![](\"/media/uploads/2022/10/27/image-20221027150310-7.png\")
![](\"/media/uploads/2022/10/27/image-20221027150310-9.png\")
He lived here with landlady Stephanie Meijer-Schuster.[1] Here he also met Otto Frank, of whom Meijer-Schuster was a childhood friend.[2] Charlotte Kaletta continued to live here during the occupation years. Koos Vorrink, a prominent member of the SDAP, also lived at this address.[3]
\r\n\r\nHij woonde hier bij hospita Stephanie Meijer - Schuster.[1] Hier leerde hij ook Otto Frank kennen, van wie Meijer - Schuster een jeugdvriendin was.[2] Charlotte Kaletta bleef hier gedurende de bezettingsjaren wonen. Ook SDAP-prominent Koos Vorrink woonde op dit adres.[3]
\r\n\r\nHe lived here with landlady Stephanie Meijer-Schuster.[1] Here he also met Otto Frank, of whom Meijer-Schuster was a childhood friend.[2] Charlotte Kaletta continued to live here during the occupation years. Koos Vorrink, a prominent member of the SDAP, also lived at this address.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe Rivierenbuurt is een in het oosten van het Amsterdamse stadsdeel Zuid gelegen buurt, die wordt begrensd door de Amstelrivier in het oosten, de Boerenwetering in het westen, het Amstelkanaal in het noorden, en de Zuidelijke Wandelweg in het zuiden. Het maakt deel uit van Plan Zuid, een stedenbouwkundig plan voor Amsterdam-Zuid, dat in het begin van de 20e eeuw werd ontworpen door de architect H.P Berlage.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid bestond uit drie delen: de Apollobuurt en de Stadionbuurt, gericht op welgestelden, middenklasse en arbeidersklasse, en de Rivierenbuurt, gericht op de middenklasse. Ook een groot deel van de buurt Nieuwe Pijp behoort tot het Plan Zuid. In het stedenbouwkundig plan was bedacht dat drie hoofdstraten (de Amstellanen) de buurt in een Y-vorm zouden doorsnijden, en samen zouden komen op het Daniël Willinkplein, een vernoeming naar de Nederlandse schrijver Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] Dit waren de Amstellaan (na de oorlog werd dit de Stalinlaan en in 1956, na de Russische inval in Hongarije, gewijzigd in Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (nu Churchill-laan) en Zuider Amstellaan (nu Rooseveltlaan).[3] De overige straatnamen in de buurt werden vernoemd naar Nederlandse rivieren.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe woningen in de Rivierenbuurt oefenden vanaf het begin van de jaren dertig grote aantrekkingskracht uit op Joodse Amsterdammers uit de middenklasse. Qua grootte en voorzieningen staken zij bijzonder gunstig af tegen de kleine, slechte woningen in de overbevolkte Jodenbuurt rond het Waterlooplein. Toch was er in de jaren dertig veel leegstand, en daardoor streken ook veel Duitse Joden die vanuit nazi-Duitsland naar Nederland vluchtten, hier neer, waaronder ook de families Frank en Van Pels en een aantal van hun vrienden en kennissen. De immigranten voelden zich thuis in deze buurt met de vele geloofsgenoten. Uiteindelijk woonde in 1940 zo'n 40% van de in Amsterdam wonende Joden in dit deel van de stad.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","description_nl":"Onder verblijf wordt verstaan een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.
