, <em>Het Vaderland</em>, 6 oktober 1942, ochtendeditie.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\" id=\"footnote-10\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-10-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 5 November 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\" id=\"footnote-11\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version B, 12 March 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\" id=\"footnote-12\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-12-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Distributie”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 10 maart 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\" id=\"footnote-13\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-13-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 10 March 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\" id=\"footnote-14\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-14-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 14 March 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\" id=\"footnote-15\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-15-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Rond de rundveeprijzen”, <em>Provinciale Noordhollandsche Courant</em>, 25 januari 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\" id=\"footnote-16\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-16-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Groente wordt verdeeld in massaproduct en keuze-artikel”, <em>Gooi- en Eemlander</em>, 29 april 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\" id=\"footnote-17\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-17-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 25 May 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\" id=\"footnote-18\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-18-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 8 July 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\" id=\"footnote-19\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-19-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 10 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\" id=\"footnote-20\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-20-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Tales and events from the Secret Annex, “Sausage Day”, 10 December 1942; Diary Version B, 10 December 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"418fw\" id=\"footnote-21\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-21-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 22 December 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\" id=\"footnote-22\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-22-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version B, 1 May 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\" id=\"footnote-23\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-23-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 27 December 1943 and 19 January 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\" id=\"footnote-24\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-24-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 9 and 13 May 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\" id=\"footnote-25\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-25-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Gebak en koek met ‘bijlevering’”, <em>Het Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 4 november 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\" id=\"footnote-26\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-26-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 8 July 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gaose\" id=\"footnote-27\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-27-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“C.C.D. waakte over de aardbeien”, <em>Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 6 juli 1944; “Ruim 2000 pond aardbeien achterhaald”, <em>Provinciale Overijsselsche en Zwolsche Courant</em>, 3 juli 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\" id=\"footnote-28\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-28-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Paul Arnoldussen, 'Poes in verdrukking en verzet 1940 – 1945'<em>, </em>in: <em>Poezenkrant</em>, (2013) nr. 57, p. 27-30.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>Het voedselthema is nauw verwant aan de onderwerpen Distributie en Bevoorrading in het algemeen. Wat er gegeten werd, en hoeveel, hing daar tenslotte mede van af. Gebrek werd er in eerste instantie in het Achterhuis niet geleden. Via reguliere en clandestiene distributiekanalen was er voldoende voedsel voorhanden.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Met ingang van <strong>8 augustus 1943</strong> kwam er in een groot aantal plaatsen, waaronder Amsterdam, een ‘klantenbinding’ voor groente en fruit tot stand. Dit wil zeggen dat ieder huishouden zich per periode van vier weken aan een vaste groentehandelaar diende te verbinden. Deze verstrekte een ‘gezinskaart’ op naam en moest zorgen voor inname van bonnen en een redelijke verdeling van zijn aanbod, afhankelijk van het aantal gezinsleden.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Hoe de helpers deze complicatie in de praktijk oplosten is niet bekend.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Groente en aardappelen komen van groenteboer Van Hoeve op de Leliegracht; voor brood was een regeling getroffen met bakker Siemons.<sup data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Vlees kwam van een bij Hermann van Pels bekende slager in de omgeving, waarschijnlijk - op grond van het hieronder genoemd menukaartje met “Roastbeaf SCHOLTE” - het filiaal van Piet Scholte op de Elandsgracht.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Met het verstrijken van de tijd ontstonden moeilijkheden, die verschillende oorzaken hadden. Victor Kugler schreef jaren later in zijn herinneringen dat gaandeweg de problemen groeiden; vooral levensmiddelen werden schaars.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> Versobering van de maaltijden en rantsoenen gaven herhaaldelijk aanleiding tot ruzies. Aan de hand van Annes notities en verschillende externe bronnen zijn diverse aspecten van het vraagstuk goed te beschrijven en ook te verklaren.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Het eetpatroon en de verschuivingen daarin</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Bij aanvang van de onderduikperiode was er een flinke voorraad levensmiddelen aangelegd, waaronder honderdvijftig conservenblikken met groente. Door de zakelijke contacten waren melkpoeder, tarwezetmeel en suiker steeds in ruime hoeveelheden voorhanden, waarmee volgens Kugler voedzame pudding kon worden gemaakt.<sup data-footnote-id=\"33qes\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In de <strong>nazomer en de herfst van 1942</strong> schrijft Anne dat zijzelf en Hermann van Pels flink aten.<sup data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> Tegelijkertijd daalde het vetrantsoen in de <strong>tweede helft van 1942</strong> gestaag.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> Op <strong>7 oktober</strong> van dat jaar is te lezen welke spanningen het wel of niet op brood smeren van boter in het Achterhuis tot gevolg had.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> In die periode kwam het officiële boter/vetrantsoen neer op 62½ gram per persoon per week.<sup data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Anne meldt in november de levering van 135 kilo peulvruchten.<sup data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\"><a href=\"#footnote-10\" id=\"footnote-marker-10-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[10]</a></sup> In <strong>maart 1943</strong> schrijft ze dat haar moeder bewerkstelligde dat de kinderen extra boter kregen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> Het was echter de distributie die bepaalde dat de jeugd tussen 4 en 21 jaar een hoger vetrantsoen kregen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\"><a href=\"#footnote-12\" id=\"footnote-marker-12-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[12]</a></sup> Op dezelfde dag schrijft ze dat ze genoeg kreeg van de witte en bruine bonen, en dat de 'avond-broodverstrekking' was ingetrokken.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> De overvloed aan bonen is te verklaren uit de eerder genoemde 135 kilo. Waarom de broodconsumptie, gezien de soepele regeling met Siemons, werd verminderd is onduidelijk.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Het werd vooral in de <strong>eerste maanden van 1944</strong> zichtbaar dat externe factoren veel bepaalden. De arrestatie van bonnenleveranciers Brouwer en Daatzelaar in maart bracht de aanvoer van onder meer aardappelen en boter in gevaar.<sup data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\"><a href=\"#footnote-13\" id=\"footnote-marker-13-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[13]</a></sup> Gebakken aardappelen als ontbijt werden dan ook vervangen door pap.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\"><a href=\"#footnote-14\" id=\"footnote-marker-14-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[14]</a></sup> Het bleek mogelijk extra volle melk te kopen, wat op aandringen van mevrouw Van Pels ook gebeurde. Volle melk was officieel voorbehouden aan kinderen onder de veertien, dus die aanschaf was clandestien. De zwarte melkprijzen bedroegen <strong>begin 1944</strong> zo’n 40 à 50 cent per liter in Amsterdam-Noord en tot 1,30 à 1,50 gulden per liter in Zuid.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\"><a href=\"#footnote-15\" id=\"footnote-marker-15-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[15]</a></sup> De onderduikers konden dus voor extra melk betrekkelijk hoge kosten maken. Dit duidt erop dat tekorten in het Achterhuis meer waren te wijten aan schaarste en verdelingsproblemen dan aan geldgebrek.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Anne beklaagt zich op <strong>8 mei 1944 </strong>over het feit dat ze steeds '<em>sla, stoofsla, spinazie, spinazie en nog eens spinazie</em>' aten. In deze periode leidde gebrek aan meststoffen tot teeltbeperkingen. Vooral de zogenaamde 'massaproducten' waren toen ruim verkrijgbaar, een categorie waartoe ook de gewraakte bladgroenten behoorden.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\"><a href=\"#footnote-16\" id=\"footnote-marker-16-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[16]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>De problemen groeiden wel na de arrestatie van groenteboer Van Hoeve <strong>eind mei 1944</strong>. Het toenemende tekort aan aardappelen en groente leidde tot het geleidelijk afschaffen van het ontbijt.<sup data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\"><a href=\"#footnote-17\" id=\"footnote-marker-17-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[17]</a></sup> Compensatie door het vervroegen van de lunch kon niet verhullen dat de schaarste toenam.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Extra’s</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Er was ruimte om af en toe iets extra’s te doen. In de eerste dagen kregen de Franks, toen nog alleen in het Achterhuis, van de helpers rabarber, aardbeien en kersen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\"><a href=\"#footnote-18\" id=\"footnote-marker-18-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[18]</a></sup> Ter gelegenheid van de huwelijksdag van Jan en Miep was er op <strong>18 juli 1942</strong>, vlak na de aankomst van de familie Van Pels, een diner in het Achterhuis. Hiervan is een getypt menukaartje bewaard gebleven, en op tafel kwamen bouillon, roast beef, diverse salades en per persoon één ‘pomme de terre’. Verder jus, ‘zeer miniem te gebruiken’ vanwege het boterrantsoen, riz à la Trautmannsdorf (‘surrogaat’) en koffie met suiker en room.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Bouillon- en juspoeders behoorden tot het kernassortiment van Gies & Co. Gezien de heersende schaarste en daardoor erg hoge prijzen zal de koffie ook wel ‘surrogaat’ zijn geweest. Toen Jan en Miep in oktober kwamen logeren, stonden er volgens Anne soep, gehaktballetjes, aardappels, worteltjes en koffie met kruidkoek en Maria’s op tafel.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\"><a href=\"#footnote-19\" id=\"footnote-marker-19-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[19]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Door het verhaaltje <em>Worstdag</em> en uit de B-versie is de door Anne in <strong>december ‘42</strong> gesitueerde episode bekend waarin Van Pels een grote hoeveelheid vlees had kunnen bemachtigen en daar worst van maakte.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\"><a href=\"#footnote-20\" id=\"footnote-marker-20-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[20]</a></sup> Via de voedseldistributie profiteerden de onderduikers soms van incidentele meevallers, zoals bij de verstrekking van extra snoep, olie en stroop met Kerstmis.<sup data-footnote-id=\"418fw\"><a href=\"#footnote-21\" id=\"footnote-marker-21-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[21]</a></sup> Daar staat tegenover dat ze het ook merkten toen er, als sanctie voor de stakingen van <strong>1943</strong> een boterbon werd ingehouden. Uit dezelfde notitie komt de opsomming van levensmiddelen die Pfeffer bij zijn verjaardag in <strong>1943</strong> kennelijk van Charlotte Kaletta toegestuurd kreeg: eieren, boter, koekjes, limonade, brood, cognac, sinaasappelen, kruidkoek en chocolade.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\"><a href=\"#footnote-22\" id=\"footnote-marker-22-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[22]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p><strong>Eind ’43</strong> wisten de helpers aan ‘vooroorlogse’ boterkoekjes voor de onderduikers te komen, en bij Ediths verjaardag enkele weken later aan een dito mokkataart.