","description_en":"Accommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","summary":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","summary_nl":"Verblijf is een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.","summary_en":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","same_as":null,"parent":396124413,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04bc398b-9132-421d-be07-26d89aecf727","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c05767e4-ac67-4d2e-a8f1-fdcfc93c3cdc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f4d47668-4071-4530-95f0-5c463fddbc60","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5e6e4c0b-e255-4b81-9abc-a8b22fd9d87c","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4caabcc8-204b-438d-915c-1e6ea54630bb","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f139a0d3-6359-4ad4-946d-b2ee153e7b99","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b654804b-25a1-4c46-affd-0de941f99790","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05463aca-21a7-4238-8686-0a4a606e10f5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8eb86b87-b516-415d-a0de-410bb88a0ab6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5f77d005-c71e-437e-8877-2ec3088e2031","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/03c56548-11fe-4e75-9a79-f1585bd2372a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b4236d95-43dd-42e6-93d5-c44eaba41b23","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1194af60-b60a-49ae-8762-cf8567fd21fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36022488-7682-43ff-918c-a2b970789006","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c730f47b-7508-4ea2-978e-331073f46ee4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/889ae572-cc0a-4847-b3c9-3bf177af8ecc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/64af952c-9403-4db9-b2cb-5ba310b33332","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ce70ffc-474f-4743-a9a8-dd4ed4e59c77","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4a5dbef2-cafa-46af-acfe-3470825a92a7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/88db758b-1dac-4579-86c6-33cc2bdc5273","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e48c8d0c-8825-4c34-bd22-8c2a28adb089","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/9c7b897a-5803-4d3a-a810-d05792a6ff5f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6b0dbaa0-4815-4f3e-ab1c-e0ee6196188e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/07627e87-1438-47e2-a29c-847e27ce51c8","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa3cb90f-e2cc-4611-b0cb-316c6202e75b","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/663c8bc9-dc5c-4dd1-bced-88ce12738280","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c4260f04-7551-463d-89f5-a7ce48eeecd3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4837c7f7-8098-4daf-8fb4-3408adb041fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/dd7e96a8-2902-4144-99a7-2aef084ed61d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/59a5ed20-0f01-42b5-a1da-785936de9c47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84d67272-953d-4e09-8014-20cd8a55bd15","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c65659a4-793a-47f1-a7c5-ee2f49ee46b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/cc6c2172-d1f5-49c4-86b0-c31aa8bd02ea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/903ba158-f1e0-4d0f-b613-eae91df2893e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bd069b91-d876-4eb7-99e7-e62aa158eae4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/995b7432-6739-42b0-9434-5c3801327d6a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b6bed785-6178-42d2-9f90-a90e7730c21e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c9289eb-d4f6-46b8-afe7-5c15df9164c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f3ea591a-9ec2-49fa-aede-0308f0c1ea5e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aab06445-fe04-4578-9fba-19e679b65d6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8f078d07-0749-4824-9317-cca40a1f8c17","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/49fb0306-d233-4742-8133-c98fdba59175","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c6d71313-a017-4e4e-b05c-f56259c2bf72","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/592362c0-d64f-42be-8319-f7e3973610d3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6a58ce7e-02e2-4517-85ce-5b03eb20b753","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0bfa905d-38bd-4422-85ed-a4f2ecc7b506","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7e61c0df-f509-437a-8f9f-5d70bdd92934","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b7c73757-981c-409e-95cc-cc8eab873a93","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/150fa41e-02ba-4cae-9f32-62460252007f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/043a50b5-46ac-4222-8001-6ad28d51a1e2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/da7429b4-b23f-4947-b6d8-e5e6c0f143c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6660d32e-d2b0-468d-b7e7-01ceefc4376d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05693431-6b99-47b4-8e47-59ab3e95a889","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04f5ebdc-fe09-4ce6-991b-cf851a81c198","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a423c2ce-aac1-4ff6-86b1-f5233e4b77ff","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0ccf3db9-1774-4848-ad11-627e3fc64cea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bd22a6-e3e0-45e6-9bef-449b9894f0db","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db15398a-d845-4147-9ceb-1530e7e9a4e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b5ad5b8d-2494-42ad-bf1f-d2a1f9250bb2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2c4e9ad5-bb38-4440-ae2f-7b3fc3fba34a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/697cb023-79af-4e61-864a-49adce1e8f82","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db594671-5a23-4c77-94e5-719f47bf03e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7d0da592-ac93-4786-b1c3-932a0fd9dcf5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aa7d60c3-6d94-4f52-a729-96440eeb4d5f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ff53ce1-d866-4190-a138-16c32a9eca43"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4/","published":true,"name":"Rivierenlaan 270-I","name_nl":"Rivierenlaan 270-I","name_en":"Rivierenlaan 270-I","uuid":"36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4","content":"\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\n
Otto Frank was registered at Merwedeplein from 5 December 1933, and the rest of his family from 7 December.[1] However, it was not until mid-February that they were all reunited in their new home.
\r\n\r\nIn a letter from November, addressed to a former neighbour from Frankfurt, Otto wrote that they had found a house.[2] From spring 1934 on, a number of household helps, subtenants, relatives and acquaintances lived with the family for shorter or longer periods. From 24 March 1939 to 29 January 1942, Edith's mother, Rosalie Holländer-Stern, lived with the family.
\r\n\r\nVanaf 5 december 1933 was Otto Frank op het Merwedeplein ingeschreven, de rest van zijn gezin vanaf de zevende.[1] Het duurde echter nog tot midden februari voordat allen daadwerkelijk in de nieuwe woning herenigd waren.
\r\n\r\nIn een brief uit november, gericht aan een vroeger buurmeisje uit Frankfurt, schreef Otto dat zij een woning hadden gevonden.[2] Vanaf het voorjaar van 1934 woonden er achtereenvolgens nog een aantal huishoudelijke hulpen, onderhuurder, familieleden en bekenden korter of langer bij het gezin. Van 24 maart 1939 tot 29 januari 1942 woonde Ediths moeder, Rosalie Holländer-Stern, bij het gezin.
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank was registered at Merwedeplein from 5 December 1933, and the rest of his family from 7 December.[1] However, it was not until mid-February that they were all reunited in their new home.
\r\n\r\nIn a letter from November, addressed to a former neighbour from Frankfurt, Otto wrote that they had found a house.[2] From spring 1934 on, a number of household helps, subtenants, relatives and acquaintances lived with the family for shorter or longer periods. From 24 March 1939 to 29 January 1942, Edith's mother, Rosalie Holländer-Stern, lived with the family.
\r\n\r\nIn the late summer of 1938, Edith Frank-Holländer and her husband applied to the Dutch government for her mother's admission to the Netherlands. However, in May of that year, the government had closed the borders and the application was rejected. Only because of the so-called November pogrom, also known as Kristallnacht, an additional seven thousand refugees were granted permission to come to the Netherlands. On 17 November 1938, Rosa Holländer received her permit, albeit on the condition that her sons Julius and Walter would not try to join her in the Netherlands.[1]
\r\n\r\nSince she did not want to leave Germany before her sons were safe, it was not until the end of March of the following year before she moved to the Netherlands. On 24 March 1939, she entered the Netherlands at Simpelveld train station.[2] She lived with her daughter's family until she died on 29 January 1942.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn de nazomer van 1938 diende Edith Frank - Holländer met haar man bij de Nederlandse regering een verzoek in tot toelating van haar moeder tot Nederland. De regering had echter in mei van dat jaar de grenzen gesloten en wees het verzoek daarom af. Het was de zogenaamde Novemberpogrom, ook wel Kristallnacht, waardoor een extra zevenduizend vluchtelingen toegang tot Nederland kregen. Op 17 november 1938 kreeg Rosa Holländer alsnog toestemming, zij het onder de voorwaarde dat niet ook haar zoons Julius en Walter naar Nederland zouden proberen te komen.[1]
\r\n\r\nOmdat zij Duitsland niet wilde verlaten voor haar zoons veilig waren, duurde het nog tot eind maart van het volgende jaar voor zij daadwerkelijk kwam. Op 24 maart 1939 kwam zij bij station Simpelveld Nederland binnen.[2] Ze woonde bij het gezin van haar dochter tot ze op 29 januari 1942 overleed.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn the late summer of 1938, Edith Frank-Holländer and her husband applied to the Dutch government for her mother's admission to the Netherlands. However, in May of that year, the government had closed the borders and the application was rejected. Only because of the so-called November pogrom, also known as Kristallnacht, an additional seven thousand refugees were granted permission to come to the Netherlands. On 17 November 1938, Rosa Holländer received her permit, albeit on the condition that her sons Julius and Walter would not try to join her in the Netherlands.[1]