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\"><a href=\"#footnote-23\" id=\"footnote-marker-23-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[23]</a></sup> Bij Otto Franks 55e verjaardag was er bier en via Siemons waren er zelfs vijftig ‘vooroorlogse’ petit fours.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\"><a href=\"#footnote-24\" id=\"footnote-marker-24-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[24]</a></sup> In het geval van de koek en taart betekende dit dat de betreffende bakkers via de helpers vooraf van benodigde ingrediënten als boter, suiker en eieren moeten zijn voorzien. Omdat bakkers hiermee karig werden bevoorraad, was dit destijds een gebruikelijke methode om aan behoorlijk - ‘vooroorlogs’ - gebak te komen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\"><a href=\"#footnote-25\" id=\"footnote-marker-25-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[25]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>juli ’44</strong> leverde mevrouw Van Hoeve – haar man zat toen gevangen vanwege het verbergen van het Joodse echtpaar Weisz – negen kilo doperwten. Hiervan werden ook de peulen gegeten. Op dezelfde dag noteert Anne de aanvoer van een grote partij aardbeien, door Broks rechtstreeks van de Beverwijkse veiling gehaald.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\"><a href=\"#footnote-26\" id=\"footnote-marker-26-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[26]</a></sup> Gezien de hoeveelheden moet ook hier sprake zijn geweest van niet-reguliere transacties. Op clandestiene handel in aardbeien werd ook in Amsterdam rond deze tijd scherp toegezien.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gaose\"><a href=\"#footnote-27\" id=\"footnote-marker-27-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[27]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Ten slotte was er nog Peters kat Mouschi. Na veel overleg en onduidelijkheid besloot de overheid dat alleen voor economisch nuttige katten, zoals pakhuiskatten, voedsel beschikbaar kon zijn.<sup data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\"><a href=\"#footnote-28\" id=\"footnote-marker-28-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[28]</a></sup> Dat betekende dat Mouschi’s voer, in tegenstelling tot dat van pakhuiskat Moffie, langs andere kanalen moest komen, of dat hij at wat de onderduikers aten.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Uit dit overzicht blijkt dat externe factoren een grotere rol spelen bij de verschraling van de voedselpositie in het Achterhuis dan interne. De afname van variatie en hoeveelheden hield gelijke tred met het wegvallen van leveranciers van bonnen en levensmiddelen. Financiële zorgen hebben zich ongetwijfeld doen gelden, maar herhaaldelijk blijkt toch dat incidentele mogelijkheden om extra’s aan te schaffen lang zijn blijven bestaan. Geldgebrek lijkt daarom geen doorslaggevende factor te zijn geweest in de achteruitgang van de voedselpositie.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Klantenbinding voor groente en fruit”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 24 juli 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 5 november 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>, Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2013.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), reg. code A_Gies_I_032: Menukaartje.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, reg. code A_Kugler_I_048: Getypte herinneringen Victor Kugler.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"33qes\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach, Archief Ernst Schnabel; Victor Kugler aan Ernst Schnabel, 17 september 1957.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 30 september en 6 oktober 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite><em>Rantsoeneering van levensmiddelen in de bezettingsjaren</em>, [S.l.] : Ministerie van Landbouw, Visscherij en Voedselvoorziening, Afdeeling Voorlichting, [ca. 1945], p. 4-5.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 7 oktober 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Boter op bon 51”, <em>Het Vaderland</em>, 6 oktober 1942, ochtendeditie.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\" id=\"footnote-10\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-10-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 5 november 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\" id=\"footnote-11\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek B, 12 maart 1943, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\" id=\"footnote-12\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-12-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Distributie”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 10 maart 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\" id=\"footnote-13\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-13-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 10 maart 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\" id=\"footnote-14\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-14-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 14 maart 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\" id=\"footnote-15\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-15-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Rond de rundveeprijzen”, <em>Provinciale Noordhollandsche Courant</em>, 25 januari 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\" id=\"footnote-16\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-16-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Groente wordt verdeeld in massaproduct en keuze-artikel”, <em>Gooi- en Eemlander</em>, 29 april 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\" id=\"footnote-17\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-17-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 25 mei 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\" id=\"footnote-18\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-18-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 8 juli 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>, Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2013.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\" id=\"footnote-19\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-19-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 10 oktober 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\" id=\"footnote-20\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-20-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Verhaaltjes en gebeurtenissen uit het Achterhuis, “Worstdag”, 10 december 1942; Dagboek B, 10 december 1942, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"418fw\" id=\"footnote-21\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-21-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 22 december 1943, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\" id=\"footnote-22\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-22-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek B, 1 mei 1943, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\" id=\"footnote-23\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-23-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 27 december 1943 en 19 januari 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\" id=\"footnote-24\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-24-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 9 en 13 mei 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\" id=\"footnote-25\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-25-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Gebak en koek met ‘bijlevering’”, <em>Het Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 4 november 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\" id=\"footnote-26\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-26-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Dagboek A, 8 juli 1944, in: <em>Verzameld werk.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gaose\" id=\"footnote-27\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-27-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“C.C.D. waakte over de aardbeien”, <em>Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 6 juli 1944; “Ruim 2000 pond aardbeien achterhaald”, <em>Provinciale Overijsselsche en Zwolsche Courant</em>, 3 juli 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\" id=\"footnote-28\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-28-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Paul Arnoldussen, 'Poes in verdrukking en verzet 1940 – 1945'<em>, </em>in: <em>Poezenkrant</em>, (2013) nr. 57, p. 27-30.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>The theme of food is closely related to the topics of Rationing and Supply in general. After all, what was eaten, and how much, partly depended on these aspects. Food was not initially lacking in the Secret Annex. Sufficient food was available through regular and clandestine distribution channels.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>From <strong>8 August 1943</strong>, a 'customer loyalty' scheme for fruit and vegetables came into effect in many places, including Amsterdam. This meant that every household had to commit to a regular greengrocer for each four-week period. The latter issued a 'family card' by name and had to ensure collection of vouchers and reasonable distribution of his supply, depending on the number of family members.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> How the helpers solved this complication in practice is not known.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Vegetables and potatoes came from greengrocer Van Hoeve on Leliegracht; for bread, an arrangement was made with baker Siemons.<sup data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Meat came from a butcher in the area known to Hermann van Pels, probably - based on the menu mentioned below with 'Roastbeaf SCHOLTE' - Piet Scholte's branch on Elandsgracht.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> As time passed, difficulties arose, which had several causes. Victor Kugler wrote years later in his recollections that gradually the problems grew; food in particular became scarce.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> Austerity of meals and rations repeatedly gave rise to quarrels. Using Anne's notes and various external sources, various aspects of the issue can be well described and also explained.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Diet and its shifts</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>At the start of the hiding period, a substantial stock of food had been established, including one hundred and fifty tins of canned vegetables. Through business contacts, powdered milk, wheat starch and sugar were always available in ample quantities, with which, according to Kugler, nutritious puddings could be made.<sup data-footnote-id=\"33qes\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In the <strong>late summer and autumn of 1942,</strong> Anne writes that she and Hermann van Pels ate heavily.<sup data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> At the same time, fat rations steadily decreased in the <strong>second half of 1942</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> On <strong>7 October</strong> that year, we can read about the tensions caused by whether or not butter was spread on bread in the Secret Annex.<sup data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> At the time, the official butter/fat ration amounted to 62½ grams per person per week.<sup data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Anne reports the delivery of 135 kilos of pulses in November.<sup data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\"><a href=\"#footnote-10\" id=\"footnote-marker-10-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[10]</a></sup> In <strong>March 1943</strong>, she writes that her mother arranged for the children to receive extra butter.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> However, it was the rationing system that determined that the youth between the ages of 4 and 21 received a higher fat ration.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\"><a href=\"#footnote-12\" id=\"footnote-marker-12-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[12]</a></sup> On the same day, she writes that she got tired of white and brown beans, and that the 'evening bread ration' had been withdrawn.<sup data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\"><a href=\"#footnote-11\" id=\"footnote-marker-11-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[11]</a></sup> The abundance of beans can be explained by the aforementioned 135 kilos. Given the lenient arrangement with Siemons, why bread consumption was reduced is unclear.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>It became especially apparent in the <strong>first months of 1944</strong> that external factors had a major influence. The arrest of voucher suppliers Brouwer and Daatzelaar in March jeopardised the supply of potatoes and butter, among other things.<sup data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\"><a href=\"#footnote-13\" id=\"footnote-marker-13-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[13]</a></sup> Fried potatoes for breakfast were therefore replaced by porridge.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\"><a href=\"#footnote-14\" id=\"footnote-marker-14-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[14]</a></sup> It proved possible to buy extra whole milk, which was done at Mrs Van Pels' insistence. Whole milk was officially reserved for children under 14, so that purchase was clandestine. Black market milk prices <strong>in early 1944</strong> were around 40 to 50 cents per litre in Amsterdam-Noord and up to 1.30 to 1.50 guilders per litre in Zuid.