\r\n\r\nSince she did not want to leave Germany before her sons were safe, it was not until the end of March of the following year before she moved to the Netherlands. On 24 March 1939, she entered the Netherlands at Simpelveld train station.[2] She lived with her daughter's family until she died on 29 January 1942.[3]
\r\n\r\nMargot received a call-up to report for transport to Germany on 5 July 1942. Anne wrote in her diary: '(...) At three o'clock the doorbell rang (...) A little while later Margot appeared in the kitchen doorway looking very agitated. "Father has received a call-up notice from the SS".'[1] According to Ilse Ledermann-Citroen, the recipients of these call-ups had to report to the Gestapo the next day (6 July 1942) between eight and nine o'clock, where they were given notice to come to the train station (it's not clear which one) on the 15th at 2.30 in the morning.[2] This call-up prompted the Frank family to immediately go into hiding.[3] Preparations for this had already been made.[4]
\r\n\r\nMiep Gies took Margot to Prinsengracht by bicycle in the early morning of 6 July 1942. The sources on this show slight differences between them:
\r\n\r\nMargot kreeg op 5 juli 1942 een oproep zich te melden voor transport naar Duitsland. Anne schrijft in haar dagboek: '(...) om ongeveer 3 uur kwam een politieagent bij moeder die riep beneden in de deur, mej. Margot Frank, moeder ging naar beneden en kreeg van die agent een kaart, waar opstond dat Margot Frank zich moest melden bij de S.S.'[1] Volgens Ilse Ledermann-Citroen moesten de ontvangers van deze oproepen de volgende dag (6 juli 1942) tussen acht en negen uur bij de Gestapo verschijnen, waar ze de aanzegging kregen de vijftiende om half drie 's nachts naar het treinstation (niet duidelijk welk) te komen.[2] Deze oproep was de aanleiding voor de familie Frank om meteen onder te duiken.[3] Voorbereidingen daartoe waren al getroffen.[4]
\r\n\r\nMiep Gies bracht Margot met de fiets in de vroege ochtend van 6 juli 1942 naar de Prinsengracht. De bronnen hierover vertonen kleine onderlinge verschillen:
\r\n\r\nMargot received a call-up to report for transport to Germany on 5 July 1942. Anne wrote in her diary: '(...) At three o'clock the doorbell rang (...) A little while later Margot appeared in the kitchen doorway looking very agitated. "Father has received a call-up notice from the SS".'[1] According to Ilse Ledermann-Citroen, the recipients of these call-ups had to report to the Gestapo the next day (6 July 1942) between eight and nine o'clock, where they were given notice to come to the train station (it's not clear which one) on the 15th at 2.30 in the morning.[2] This call-up prompted the Frank family to immediately go into hiding.[3] Preparations for this had already been made.[4]
\r\n\r\nMiep Gies took Margot to Prinsengracht by bicycle in the early morning of 6 July 1942. The sources on this show slight differences between them:
\r\n\r\nIn the Secret Annex, Anne thought about Moortje often. "There's always a tiny black cat roaming around the yard and it reminds me of my dear sweet Moortje."[1] But in her hiding place, Anne would meet four other cats in the more than two years she spent there.
\r\n\r\nIn het Achterhuis denkt Anne nog regelmatig aan Moortje. ‘In de tuin, loopt nu altijd zo'n klein zwart poesje, dat doet mij dan weer aan mijn moortje denken, o, die schat.’[1] Maar in de schuilplaats zou Anne in de ruim twee jaar dat zij daar ondergedoken zat nog vier andere katten tegenkomen.