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\"><a href=\"#footnote-15\" id=\"footnote-marker-15-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[15]</a></sup> So it's likely the people in hiding incurred relatively high costs for extra milk. This suggests that shortages in the Secret Annex were due more to scarcity and distribution problems than to lack of money.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Anne complained on <strong>8 May 1944</strong> that they were constantly eating<em> 'lettuce, stewing lettuce, spinach, spinach and more spinach</em> '. During this period, a shortage of fertilisers led to crop restrictions. Especially the so-called 'mass products' were widely available then, a category that included the controversial leafy vegetables.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\"><a href=\"#footnote-16\" id=\"footnote-marker-16-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[16]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Problems did grow after the arrest of greengrocer Van Hoeve in <strong>late May 1944</strong>. The growing shortage of potatoes and vegetables led to the gradual abolition of breakfast.<sup data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\"><a href=\"#footnote-17\" id=\"footnote-marker-17-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[17]</a></sup> Compensating by bringing lunch forward could not conceal the fact that scarcity had increased.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Extras</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>There was room to do something extra now and then. In the early days, the Franks, at that time alone in the Secret Annex, received rhubarb, strawberries and cherries from the helpers.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\"><a href=\"#footnote-18\" id=\"footnote-marker-18-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[18]</a></sup> To mark Jan and Miep's wedding anniversary, there was a dinner in the Secret Annex on <strong>18 July 1942</strong>, just after the Van Pels family arrived. A typed menu of this has been preserved, and on the table were broth, roast beef, various salads and one 'pomme de terre' per person. Also gravy, 'to be used very minimally' because of the butter ration, riz à la Trautmannsdorf ('surrogate') and coffee with sugar and cream.<sup data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-2\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Bouillon and gravy powders were part of Gies & Co's core range. Given the prevailing scarcity and therefore very high prices, the coffee must also have been 'surrogate'. When Jan and Miep came to stay in October, soup, meatballs, potatoes, carrots and coffee with gingerbread and Maria biscuits were served, according to Anne.<sup data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\"><a href=\"#footnote-19\" id=\"footnote-marker-19-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[19]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Through the story <em>Sausage Day</em> and from the B-version, the episode situated by Anne in <strong>December 1942</strong> is known in which Van Pels had managed to get hold of a large quantity of meat and made sausage from it.<sup data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\"><a href=\"#footnote-20\" id=\"footnote-marker-20-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[20]</a></sup> Through food distribution, the people in hiding sometimes benefited from occasional windfalls, as in the provision of extra sweets, oil and syrup at Christmas.<sup data-footnote-id=\"418fw\"><a href=\"#footnote-21\" id=\"footnote-marker-21-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[21]</a></sup> On the other hand, they also noticed when a butter coupon was withheld as a sanction for the <strong>1943</strong> strikes. From the same note comes the list of foodstuffs apparently sent to Pfeffer by Charlotte Kaletta on his birthday in <strong>1943</strong>: eggs, butter, biscuits, lemonade, bread, brandy, oranges, gingerbread and chocolate.<sup data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\"><a href=\"#footnote-22\" id=\"footnote-marker-22-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[22]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p><strong>In late 1943,</strong> the helpers managed to get 'pre-war' butter biscuits for the people in the Secret Annex, and on Edith's birthday a few weeks later, a 'pre-war' mocha cake.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\"><a href=\"#footnote-23\" id=\"footnote-marker-23-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[23]</a></sup> On Otto Frank's 55th birthday there was beer, and through Siemons there were even fifty 'pre-war' petit fours.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\"><a href=\"#footnote-24\" id=\"footnote-marker-24-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[24]</a></sup> In the case of the cake and pie, this meant that the relevant bakers must have been provided with necessary ingredients such as butter, sugar and eggs in advance via the helpers. As bakers were sparsely supplied with these, this was a common method of obtaining decent - 'pre-war' - pastries at the time.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\"><a href=\"#footnote-25\" id=\"footnote-marker-25-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[25]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>In <strong>July 1944</strong>, Mrs Van Hoeve - her husband was imprisoned at that time for hiding the Jewish couple Weisz - delivered nine kilos of peas. The pods of these were also eaten. On the same day, Anne notes the delivery of a large batch of strawberries, taken by Broks directly from the Beverwijk auction.<sup data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\"><a href=\"#footnote-26\" id=\"footnote-marker-26-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[26]</a></sup> Given the quantities, these must also have been non-regular transactions. Clandestine trade in strawberries was also closely monitored in Amsterdam around this time.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gaose\"><a href=\"#footnote-27\" id=\"footnote-marker-27-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[27]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Finally, there was Peter's cat Mouschi. After much deliberation and ambiguity, the government decided that food could only be available for economically useful cats, such as warehouse cats.<sup data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\"><a href=\"#footnote-28\" id=\"footnote-marker-28-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[28]</a></sup> This meant that Mouschi's food, unlike that of warehouse cat Moffie, had to come through other channels, or he ate what the people in hiding ate.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>This overview shows that external factors played a greater role in the impoverishment of the food position in the Secret Annex than internal ones. The decline in variety and quantities kept pace with the disappearance of suppliers of coupons and foodstuffs. Financial concerns undoubtedly made themselves felt, yet repeatedly it appears that occasional opportunities to purchase extras remained for a long time. Lack of money therefore does not seem to have been a decisive factor in the decline of the food position.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bfc4v\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Klantenbinding voor groente en fruit”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 24 juli 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"zuvn7\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 5 November 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works, </em>transl. from the Dutch by Susan Massotty, London [etc.]: Bloomsbury Continuum, 2019.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"nhrst\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting (AFS), Anne Frank Collectie (AFC), reg. code A_Gies_I_032: Menukaartje.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eigvn\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>AFS, AFC, reg. code A_Kugler_I_048: Getypte herinneringen Victor Kugler.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"33qes\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach, Archief Ernst Schnabel; Victor Kugler aan Ernst Schnabel, 17 september 1957.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"mj8k3\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 30 September and 6 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rnja0\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite><em>Rantsoeneering van levensmiddelen in de bezettingsjaren</em>, [S.l.] : Ministerie van Landbouw, Visscherij en Voedselvoorziening, Afdeeling Voorlichting, [ca. 1945], p. 4-5.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"t9erf\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 7 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"vmsnc\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Boter op bon 51”, <em>Het Vaderland</em>, 6 oktober 1942, ochtendeditie.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"dtuop\" id=\"footnote-10\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-10-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 5 November 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"6mvl2\" id=\"footnote-11\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-1\">a</a>, <a href=\"#footnote-marker-11-2\">b</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version B, 12 March 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wmn6e\" id=\"footnote-12\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-12-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Distributie”, <em>De Tijd</em>, 10 maart 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"fgk2m\" id=\"footnote-13\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-13-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 10 March 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wsny7\" id=\"footnote-14\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-14-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 14 March 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qhwm1\" id=\"footnote-15\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-15-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Rond de rundveeprijzen”, <em>Provinciale Noordhollandsche Courant</em>, 25 januari 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tm99x\" id=\"footnote-16\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-16-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Groente wordt verdeeld in massaproduct en keuze-artikel”, <em>Gooi- en Eemlander</em>, 29 april 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"be9ki\" id=\"footnote-17\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-17-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 25 May 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9hyih\" id=\"footnote-18\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-18-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 8 July 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"eht5s\" id=\"footnote-19\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-19-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 10 October 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"qowi6\" id=\"footnote-20\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-20-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Tales and events from the Secret Annex, “Sausage Day”, 10 December 1942; Diary Version B, 10 December 1942, in: <em>The Collected Works.</em></cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"418fw\" id=\"footnote-21\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-21-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 22 December 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"rgvir\" id=\"footnote-22\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-22-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version B, 1 May 1943, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hvefd\" id=\"footnote-23\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-23-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 27 December 1943 and 19 January 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tbdtz\" id=\"footnote-24\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-24-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 9 and 13 May 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9k62b\" id=\"footnote-25\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-25-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“Gebak en koek met ‘bijlevering’”, <em>Het Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 4 november 1943.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"hdme4\" id=\"footnote-26\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-26-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank, Diary Version A, 8 July 1944, in: <em>The Collected Works</em>.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gaose\" id=\"footnote-27\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-27-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>“C.C.D. waakte over de aardbeien”, <em>Nieuws van den Dag</em>, 6 juli 1944; “Ruim 2000 pond aardbeien achterhaald”, <em>Provinciale Overijsselsche en Zwolsche Courant</em>, 3 juli 1944.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"cga6x\" id=\"footnote-28\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-28-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Paul Arnoldussen, 'Poes in verdrukking en verzet 1940 – 1945'<em>, </em>in: <em>Poezenkrant</em>, (2013) nr. 57, p. 27-30.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "Anne Frank's diaries provide a lot of information about what was eaten in the Secret Annex. What was available depended heavily on supply and opportunities to get around rationing restrictions and other problems.",
"summary_nl": "De dagboeken van Anne Frank geven veel informatie over wat er in het Achterhuis zoal op tafel kwam. Wat er op tafel stond was sterk afhankelijk van het aanbod en de mogelijkheden om distributiebeperkingen en andere problemen te omzeilen.",
"summary_en": "Anne Frank's diaries provide a lot of information about what was eaten in the Secret Annex. What was available depended heavily on supply and opportunities to get around rationing restrictions and other problems.",
"same_as": null,
"parent": 396124663,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124657,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/e6090c55-5e26-4b2b-9dc9-8c5d1fe3b98b/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "e6090c55-5e26-4b2b-9dc9-8c5d1fe3b98b",
"name": "People in hiding",
"name_nl": "Onderduikers",
"name_en": "People in hiding",
"description": "<p>The Frank and Van Pels families, along with Fritz Pfeffer, had to go into hiding because they were Jewish. But it wasn’t just Jews who went into hiding in the Netherlands. The lives of for example resistance workers were at risk too. Like the Jews, they too needed to find places to hide. People chose a wide variety of places to go into hiding. Some people hid in cities, others in the country. Hiding places could be large or small. Some people had to stay inside all day, while others were able to walk around freely outside. They were the ones with well made forged papers.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tikjf\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>The decision to go into hiding</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>According to estimates, approximately 300,000 people of which probably 28,000 Jews, hid in the Netherlands, either for a short or long time period.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bcphu\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> For the resistance, the question of "to hide or not to hide? ", was in fact no real question. If they didn't want end up in prison, they had to go into hiding. For many Jewish families, it was a question as well. A difficult question. Why go into hiding when you had done nothing wrong? And perhaps, the camps were not that bad.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Children in hiding</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Some Jewish parents faced a difficult decision during the war. It was sometimes easier for an individual child to go into hiding with a host family. For the parents, that meant leaving their child behind at a hiding place on their own. Sometimes even babies had to be hidden this way. Some helpers were prepared the risk taking a child in. For adults, it was harder to find a good hiding place. The Jewish children hidden this way simply became one of the family. The hosts might have claimed the child had come from Rotterdam, where many records had been lost in the bombings.<sup data-footnote-id=\"u4bgd\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Betrayal</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Of the 25,000 Jews who went into hiding, 8,000 were discovered. They’d often been betrayed.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tj460\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> If you were arrested in hiding, you would be sent as a criminal to transit camp Westerbork’s prison block before being deported to a concentration camp. For the helpers, the outcome varied. Sometimes only those in hiding were arrested and their helpers left alone, but other times the helpers were arrested too. In theory, there were heavy penalties for being caught helping a Jew. In practice, that wasn’t always the case.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tikjf\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jaap Cohen,<a href=\"https://www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/how-unique-was-secret-annex-people-hiding-occupied-netherlands/\" target=\"_blank\"> How unique was the Secret Annex? People in hiding in the occupied Netherlands</a>, Website Anne Frank Stichting (geraadpleegd 4 december 2023).</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bcphu\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Andere achterhuizen. Verhalen van Joodse onderduikers</em>, Amsterdam : Athenaeum-Polak Van Gennep, 2010 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://hiddenlikeannefrank.com/\" target=\"_blank\">Hidden like Anne Frank</a>); Michal Citroen, <em>Een adres: de geschiedenis van de joodse onderduik</em>, Amsterdam; Alfabet Uitgevers, 2024.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"u4bgd\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Voor literatuur over onderduikhulp aan Joodse kinderen en de ervaringen van ouders én kinderen, zie: Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geleende kinderen. Ervaringen van onderduikouders en hun Joodse beschermelingen in de jaren 1942 tot 1945, </em>Kampen: Kok, 1994; Bloeme Evers-Emden & Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Ondergedoken geweest. Een afgesloten verleden? Joodse 'kinderen' over hun onderduik, vijftig jaar later</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1995; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geschonden bestaan. Gesprekken met vervolgde Joden die hun kinderen moesten, 'wegdoen'</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Omdat hun hart sprak. Geschiedenis van de georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen in Nederland, 1942-1945</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Je ouders delen. Een eerste onderzoek naar de gevoelens van eigen kinderen in pleeggezinnen in de oorlog en nu</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1999; Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Ondergedoken als Anne Frank. Verhalen van Joodse kinderen in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Querido, 2011 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://hiddenlikeannefrank.com/\" target=\"_blank\">Hidden like Anne Frank</a>); Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Onder de klok. Georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen</em>, Amsterdam: Gibbon Uitgeefagentschap, 2012.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tj460\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Ad van Liempt, <em>Kopgeld. Nederlandse premiejagers op zoek naar Joden: 1943</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 2002; Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij. De jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Ad van Liemp & Jan H. Kompagnie (red.), <em>Jodenjacht: de onthutsende rol van de Nederlandse politie in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Balans. 2011.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>De familie Frank, de familie Van Pels en Fritz Pfeffer moesten onderduiken, omdat zij Joods waren. Maar niet alleen Joden in Nederland doken onder. Ook het leven van bijvoorbeeld verzetsmensen liep gevaar. Zij moesten net als Joden op zoek gaan naar een schuilplaats. De plekken waar mensen ondergedoken zaten waren erg verschillend. Er waren schuilplaatsen in de stad en op het land. Grote en kleine schuilplaatsen. Sommige onderduikers moesten de hele dag binnen blijven, andere konden gewoon buiten lopen. Zij hadden goede valse papieren.<sup data-footnote-id=\"q6sdb\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Wel of niet onderduiken?</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Volgens schattingen hebben tussen de 300.000 en 330.000 mensen, van wie waarschijnlijk 28.000 Joden, in Nederland tijdens de oorlog voor korte of lange tijd ergens ondergedoken gezeten.<sup data-footnote-id=\"dn7r7\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Voor verzetsmensen was de vraag ‘Onderduiken of niet?’ eigenlijk geen echte vraag. Als zij niet in de gevangenis wilden belanden, moesten zij wel onderduiken. Voor veel Joodse gezinnen was het wel een vraag. Een moeilijke vraag. Waarom zou je onderduiken als je niets had gedaan? En misschien viel het wel mee in de kampen.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Ondergedoken kinderen</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>In de oorlog stonden sommige Joodse ouders voor een erg moeilijke beslissing: het was soms makkelijker om een schuilplaats bij een gezin te vinden voor een kind alleen. Dit betekende voor die ouders dat zij hun kind alleen naar een onderduikadres moesten laten gaan. En soms zelfs hun baby. Sommige helpers durfden het risico nog wel te nemen om een kind onder te laten duiken. Voor volwassenen was het veel moeilijker om een goede schuilplaats te vinden. Bij die Joodse kinderen werd dan net gedaan alsof de logé familie was. Er werd dan bijvoorbeeld gezegd dat het kind uit Rotterdam kwam, want daar waren veel gegevens door het bombardement verloren gegaan.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ndewx\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Verraad</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Van de 28.000 Joodse onderduikers zijn er 8.000 gepakt. Vaak was daarbij verraad in het spel.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ialiw\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> Als gearresteerde onderduiker kwam je als strafgeval in de strafbarak van doorgangskamp Westerbork terecht voordat je gedeporteerd werd naar een concentratiekamp. Voor de helpers verschilde het. Soms werden alleen de onderduikers gearresteerd en de helpers met rust gelaten, soms werden de helpers wel gearresteerd. In principe stond er op het helpen van Joden een zware straf. In de praktijk was dat niet altijd het geval.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"q6sdb\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jaap Cohen, <a href=\"https://www.annefrank.org/nl/anne-frank/verdieping/onderduiken-het-bezette-nederland-hoe-uniek-was-het-achterhuis/\" target=\"_blank\">Onderduiken in het bezette Nederland. Hoe uniek was het Achterhuis?</a> Website Anne Frank Stichting (geraadpleegd 4 december 2023).</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"dn7r7\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Andere achterhuizen. Verhalen van Joodse onderduikers</em>, Amsterdam : Athenaeum-Polak Van Gennep, 2010 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://andereachterhuizen.nl/\" target=\"_blank\">Andere Achterhuizen - verhalen van Joodse onderduikers</a>); Michal Citroen, <em>Een adres: de geschiedenis van de joodse onderduik</em>, Amsterdam: Alfabet Uitgevers, 2024.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ndewx\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Voor literatuur over onderduikhulp aan Joodse kinderen en de ervaringen van ouders én kinderen, zie: Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geleende kinderen. Ervaringen van onderduikouders en hun Joodse beschermelingen in de jaren 1942 tot 1945, </em>Kampen: Kok, 1994; Bloeme Evers-Emden & Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Ondergedoken geweest. Een afgesloten verleden? Joodse 'kinderen' over hun onderduik, vijftig jaar later</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1995; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geschonden bestaan. Gesprekken met vervolgde Joden die hun kinderen moesten, 'wegdoen'</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Omdat hun hart sprak. Geschiedenis van de georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen in Nederland, 1942-1945</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Je ouders delen. Een eerste onderzoek naar de gevoelens van eigen kinderen in pleeggezinnen in de oorlog en nu</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1999; Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Ondergedoken als Anne Frank. Verhalen van Joodse kinderen in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Querido, 2011 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://www.ondergedokenalsannefrank.nl\" target=\"_blank\">Ondergedoken als Anne Frank</a>); Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Onder de klok. Georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen</em>, Amsterdam: Gibbon Uitgeefagentschap, 2012.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ialiw\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Ad van Liempt, <em>Kopgeld. Nederlandse premiejagers op zoek naar Joden: 1943</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 2002; Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij. De jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Ad van Liempt & Jan H.Kompagnie (red.), <em>Jodenjacht: de onthutsende rol van de Nederlande politie in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 2022.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>The Frank and Van Pels families, along with Fritz Pfeffer, had to go into hiding because they were Jewish. But it wasn’t just Jews who went into hiding in the Netherlands. The lives of for example resistance workers were at risk too. Like the Jews, they too needed to find places to hide. People chose a wide variety of places to go into hiding. Some people hid in cities, others in the country. Hiding places could be large or small. Some people had to stay inside all day, while others were able to walk around freely outside. They were the ones with well made forged papers.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tikjf\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>The decision to go into hiding</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>According to estimates, approximately 300,000 people of which probably 28,000 Jews, hid in the Netherlands, either for a short or long time period.<sup data-footnote-id=\"bcphu\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> For the resistance, the question of "to hide or not to hide? ", was in fact no real question. If they didn't want end up in prison, they had to go into hiding. For many Jewish families, it was a question as well. A difficult question. Why go into hiding when you had done nothing wrong? And perhaps, the camps were not that bad.