\r\n\r\nIn the Secret Annex, Anne thought about Moortje often. "There's always a tiny black cat roaming around the yard and it reminds me of my dear sweet Moortje."[1] But in her hiding place, Anne would meet four other cats in the more than two years she spent there.
\r\n\r\nThe first residents of Merwedeplein 37-II moved into the then new house in 1931. Otto Frank was the fourth main resident by the end of 1933. The construction and management company of the entire block was the N.V. Bouw en Exploitatie Maatschappij Hilwis and the rent was seventy guilders. That included twenty guilders for the hot water supply and central heating provided by the heating cellar of the nearby so-called 'Wolkenkrabber' (Skyscraper), the residential tower that is still part of the complex.[1]
\r\n\r\nApart from the Frank family, numerous other Germans, including many Jews, came to the Netherlands after Adolf Hitler and his NSDAP came to power. Organisations that had long been active in helping Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe responded to these new developments. For example, the Committee for Jewish Refugees created jobs in domestic service to give women and girls opportunities to settle in the Netherlands.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn the Frank family home, some of these women found work or shelter for shorter or longer periods of time. A couple of them, Renate Wolf and Malli Aschenbrand, were also from Frankfurt. Ilse Windesheim, Gerda Einstein, Julie van Groningen and Rosel Goldschmidt came from other parts of Germany.
\r\n\r\nThe later 1930s saw a change in the family's economic circumstances. Otto Frank travelled to England several times in 1937 in fruitless attempts to get a business initiative off the ground there. In June 1938, Jo Kleiman founded the new firm Pectacon in collaboration with Otto Frank. The last domestic help left in mid-October 1937, and in June 1938 the first subtenant Ernst Katz appeared. He was to be the first of four: after him came Johanna Briels, Paul Wronker and Werner Goldschmidt. About the subtenants, Anne wrote her story 'Boarders or lodgers'.[3] Wronker and Goldschmidt also appear in her diary.[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto and Edith Frank applied for grandmother Holländer's admission to the Netherlands in September 1938 so that she could join her daughter's family in Amsterdam. The Justice Ministry turned this down because the government closed the border to refugees in May that year. A limited widening after the November pogroms eventually allowed her to come and in March 1939 she settled here after all.[5] Her arrival brought the number of people in the house to six.
\r\n\r\nMoortje the cat was added in the autumn of 1941.[6] Anne wrote about her in a letter to her grandmother, and later mentioned her repeatedly in her diary. Moortje did not come with her to the Secret Annex, but according to the diary, Werner Goldschmidt took her to the neighbours.[7] The neighbouring Kupers family at 39-III would take care of her after this.
\r\n\r\nThe last to appear were the three members of the Kohnke-Leyens family. Leni Kohnke was a close acquaintance of Edith and had to leave their hometown of Hilversum with her husband and young daughter. Around May 1942, they lived with the family for a few weeks.[8] Grandma Holländer had died in January, so during these weeks the number of people in the house was eight.