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Children in hiding</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Some Jewish parents faced a difficult decision during the war. It was sometimes easier for an individual child to go into hiding with a host family. For the parents, that meant leaving their child behind at a hiding place on their own. Sometimes even babies had to be hidden this way. Some helpers were prepared the risk taking a child in. For adults, it was harder to find a good hiding place. The Jewish children hidden this way simply became one of the family. The hosts might have claimed the child had come from Rotterdam, where many records had been lost in the bombings.<sup data-footnote-id=\"u4bgd\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<h1>Betrayal</h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Of the 25,000 Jews who went into hiding, 8,000 were discovered. They’d often been betrayed.<sup data-footnote-id=\"tj460\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> If you were arrested in hiding, you would be sent as a criminal to transit camp Westerbork’s prison block before being deported to a concentration camp. For the helpers, the outcome varied. Sometimes only those in hiding were arrested and their helpers left alone, but other times the helpers were arrested too. In theory, there were heavy penalties for being caught helping a Jew. In practice, that wasn’t always the case.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tikjf\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie verder: Jaap Cohen,<a href=\"https://www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/how-unique-was-secret-annex-people-hiding-occupied-netherlands/\" target=\"_blank\"> How unique was the Secret Annex? People in hiding in the occupied Netherlands</a>, Website Anne Frank Stichting (geraadpleegd 4 december 2023).</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"bcphu\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Andere achterhuizen. Verhalen van Joodse onderduikers</em>, Amsterdam : Athenaeum-Polak Van Gennep, 2010 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://hiddenlikeannefrank.com/\" target=\"_blank\">Hidden like Anne Frank</a>); Michal Citroen, <em>Een adres: de geschiedenis van de joodse onderduik</em>, Amsterdam; Alfabet Uitgevers, 2024.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"u4bgd\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Voor literatuur over onderduikhulp aan Joodse kinderen en de ervaringen van ouders én kinderen, zie: Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geleende kinderen. Ervaringen van onderduikouders en hun Joodse beschermelingen in de jaren 1942 tot 1945, </em>Kampen: Kok, 1994; Bloeme Evers-Emden & Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Ondergedoken geweest. Een afgesloten verleden? Joodse 'kinderen' over hun onderduik, vijftig jaar later</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1995; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Geschonden bestaan. Gesprekken met vervolgde Joden die hun kinderen moesten, 'wegdoen'</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Omdat hun hart sprak. Geschiedenis van de georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen in Nederland, 1942-1945</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1996; Bloeme Evers-Emden, <em>Je ouders delen. Een eerste onderzoek naar de gevoelens van eigen kinderen in pleeggezinnen in de oorlog en nu</em>, Kampen: Kok, 1999; Marcel Prins & Peter Henk Steenhuis, <em>Ondergedoken als Anne Frank. Verhalen van Joodse kinderen in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Querido, 2011 (zie ook de bijbehorende website: <a href=\"https://hiddenlikeannefrank.com/\" target=\"_blank\">Hidden like Anne Frank</a>); Bert-Jan Flim, <em>Onder de klok. Georganiseerde hulp aan Joodse kinderen</em>, Amsterdam: Gibbon Uitgeefagentschap, 2012.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"tj460\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie bijv.: Ad van Liempt, <em>Kopgeld. Nederlandse premiejagers op zoek naar Joden: 1943</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 2002; Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij. De jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Ad van Liemp & Jan H. Kompagnie (red.), <em>Jodenjacht: de onthutsende rol van de Nederlandse politie in de Tweede Wereldoorlog</em>, Amsterdam: Balans. 2011.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "People in hiding are people who hide, often for long periods of time, to avoid being picked up by the police or Germans. The reason for going into hiding was usually to escape persecution of Jews or forced Labour Deployment, or because one was wanted for illegal activities.",
"summary_nl": "Onderduikers zijn mensen die zich, vaak voor langere tijd, verbergen om niet door de politie of de Duitsers te worden opgepakt. De reden om onder te duiken was meestal om te ontkomen aan de Jodenvervolging of de gedwongen Arbeidsinzet, of omdat men gezocht werd wegens illegale activiteiten.",
"summary_en": "People in hiding are people who hide, often for long periods of time, to avoid being picked up by the police or Germans. The reason for going into hiding was usually to escape persecution of Jews or forced Labour Deployment, or because one was wanted for illegal activities.",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2697"
],
"parent": 396124388,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124652,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/1ccd9e30-3b3f-4185-baac-78d7d1f42d4d/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "1ccd9e30-3b3f-4185-baac-78d7d1f42d4d",
"name": "Return",
"name_nl": "Terugkeer",
"name_en": "Return",
"description": "<p>After <strong>9 May 1945</strong>, about 5,500 Jews returned from German concentration camps. About 16,000 Jews emerged from hiding and another 15,000 Jews returned who had otherwise escaped persecution or fled abroad.</p>",
"description_nl": "<p>Na <strong>9 mei 1945</strong> kwamen ongeveer 5.500 Joden terug uit Duitse concentratiekampen. Ongeveer 16.000 Joden kwamen tevoorschijn uit de onderduik en nog ongeveer 15.000 Joden die op andere manieren aan de vervolging waren ontsnapt of naar het buitenland waren gevlucht.</p>",
"description_en": "<p>After <strong>9 May 1945</strong>, about 5,500 Jews returned from German concentration camps. About 16,000 Jews emerged from hiding and another 15,000 Jews returned who had otherwise escaped persecution or fled abroad.</p>",
"summary": "'Return' in this context refers to the unregulated return of persons to the Netherlands after the liberation, following a stay (forced or otherwise) abroad during World War II.",
"summary_nl": "Met Terugkeer wordt hier bedoeld de na de bevrijding ongeregelde terugkeer van personen naar Nederland, na een (al dan niet gedwongen) verblijf in het buitenland tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog.",
"summary_en": "'Return' in this context refers to the unregulated return of persons to the Netherlands after the liberation, following a stay (forced or otherwise) abroad during World War II.",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/1564"
],
"parent": null,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124659,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/59d0af70-cfde-4254-aaa9-03dce11393e3/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "59d0af70-cfde-4254-aaa9-03dce11393e3",
"name": "Collaboration",
"name_nl": "Collaboratie",
"name_en": "Collaboration",
"description": "<p>Collaborators were considered disloyal to the nation and thus to be committing treason. In the case of the German occupation of the Netherlands during World War II, a number of groups are considered collaborators. For example, NSB members, people working for the <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em>, companies that were gaining economic advantage and people who signed up for the <em>Waffen-SS</em>.</p>",
"description_nl": "<p>Collaborateurs zouden niet loyaal zijn aan de natie en daarom verraad plegen. In het geval van de Duits bezetting van Nederland tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog worden een aantal groepen als collaborateurs gezien. Bijvoorbeeld NSB leden, mensen die voor de <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em> werken, bedrijven die er economisch op vooruit gaan en mensen die zich aanmelden voor de <em>Waffen-SS</em>.</p>",
"description_en": "<p>Collaborators were considered disloyal to the nation and thus to be committing treason. In the case of the German occupation of the Netherlands during World War II, a number of groups are considered collaborators. For example, NSB members, people working for the <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em>, companies that were gaining economic advantage and people who signed up for the <em>Waffen-SS</em>.</p>",
"summary": "Collaboration is collaboration with a (foreign) enemy in which one turns against one's own people and government.",
"summary_nl": "Collaboratie is samenwerking met een (buitenlandse) vijand waarbij men zich keert tegen eigen bevolking en overheid.",
"summary_en": "Collaboration is collaboration with a (foreign) enemy in which one turns against one's own people and government.",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2240"
],
"parent": null,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124498,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/35e39506-2e6f-4ba2-83b0-31ad32ca23a1/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "35e39506-2e6f-4ba2-83b0-31ad32ca23a1",
"name": "National Socialist Movement",
"name_nl": "Nationaal Socialistische Beweging",
"name_en": "National Socialist Movement",
"description": "<p>The National Socialist Movement (NSB) was founded in Utrecht in <strong>December 1931</strong> by Anton Adriaan Mussert. Mussert led the movement until the German capitulation in <strong>May 1945</strong>. In the pre-war years, the NSB failed to grow into a serious power factor. However, elections in <strong>1935</strong> and <strong>1937</strong> did bring NSB candidates to the Provincial Council, the Senate and the Lower House.<sup data-footnote-id=\"urytv\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Electoral support for the NSB had declined very sharply in the two intervening years, though. From 294,000 votes at the Provincial Council elections in <strong>1935</strong>, only 171,000 remained at the Lower House elections in <strong>1937</strong>.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>The movement had its own resistance corps, the <em>Resistance Division</em> (WA), from <strong>November 1932</strong>. This corps caused a great deal of street violence. Mussert disbanded it <strong>at the end of 1935</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> However, radical NSB groups continued to cause violence, often aimed at Jewish targets. This also happened in Anne Frank's surroundings. In <strong>May 1939</strong>, NSB members staged a major brawl in ice cream parlour 'Koco' on Amsterdam's Rijnstraat. They seriously abused some visitors there.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Two years later, NSB members tried to break into ice cream parlour 'Oase', which some policemen managed to prevent.<sup data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>The NSB, with initially mainly Mussolini-inspired ideas, sought a Dutch variant of fascism. During the German occupation, the NSB tried to create its own position, but eventually subordinated itself to the occupation authorities. Many NSB members ended up in high civil service positions and mayoral posts. Numerous members also joined the German military, ending up on the Eastern Front.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>17 September 1944</strong>, the government placed the NSB on a list of treasonous, and therefore banned, organisations.<sup data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"urytv\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie <a href=\"http://www.parlement.com\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.parlement.com</a>, zoeken met ‘Selectiemenu Eerste Kamer’ en ‘Selectiemenu Tweede Kamer’.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>H. Schumacher, “Tien jaar W.A.” in: <em>Nationaal-Socialistische Almanak</em>, Utrecht: Nenasu, 1943, p. 91-107, aldaar p. 95.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Gertjan Broek, <em>Weerkorpsen. Extreemrechtse strijdgroepen in Amsterdam, 1923 - 1942 (</em>Proefschrift Universiteit van Amsterdam 2014), p. 258-259.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, inv. nr. 2959: Rapport bureau Pieter Aertszstraat, 22 mei 1941, mut. 22.30.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jaap van Donselaar, <em>Fout na de oorlog. Fascistische en racistische organisaties in Nederland, 1950 – 1990</em>, Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1991, p. 10. ZIe ook: <a href=\"http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/\" target=\"_blank\">http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/</a> (geraadpleegd juni 2015).</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>De Nationaal Socialistische Beweging (NSB) werd in <strong>december 1931</strong> te Utrecht opgericht door Anton Adriaan Mussert. Mussert leidde de beweging tot de Duitse capitulatie in <strong>mei 1945</strong>. In de vooroorlogse jaren slaagde de NSB er niet in tot een serieuze machtsfactor uit te groeien. Wel brachten verkiezingen in <strong>1935</strong> en <strong>1937</strong> NSB-kandidaten in de Provinciale Staten, de Eerste en de Tweede Kamer.<sup data-footnote-id=\"urytv\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> De electorale steun voor de NSB was in de twee tussenliggende jaren wel zeer sterk afgenomen. Van 294.000 stemmen bij de Provinciale Statenverkiezing in <strong>1935</strong> bleven er bij Tweede-Kamerverkiezingen in <strong>1937</strong> 171.000 over.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>De beweging had vanaf november <strong>1932</strong> een eigen weerkorps, de <em>Weerbaarheidsafdeeling</em> (WA). Dit korps veroorzaakte veel straatgeweld. Mussert hief het <strong>eind 1935</strong> op.<sup data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Radicale NSB-groepen bleven echter geweld veroorzaken, vaak op Joodse doelen gericht. Ook in de leefomgeving van Anne Frank gebeurde dit. In <strong>mei 1939</strong> zetten NSB’ers een grote vechtpartij op touw in ijssalon ‘Koco’ aan de Amsterdamse Rijnstraat. Ze mishandelden daar enkele bezoekers ernstig.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Twee jaar later proberen NSB'ers bij ijssalon ‘Oase’ binnen te dringen, wat enkele politieagenten wisten te voorkomen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>De NSB streefde, met aanvankelijk vooral op Mussolini geinspireerde ideeën, naar een Nederlandse variant van het fascisme. Tijdens de Duitse bezetting probeerde de NSB een eigen positie te creëren, maar maakte zich uiteindelijk ondergeschikt aan de bezettingsautoriteiten. Veel NSB’ers kwamen op hoge ambtelijke posities en burgemeestersposten terecht. Ook traden talloze leden toe tot Duitse militaire verbanden en belandden zo aan het Oostfront.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Op <strong>17 september 1944</strong> plaatste de regering de NSB op een lijst van landverraderlijke, en daarom verboden, organisaties.<sup data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"urytv\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie <a href=\"http://www.parlement.com\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.parlement.com</a>, zoeken met ‘Selectiemenu Eerste Kamer’ en ‘Selectiemenu Tweede Kamer’.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>H. Schumacher, “Tien jaar W.A.” in: <em>Nationaal-Socialistische Almanak</em>, Utrecht: Nenasu, 1943, p. 91-107, aldaar p. 95.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Gertjan Broek, <em>Weerkorpsen. Extreemrechtse strijdgroepen in Amsterdam, 1923 - 1942 (</em>Proefschrift Universiteit van Amsterdam 2014), p. 258-259.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, inv. nr. 2959: Rapport bureau Pieter Aertszstraat, 22 mei 1941, mut. 22.30.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jaap van Donselaar, <em>Fout na de oorlog. Fascistische en racistische organisaties in Nederland, 1950 – 1990</em>, Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1991, p. 10. ZIe ook: <a href=\"http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/\" target=\"_blank\">http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/</a> (geraadpleegd juni 2015).</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>The National Socialist Movement (NSB) was founded in Utrecht in <strong>December 1931</strong> by Anton Adriaan Mussert. Mussert led the movement until the German capitulation in <strong>May 1945</strong>. In the pre-war years, the NSB failed to grow into a serious power factor. However, elections in <strong>1935</strong> and <strong>1937</strong> did bring NSB candidates to the Provincial Council, the Senate and the Lower House.<sup data-footnote-id=\"urytv\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Electoral support for the NSB had declined very sharply in the two intervening years, though. From 294,000 votes at the Provincial Council elections in <strong>1935</strong>, only 171,000 remained at the Lower House elections in <strong>1937</strong>.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>The movement had its own resistance corps, the <em>Resistance Division</em> (WA), from <strong>November 1932</strong>. This corps caused a great deal of street violence. Mussert disbanded it <strong>at the end of 1935</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> However, radical NSB groups continued to cause violence, often aimed at Jewish targets. This also happened in Anne Frank's surroundings. In <strong>May 1939</strong>, NSB members staged a major brawl in ice cream parlour 'Koco' on Amsterdam's Rijnstraat. They seriously abused some visitors there.<sup data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Two years later, NSB members tried to break into ice cream parlour 'Oase', which some policemen managed to prevent.<sup data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>The NSB, with initially mainly Mussolini-inspired ideas, sought a Dutch variant of fascism. During the German occupation, the NSB tried to create its own position, but eventually subordinated itself to the occupation authorities. Many NSB members ended up in high civil service positions and mayoral posts. Numerous members also joined the German military, ending up on the Eastern Front.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>17 September 1944</strong>, the government placed the NSB on a list of treasonous, and therefore banned, organisations.<sup data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"urytv\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Zie <a href=\"http://www.parlement.com\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.parlement.com</a>, zoeken met ‘Selectiemenu Eerste Kamer’ en ‘Selectiemenu Tweede Kamer’.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"i50pn\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>H. Schumacher, “Tien jaar W.A.” in: <em>Nationaal-Socialistische Almanak</em>, Utrecht: Nenasu, 1943, p. 91-107, aldaar p. 95.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"o2ajo\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Gertjan Broek, <em>Weerkorpsen. Extreemrechtse strijdgroepen in Amsterdam, 1923 - 1942 (</em>Proefschrift Universiteit van Amsterdam 2014), p. 258-259.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"yrltk\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, inv. nr. 2959: Rapport bureau Pieter Aertszstraat, 22 mei 1941, mut. 22.30.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"2kh0r\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Jaap van Donselaar, <em>Fout na de oorlog. Fascistische en racistische organisaties in Nederland, 1950 – 1990</em>, Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1991, p. 10. ZIe ook: <a href=\"http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/\" target=\"_blank\">http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0002010/</a> (geraadpleegd juni 2015).</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "The National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands (1931-1945), founded by Anton Adriaan Mussert.",
"summary_nl": "De Nationaal Socialistische Beweging in Nederland (1931-1945), opgericht door Anton Adriaan Mussert.",
"summary_en": "The National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands (1931-1945), founded by Anton Adriaan Mussert.",
"same_as": [
"https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2244"
],
"parent": 396124659,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124654,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/2abdc9fe-b0e6-493d-a6cd-a8fd85baabd7/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "2abdc9fe-b0e6-493d-a6cd-a8fd85baabd7",
"name": "Arrest and betrayal",
"name_nl": "Arrestatie en verraad",
"name_en": "Arrest and betrayal",
"description": "<p>One of the most frequently asked questions about the history of Anne Frank and the inhabitants of the Secret Annex is: Who actually betrayed them? This question continues to intrigue people. The Anne Frank House (AFH) still regularly receives suggestions, usually singling out specific individuals. These suggestions are always taken seriously but so far have not provided useful leads. And, of course, here at the Anne Frank House this question is always present in the background. In recent years, the AFH has made more of a commitment to focus on conducting its own research, so this matter is now part of the Knowledge Centre’s research program.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Premise and Background</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>This investigative report is based on the premise that only one thing can be agreed on with certainty: on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>, members of the <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em> or SD (German Security Service) raided the building at 263 Prinsengracht and arrested ten people. It is an assumption – granted a sound one – that this was not a chance occurrence. Obviously, the building had been selected for a reason. Yet, on what information that raid was based and how the SD got that information is still completely unclear. Whether this was a matter of betrayal, committed deliberately or not, is also an assumption. It remains to be seen if an analysis of the available data convincingly supports this decade-old theory. Shortly after the liberation, Otto Frank and the helpers took steps to identify those who might have been responsible for the betrayal. The question of whether betrayal had taken place was not under discussion at that moment. In <strong>1963</strong>, after the Austrian “Nazi-hunter” Simon Wiesenthal tracked down the former SS Officer Karl Joseph Silberbauer, the man who had led the raid on the Secret Annex, the assumption of betrayal seemed to be confirmed. Consequently, until now the literature on this subject has always focused on the question of who? It has long been assumed that a betrayer was out there who needed to be found. However, the sobering reality is that to date this avenue of thinking has yielded nothing conclusive.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Research Question and Sources</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Considering the above, there is sufficient reason to be receptive to new perspectives and not to exclude other theories. Given what was just presented in the last paragraph, the proposed research question is: Based on what information did the SD raid 263 Prinsengracht on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>, and how did it acquire this information? Both existing and previously unknown sources have been consulted to address this question. Earlier studies generally relied on source material from the files of the Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging or CABR (Central Archives for Special Criminal Jurisdiction). Despite extensive research, no definitive leads have ever been found there, but information in these files can still be very helpful. Therefore, during this study, a lot of data was scrutinized again and compared with previously unknown or untapped sources. This material included police reports from Amsterdam, Zwolle, and Haarlem, as well as records from the judicial authorities in the latter two cities. In addition, the increasing digitization of data from municipal population registers has made it easier to access information and identify how people might be connected. The ongoing historical research done by the Anne Frank House in recent years has provided more understanding as well. These insights have also been applied while re-examining earlier ideas and theories. Of course, in the analysis of all the related data, existing publications were also consulted. Over the years, several books have been released about the betrayal of people in hiding during the wartime occupation and how they were hunted down.<sup data-footnote-id=\"sa59d\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Biographies about both Anne and Otto Frank also present different theories about the events leading up to the raid on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"1qfz0\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Nonetheless, as the 2003 evaluation conducted by researchers David Barnouw and Gerrold van der Stroom of the NIOD (Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, previously the Dutch Institute for War Documentation) concludes, these theories do not stand up to scrutiny.<sup data-footnote-id=\"cz28w\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> An overview of the source material used for this investigation – published as well as unpublished – is included at the end of this report</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"sa59d\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij: de jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Koos Groen, <em>Een prooi wordt jager: de zaak van de Joodse verraadster Ans van Dijk</em>, herz. ed., Meppel: Just Publishers, 2016; Gerard Kremer, <em>Anne Frank betrayed: the mystery unravelled after 75 years</em>, Ede: De Lantaarn, 2020; Rosemary Sullivan, <em>The betrayal of Anne Frank: a cold case investigation</em>, New York, NY: Harper, 2022 (upd. ed. with a new afterword 2023); Joop van Wijk-Voskuijl & Jeroen De Bruyn, <em>The last secret of the Secret Annex : the untold story of Anne Frank, her silent protector, and a family betrayal</em>, London: Simon & Schuster, 2023.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"1qfz0\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Carol Ann Lee, <em>The hidden life of Otto Frank</em>, London: Viking, 2002; Melissa Müller, <em>Anne Frank: the biography, u</em>pd. and exp. ed., London: Bloomsbury, 2013.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"cz28w\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>David Barnouw & Gerrold van der Stroom, <a href=\"https://www.niod.nl/nl/publicaties/who-betrayed-anne-frank\"><em>Who betrayed Anne Frank?</em></a>, Amsterdam: NIOD, 2003. For an updated version, see: David Barnouw, <em>Anne Frank en het verraad: een overzicht</em>, Amsterdam: Boom, 2023.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>Een van de meest gestelde vragen over de geschiedenis van Anne Frank en het Achterhuis is wel: 'Wie heeft ze nu eigenlijk verraden?' Die kwestie houdt zeer veel mensen bezig. Er komen bij de Anne Frank Stichting (AFS) met zekere regelmaat nog suggesties binnen, doorgaans duidelijk gericht naar individuen. Die suggesties worden altijd serieus bekeken maar leverden tot dusverre geen bruikbare gezichtspunten op. Ook binnen de AFS is het vraagstuk uiteraard altijd sterk aanwezig. Nu de AFS zich de laatste jaren sterker dan voorheen op eigen onderzoek is gaan richten, is deze kwestie in het onderzoeksprogramma opgenomen.