\r\n\r\nAfter the Frank family left, subtenant Werner Goldschmidt stayed behind. Later evacuees from other places settled in the house who were obliged to move to Amsterdam.[9] Although sources are lacking, the Jewish Council seems to have played a role here. Hilwis rent records show that the last evacuee left on 20 June 1943 and that the house was empty on the 28th.[10] The new main occupant Tim Choy was registered in the population register at this address from 3 September 1943.[11] Nevertheless, all four members of the Frank family retained their registrations at the house until 27 October 1944, almost two months after their deportation to Auschwitz.[12]
\r\n\r\nDe eerste bewoners van Merwedeplein 37-II betrokken de toen nieuwe woning in 1931. Otto Frank was eind 1933 de vierde hoofdbewoner. Bouwer en beheerder van het hele blok was de N.V. Bouw en Exploitatie Maatschappij Hilwis en de huur bedroeg zeventig gulden. Dat was inclusief twintig gulden voor de warmwatervoorziening en centrale verwarming die de stookkelder van de nabijgelegen z.g. 'Wolkenkrabber' leverde, de woontoren die nog altijd deel van het complex uitmaakt.[1]
\r\n\r\nBuiten de familie Frank kwamen ook tal van andere Duitsers, waaronder veel Joden, na het aan de macht komen van Adolf Hitler en zijn NSDAP naar Nederland. Organisaties die al langer actief waren bij het helpen van Joodse vluchtelingen uit Oost-Europa speelden op deze nieuwe ontwikkelingen in. Zo creëerde het Comité voor Joodsche Vluchtelingen werkgelegenheid in de huishoudelijke dienstverlening om zo vrouwen en meisjes kansen te bieden zich in Nederland te vestigen.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn de woning van het gezin Frank vond een aantal van deze vrouwen voor kortere of langere tijd werk of onderdak. Enkele van hen, Renate Wolf en Malli Aschenbrand, waren eveneens afkomstig uit Frankfurt. Ilse Windesheim, Gerda Einstein, Julie van Groningen en Rosel Goldschmidt kwamen uit andere delen van Duitsland.
\r\n\r\nIn de latere jaren dertig vond een verandering in de ecomische omstandigheden van het gezin plaats. Otto Frank reisde in 1937 verschillende keren naar Engeland in vruchteloze pogingen daar een zakelijk initiatief van de grond te krijgen. In juni 1938 richtte Jo Kleiman in samenwerking met Otto Frank de nieuwe firma Pectacon op. De laatste huishoudelijke hulp vertrok half oktober 1937, en in juni 1938 verscheen de eerste onderhuurder Ernst Katz. Hij zou de eerste van vier zijn: na hem kwamen nog Johanna Briels, Paul Wronker en Werner Goldschmidt. Over de onderhuurders schreef Anne haar verhaaltje 'Pension- of huurgasten'.[3] Wronker en Goldschmidt komen ook voor in haar dagboek.[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto en Edith Frank vroegen in september 1938 voor oma Holländer om toelating tot Nederland, zodat zij zich bij het gezin van haar dochter in Amsterdam kon voegen. Het Ministerie van Justitie wees dat af omdat de regering in mei van dat jaar de grens voor vluchtelingen sloot. Door een beperkte verruiming na de pogroms van november kon ze uiteindelijk toch komen en in maart 1939 vestigde zij zich hier alsnog.[5] Haar komst bracht het aantal personen in huis op zes.
\r\n\r\nIn het najaar van 1941 kwam de poes Moortje er nog bij.[6] Anne schrijft over haar in een brief aan haar grootmoeder, en noemde haar later herhaaldelijk in haar dagboek. Moortje ging niet mee naar het Achterhuis, maar volgens het dagboek bracht Werner Goldschmidt haar naar de buren.[7] Het buurgezin Kupers op 39-III zou de verdere zorg op zich nemen.
\r\n\r\nAls laatsten verschenen de drie leden van het gezin Kohnke - Leyens. Leni Kohnke was een goede bekende van Edith en moest met haar man en dochtertje hun woonplaats Hilversum verlaten. Omstreeks mei 1942 woonden ze enkele weken bij het gezin in.[8] Oma Holländer was in januari overleden, dus in deze weken was het aantal personen in de woning acht.