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Opzet en achtergrond</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Het onderzoek is opgezet vanuit de gedachte dat er maar één ding vaststaat: er is op <strong>4 augustus 1944</strong> een inval van leden van de <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em> (SD) in het pand Prinsengracht 263 geweest, en daarbij zijn tien personen gearresteerd. Het is een aanname – hoewel een veilige – dat dit geen toevalstreffer was. Men had het wel degelijk op dit pand gemunt. Op grond van welke kennis de inval gebeurde, en hoe de SD daaraan kwam is echter volstrekt onduidelijk. Dat het een kwestie was van verraad, al dan niet welbewust en doelgericht gepleegd, is eveneens een aanname. Het zal moeten blijken in hoeverre analyse van de beschikbare gegevens deze overtuigend steunt. Kort na de bevrijding zetten Otto Frank en de helpers stappen om de opsporing te bevorderen van degene die voor het verraad verantwoordelijk zou zijn. De vraag of er wel werkelijk verraad plaatsvond stond niet merkbaar ter discussie. Nadat ‘nazi-jager’ Simon Wiesenthal in <strong>1963</strong> de ex-SS’er Karl Joseph Silberbauer opspoorde, de man die de inval in het Achterhuis leidde, leek de aanname van verraad bevestigd. In de literatuur over het onderwerp tot nu toe was de vraagstelling dan ook steeds gericht op ‘wie?’ Dat er gezocht moest worden naar een daadwerkelijke verrader stond daarbij op voorhand vast. De ontnuchterende conclusie is dat die aanpak tot op heden geen betrouwbare resultaten opleverde.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Vraagstelling en bronnen</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Het voorgaande geeft voldoende aanleiding om het blikveld te verruimen en andere mogelijkheden niet bij voorbaat uit te sluiten. Uitgaande van wat in de vorige paragraaf naar voren is gebracht luidt daarom de vraagstelling: op grond van welke informatie viel de SD het pand Prinsengracht 263 op <strong>4 augustus 1944</strong> binnen, en hoe kwamen ze daaraan? Om deze vraag te beantwoorden is gebruik gemaakt van bekend en tot dusver onbekend materiaal. Oudere onderzoeken baseerden zich doorgaans op bronnen die zich bevinden in de dossiers van het Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR). Ondanks zeer uitvoerig onderzoek zijn hier nooit duidelijke aanwijzingen aangetroffen. Desondanks zijn gegevens uit deze dossiers uiteraard van groot belang. In dit onderzoek zijn veel gegevens daarom opnieuw bekeken en vergeleken met voorheen onbekende of onbenutte bronnen. Hiertoe behoren rapporten van de politiekorpsen van Amsterdam, Zwolle en Haarlem, en stukken van justitiële autoriteiten in de laatste twee steden. Met behulp van steeds vaker gedigitaliseerde gegevens uit de bevolkingsadministratie konden bovendien netwerken beter in kaart worden gebracht. Het lopend historisch onderzoek van de Anne Frank Stichting leverde de afgelopen jaren scherpere inzichten op. Deze zijn gebruikt om oudere denkbeelden en theorieën tegen het licht te houden. Bij het analyseren van alle gegevens is vanzelfsprekend ook gebruik gemaakt van de bestaande literatuur. Over verraad van onderduikers en andere vormen van mensenjacht verschenen in de loop van de tijd verschillende boeken.<sup data-footnote-id=\"1xj0u\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> In biografieën over zowel Anne als Otto Frank zijn eveneens verschillende theorieën ontvouwd over het voortraject van de inval van <strong>4 augustus</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9zinm\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Deze bleven evenwel onbewezen, zoals een evaluatie van de onderzoekers David Barnouw en Gerrold van der Stroom van het NIOD (destijds Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogsdocumentatie) uit 2003 aantoont.<sup data-footnote-id=\"ivelj\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Een overzicht van al het gebruikte materiaal, gepubliceerd en ongepubliceerd, is aan dit verslag toegevoegd.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"1xj0u\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij: de jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Jeroen De Bruyn & Joop van Wijk, <em>Bep Voskuijl, het zwijgen voorbij: een biografie van de jongste helper van het Achterhuis</em>, Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2015; Koos Groen, <em>Een prooi wordt jager: de zaak van de joodse verraadster Ans van Dijk, </em>herz. ed., Meppel: Just Publishers, 2016; Gerard Kremer, <em>De achtertuin van het Achterhuis</em>, Ede: De Lantaarn, 2018, Rosemary Sullivan, <em>Het verraad van Anne Frank: het baanbrekende onderzoek van een internationaal coldcaseteam in Nederland</em>, Amsterdam: Ambo Anthos, 2022.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9zinm\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Melissa Müller, <em>Anne Frank: de biografie</em>, 5e, geheel herz. dr., Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2013; Carol Ann Lee, <em>Het verborgen leven van Otto Frank: de biografie</em>, Amsterdam: Balans, 2002.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"ivelj\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>David Barnouw & Gerrold van der Stroom, <em>Wie verraadde Anne Frank?</em>, Amsterdam: Boom / NIOD, 2003. Voor een geactualiseerde versie, zie: David Barnouw, <em>Anne Frank en het verraad: een overzicht</em>, Amsterdam: Boom, 2023.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>One of the most frequently asked questions about the history of Anne Frank and the inhabitants of the Secret Annex is: Who actually betrayed them? This question continues to intrigue people. The Anne Frank House (AFH) still regularly receives suggestions, usually singling out specific individuals. These suggestions are always taken seriously but so far have not provided useful leads. And, of course, here at the Anne Frank House this question is always present in the background. In recent years, the AFH has made more of a commitment to focus on conducting its own research, so this matter is now part of the Knowledge Centre’s research program.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Premise and Background</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>This investigative report is based on the premise that only one thing can be agreed on with certainty: on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>, members of the <em>Sicherheitsdienst</em> or SD (German Security Service) raided the building at 263 Prinsengracht and arrested ten people. It is an assumption – granted a sound one – that this was not a chance occurrence. Obviously, the building had been selected for a reason. Yet, on what information that raid was based and how the SD got that information is still completely unclear. Whether this was a matter of betrayal, committed deliberately or not, is also an assumption. It remains to be seen if an analysis of the available data convincingly supports this decade-old theory. Shortly after the liberation, Otto Frank and the helpers took steps to identify those who might have been responsible for the betrayal. The question of whether betrayal had taken place was not under discussion at that moment. In <strong>1963</strong>, after the Austrian “Nazi-hunter” Simon Wiesenthal tracked down the former SS Officer Karl Joseph Silberbauer, the man who had led the raid on the Secret Annex, the assumption of betrayal seemed to be confirmed. Consequently, until now the literature on this subject has always focused on the question of who? It has long been assumed that a betrayer was out there who needed to be found. However, the sobering reality is that to date this avenue of thinking has yielded nothing conclusive.</p>\r\n\r\n<h1><strong>Research Question and Sources</strong></h1>\r\n\r\n<p>Considering the above, there is sufficient reason to be receptive to new perspectives and not to exclude other theories. Given what was just presented in the last paragraph, the proposed research question is: Based on what information did the SD raid 263 Prinsengracht on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>, and how did it acquire this information? Both existing and previously unknown sources have been consulted to address this question. Earlier studies generally relied on source material from the files of the Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging or CABR (Central Archives for Special Criminal Jurisdiction). Despite extensive research, no definitive leads have ever been found there, but information in these files can still be very helpful. Therefore, during this study, a lot of data was scrutinized again and compared with previously unknown or untapped sources. This material included police reports from Amsterdam, Zwolle, and Haarlem, as well as records from the judicial authorities in the latter two cities. In addition, the increasing digitization of data from municipal population registers has made it easier to access information and identify how people might be connected. The ongoing historical research done by the Anne Frank House in recent years has provided more understanding as well. These insights have also been applied while re-examining earlier ideas and theories. Of course, in the analysis of all the related data, existing publications were also consulted. Over the years, several books have been released about the betrayal of people in hiding during the wartime occupation and how they were hunted down.<sup data-footnote-id=\"sa59d\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup> Biographies about both Anne and Otto Frank also present different theories about the events leading up to the raid on <strong>4 August 1944</strong>.<sup data-footnote-id=\"1qfz0\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> Nonetheless, as the 2003 evaluation conducted by researchers David Barnouw and Gerrold van der Stroom of the NIOD (Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies, previously the Dutch Institute for War Documentation) concludes, these theories do not stand up to scrutiny.<sup data-footnote-id=\"cz28w\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> An overview of the source material used for this investigation – published as well as unpublished – is included at the end of this report</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"sa59d\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Sytze van der Zee, <em>Vogelvrij: de jacht op de Joodse onderduiker</em>, Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2010; Koos Groen, <em>Een prooi wordt jager: de zaak van de Joodse verraadster Ans van Dijk</em>, herz. ed., Meppel: Just Publishers, 2016; Gerard Kremer, <em>Anne Frank betrayed: the mystery unravelled after 75 years</em>, Ede: De Lantaarn, 2020; Rosemary Sullivan, <em>The betrayal of Anne Frank: a cold case investigation</em>, New York, NY: Harper, 2022 (upd. ed. with a new afterword 2023); Joop van Wijk-Voskuijl & Jeroen De Bruyn, <em>The last secret of the Secret Annex : the untold story of Anne Frank, her silent protector, and a family betrayal</em>, London: Simon & Schuster, 2023.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"1qfz0\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Carol Ann Lee, <em>The hidden life of Otto Frank</em>, London: Viking, 2002; Melissa Müller, <em>Anne Frank: the biography, u</em>pd. and exp. ed., London: Bloomsbury, 2013.</cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"cz28w\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>David Barnouw & Gerrold van der Stroom, <a href=\"https://www.niod.nl/nl/publicaties/who-betrayed-anne-frank\"><em>Who betrayed Anne Frank?</em></a>, Amsterdam: NIOD, 2003. For an updated version, see: David Barnouw, <em>Anne Frank en het verraad: een overzicht</em>, Amsterdam: Boom, 2023.</cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "Extensive research into the arrest and possible betrayal of the people in hiding in the Secret Annex was carried out by the Anne Frank House in 2016. Read the introduction here and download the entire report ´Research report on betrayal and arrest of the people in hiding in the Secret Annex´ here.",
"summary_nl": "Naar de arrestatie en het mogelijke verraad van de onderduikers in het Achterhuis is in 2016 door de Anne Frank Stichting uitgebreid onderzoek gedaan. Lees hier de inleiding en download het gehele verslag ´Onderzoeksverslag inzake verraad en arrestatie van de onderduikers in het Achterhuis´",
"summary_en": "Extensive research into the arrest and possible betrayal of the people in hiding in the Secret Annex was carried out by the Anne Frank House in 2016. Read the introduction here and download the entire report ´Research report on betrayal and arrest of the people in hiding in the Secret Annex´ here.",
"same_as": null,
"parent": 396124388,
"files": [
916,
917
]
},
"score": 0.0
},
{
"type": "subject",
"instance": {
"id": 396124655,
"image": null,
"url": "https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/7d9879d7-46de-4a25-8d5e-1d639892c140/",
"published": true,
"uuid": "7d9879d7-46de-4a25-8d5e-1d639892c140",
"name": "Opekta and Gies & Co after the 4 August 1944 raid",
"name_nl": "Opekta en Gies & Co na de inval van 4 augustus 1944",
"name_en": "Opekta and Gies & Co after the 4 August 1944 raid",
"description": "<p>After 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.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>It 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 <strong>1963</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Kugler stated in <strong>September 1945</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> In a conversation with the journalist Ernst Schnabel <strong>in the late 1950s</strong>, Miep Gies confirmed Daatzelaar's initiative.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> She referred at that time to the 'Verhafteten'. In <strong>1963</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> 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.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>In 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 <strong>29 August</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup> An answer is not known, but it would later emerge that the pair had been imprisoned in Camp Amersfoort.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>18 September</strong>, Jo Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort. Because of his stomach problems, the Red Cross had worked to secure his release.<sup data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> He reappeared at Prinsengracht to take up his duties. Thus, the two companies slowly entered the last winter of the war.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Although 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 <strong>16 January 1945</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> However, when Otto Frank and his associates filed a case against Van Maaren in <strong>1948</strong>, it turned out he had been a suspect. His house had been searched by detectives, apparently in the presence of Broks.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> That search yielded nothing.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>There 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 Jo Kleiman's father died in February. On the business front, sources are scarce. Opekta's <strong>1944</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Only after the liberation could serious work start on rebuilding the businesses - and the country.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), toegang 2.09.09, inv. nr. 23892: verklaringen Miep Gies en W.G. van Maaren, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13-14 en 30. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 105746: brief Victor Kugler namens fa. Gies & Co. aan PRA Haarlem, 29 september 1945. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank. </em><em>Spur eines Kindes</em>, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1958, p. 123. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892: verklaring Miep Gies, 23 december 1963, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, Afwikkelingsbureau Concentratiekampen, toegang 250m, inv. nr. 143: brief H. Gies aan mw. Timmenga – Hiemstra, 29 augustus 1944. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892, dossier PRA 61169 : Verklaring Kleiman aan de Politiek Recherche Afdeling, 12 januari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, toegang 5225, inv. nr. 7014: meldingsrapport recherche Singel, 16 januari 1945, mut. 12.50. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892:, Verklaring – i.z. Gies & Co, W.G. van Maaren, 2 februari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting, Anne Frank Collectie, reg. code A/Opekta/I/10: Balans en Verlies- en winstrekening per 31 december 1944. </cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_nl": "<p>Na de inval van vier augustus bleven de firma’s Gies & Co en Opekta zonder directie achter. Het personeel, Bep Voskuijl en Miep 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.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Het 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 <strong>1963</strong> zei Miep tegen de Rijksrecherche dat Van Maaren bij haar om de sleutels kwam omdat ‘ze’ (d.w.z. de <em>SD</em>) 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Kugler verklaarde in <strong>september 1945</strong> dat vertegenwoordiger Hendrik Pieter Daatzelaar destijds had willen proberen de <em>directie</em>, dat wil zeggen Kugler en Kleiman, op de Euterpestraat vrij te kopen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> In een gesprek met de journalist Ernst Schnabel <strong>eind jaren vijftig</strong> bevestigde Miep Gies het initiatief van Daatzelaar.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> Zij sprak daar over de ‘Verhafteten’. In <strong>1963</strong> vertelde ze nog eens aan de Rijksrecherche dat zij met geld ‘de gearresteerden’ wilde vrijkopen, zonder daarbij Daatzelaar nog te noemen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> In hoeverre echt de hoop leefde ook de <em>onderduikers </em>vrij te kunnen kopen is niet te zeggen. De directeuren waren opgepakt om wat ze hadden gedaan, de onderduikers om wie ze waren.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>In 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 <strong>29 augustus</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup> Een antwoord is niet bekend, maar later zou blijken dat het tweetal in Kamp Amersfoort was opgesloten.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Op <strong>18 september</strong> kwam Jo Kleiman weer vrij uit Kamp Amersfoort. Vanwege zijn maagklachten had het Rode Kruis zich voor zijn vrijlating ingespannen.<sup data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> Hij verscheen weer op de Prinsengracht om zijn taak op zich te nemen. Zo gingen de twee bedrijven langzaamaan de laatste oorlogswinter tegemoet.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Hoewel 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 <strong>16 januari 1945</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> Toen Otto Frank en zijn medewerkers in <strong>1948</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> Die huiszoeking leverde niets op.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Er 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 Jo Kleiman overleden. In zakelijk opzicht zijn de bronnen schaars. Het jaarverslag van Opekta over <strong>1944</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Pas na de bevrijding kon serieus werk worden gemaakt van de wederopbouw van de bedrijven. En van het land.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), toegang 2.09.09, inv. nr. 23892: verklaringen Miep Gies en W.G. van Maaren, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13-14 en 30. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 105746: brief Victor Kugler namens fa. Gies & Co. aan PRA Haarlem, 29 september 1945. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank. </em><em>Spur eines Kindes</em>, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1958, p. 123. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892: verklaring Miep Gies, 23 december 1963, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, Afwikkelingsbureau Concentratiekampen, toegang 250m, inv. nr. 143: brief H. Gies aan mw. Timmenga – Hiemstra, 29 augustus 1944. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892, dossier PRA 61169 : Verklaring Kleiman aan de Politiek Recherche Afdeling, 12 januari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, toegang 5225, inv. nr. 7014: meldingsrapport recherche Singel, 16 januari 1945, mut. 12.50. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892:, Verklaring – i.z. Gies & Co, W.G. van Maaren, 2 februari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting, Anne Frank Collectie, reg. code A/Opekta/I/10: Balans en Verlies- en winstrekening per 31 december 1944. </cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"description_en": "<p>After 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.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>It 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 <strong>1963</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\"><a href=\"#footnote-1\" id=\"footnote-marker-1-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[1]</a></sup></p>\r\n\r\n<p>Kugler stated in <strong>September 1945</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\"><a href=\"#footnote-2\" id=\"footnote-marker-2-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[2]</a></sup> In a conversation with the journalist Ernst Schnabel <strong>in the late 1950s</strong>, Miep Gies confirmed Daatzelaar's initiative.<sup data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\"><a href=\"#footnote-3\" id=\"footnote-marker-3-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[3]</a></sup> She referred at that time to the 'Verhafteten'. In <strong>1963</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\"><a href=\"#footnote-4\" id=\"footnote-marker-4-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[4]</a></sup> 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.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>In 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 <strong>29 August</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\"><a href=\"#footnote-5\" id=\"footnote-marker-5-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[5]</a></sup> An answer is not known, but it would later emerge that the pair had been imprisoned in Camp Amersfoort.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>On <strong>18 September</strong>, Jo Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort. Because of his stomach problems, the Red Cross had worked to secure his release.<sup data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\"><a href=\"#footnote-6\" id=\"footnote-marker-6-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[6]</a></sup> He reappeared at Prinsengracht to take up his duties. Thus, the two companies slowly entered the last winter of the war.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>Although 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 <strong>16 January 1945</strong>, 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\"><a href=\"#footnote-7\" id=\"footnote-marker-7-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[7]</a></sup> However, when Otto Frank and his associates filed a case against Van Maaren in <strong>1948</strong>, it turned out he had been a suspect. His house had been searched by detectives, apparently in the presence of Broks.<sup data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\"><a href=\"#footnote-8\" id=\"footnote-marker-8-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[8]</a></sup> That search yielded nothing.</p>\r\n\r\n<p>There 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 Jo Kleiman's father died in February. On the business front, sources are scarce. Opekta's <strong>1944</strong> 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.<sup data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\"><a href=\"#footnote-9\" id=\"footnote-marker-9-1\" rel=\"footnote\">[9]</a></sup> Only after the liberation could serious work start on rebuilding the businesses - and the country.</p>\r\n\r\n<section class=\"footnotes\">\r\n<header>\r\n<h2>Footnotes</h2>\r\n</header>\r\n\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"8iqah\" id=\"footnote-1\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-1-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Nationaal Archief (NL-HaNA), Den Haag, Centraal Archief van de Bijzondere Rechtspleging (CABR), toegang 2.09.09, inv. nr. 23892: verklaringen Miep Gies en W.G. van Maaren, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13-14 en 30. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"0phd3\" id=\"footnote-2\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-2-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 105746: brief Victor Kugler namens fa. Gies & Co. aan PRA Haarlem, 29 september 1945. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"gkqss\" id=\"footnote-3\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-3-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Ernst Schnabel, <em>Anne Frank. </em><em>Spur eines Kindes</em>, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1958, p. 123. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"klmqd\" id=\"footnote-4\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-4-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892: verklaring Miep Gies, 23 december 1963, p.v.b. 85/1963 v.H., p. 13. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"r8vk8\" id=\"footnote-5\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-5-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NIOD Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs-, Holocaust- en Genocidestudies, Afwikkelingsbureau Concentratiekampen, toegang 250m, inv. nr. 143: brief H. Gies aan mw. Timmenga – Hiemstra, 29 augustus 1944. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"pxso1\" id=\"footnote-6\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-6-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892, dossier PRA 61169 : Verklaring Kleiman aan de Politiek Recherche Afdeling, 12 januari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"wivsl\" id=\"footnote-7\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-7-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Stadsarchief Amsterdam, Gemeentepolitie Amsterdam, toegang 5225, inv. nr. 7014: meldingsrapport recherche Singel, 16 januari 1945, mut. 12.50. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"9xz9r\" id=\"footnote-8\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-8-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>NL-HaNA, CABR, inv. nr. 23892:, Verklaring – i.z. Gies & Co, W.G. van Maaren, 2 februari 1948. </cite></li>\r\n\t<li data-footnote-id=\"xrxer\" id=\"footnote-9\"><sup><a href=\"#footnote-marker-9-1\">^</a> </sup><cite>Anne Frank Stichting, Anne Frank Collectie, reg. code A/Opekta/I/10: Balans en Verlies- en winstrekening per 31 december 1944. </cite></li>\r\n</ol>\r\n</section>",
"summary": "With the arrest of helpers Victor Kugler and Jo Kleiman, the management of Gies & Co and Opekta was gone. The three other helpers, Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl, remained free and continued the businesses. Kleiman returned to the office after his release (18 September 1944).",
"summary_nl": "Door de arrestatie van de helpers Victor Kugler en Jo Kleiman was de directie van Gies & Co en Opekta weg. De drie andere helpers, Miep en Jan Gies en Bep Voskuijl, bleven vrij en zetten het bedrijf voort. Kleiman kwam na zijn vrijlating (18 september 1944) terug op kantoor.",
"summary_en": "With the arrest of helpers Victor Kugler and Jo Kleiman, the management of Gies & Co and Opekta was gone. The three other helpers, Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl, remained free and continued the businesses. Kleiman returned to the office after his release (18 September 1944).",
"same_as": null,
"parent": 396124654,
"files": []
},
"score": 0.0
}
]
}