\r\n\r\nNadat de familie Frank vertrok bleef onderhuurder Werner Goldschmidt achter. Later vestigden zich in de woning evacués uit andere plaatsen die verplicht naar Amsterdam trokken.[9] Hoewel bronnen ontbreken lijkt hier de Joodse Raad een rol in te spelen. De huuradministratie van Hilwis laat zien dat de laatste evacué op 20 juni 1943 vertrok en dat de woning de 28e leeg was.[10] De nieuwe hoofdbewoner Tim Choy stond per 3 september 1943 op dit adres in het bevolkingsregister ingeschreven.[11] Desondanks behielden alle vier de leden van het gezin Frank hun inschrijvingen op de woning nog tot 27 oktober 1944, bijna twee maanden na hun deportatie naar Auschwitz.[12]
\r\n\r\nThe first residents of Merwedeplein 37-II moved into the then new house in 1931. Otto Frank was the fourth main resident by the end of 1933. The construction and management company of the entire block was the N.V. Bouw en Exploitatie Maatschappij Hilwis and the rent was seventy guilders. That included twenty guilders for the hot water supply and central heating provided by the heating cellar of the nearby so-called 'Wolkenkrabber' (Skyscraper), the residential tower that is still part of the complex.[1]
\r\n\r\nApart from the Frank family, numerous other Germans, including many Jews, came to the Netherlands after Adolf Hitler and his NSDAP came to power. Organisations that had long been active in helping Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe responded to these new developments. For example, the Committee for Jewish Refugees created jobs in domestic service to give women and girls opportunities to settle in the Netherlands.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn the Frank family home, some of these women found work or shelter for shorter or longer periods of time. A couple of them, Renate Wolf and Malli Aschenbrand, were also from Frankfurt. Ilse Windesheim, Gerda Einstein, Julie van Groningen and Rosel Goldschmidt came from other parts of Germany.
\r\n\r\nThe later 1930s saw a change in the family's economic circumstances. Otto Frank travelled to England several times in 1937 in fruitless attempts to get a business initiative off the ground there. In June 1938, Jo Kleiman founded the new firm Pectacon in collaboration with Otto Frank. The last domestic help left in mid-October 1937, and in June 1938 the first subtenant Ernst Katz appeared. He was to be the first of four: after him came Johanna Briels, Paul Wronker and Werner Goldschmidt. About the subtenants, Anne wrote her story 'Boarders or lodgers'.[3] Wronker and Goldschmidt also appear in her diary.[4]
\r\n\r\nOtto and Edith Frank applied for grandmother Holländer's admission to the Netherlands in September 1938 so that she could join her daughter's family in Amsterdam. The Justice Ministry turned this down because the government closed the border to refugees in May that year. A limited widening after the November pogroms eventually allowed her to come and in March 1939 she settled here after all.[5] Her arrival brought the number of people in the house to six.
\r\n\r\nMoortje the cat was added in the autumn of 1941.[6] Anne wrote about her in a letter to her grandmother, and later mentioned her repeatedly in her diary. Moortje did not come with her to the Secret Annex, but according to the diary, Werner Goldschmidt took her to the neighbours.[7] The neighbouring Kupers family at 39-III would take care of her after this.
\r\n\r\nThe last to appear were the three members of the Kohnke-Leyens family. Leni Kohnke was a close acquaintance of Edith and had to leave their hometown of Hilversum with her husband and young daughter. Around May 1942, they lived with the family for a few weeks.[8] Grandma Holländer had died in January, so during these weeks the number of people in the house was eight.
\r\n\r\nAfter the Frank family left, subtenant Werner Goldschmidt stayed behind. Later evacuees from other places settled in the house who were obliged to move to Amsterdam.[9] Although sources are lacking, the Jewish Council seems to have played a role here. Hilwis rent records show that the last evacuee left on 20 June 1943 and that the house was empty on the 28th.[10] The new main occupant Tim Choy was registered in the population register at this address from 3 September 1943.[11] Nevertheless, all four members of the Frank family retained their registrations at the house until 27 October 1944, almost two months after their deportation to Auschwitz.[12]
\r\n\r\nNot everyone who wanted to come to the Netherlands after the German coup in January 1933 could just settle here. The Committee for Jewish Refugees helped as many Jewish women as possible gain admission to the Netherlands by seeking work as domestic help for them.[1] Edith Frank wrote to a former girl next door in December 1933: 'Unser Wohnung ist ähnlich der in der Ganghofer Str., nur viel kleiner. In unserem Schlafzimmer kann ausser den Betten nichts mehr stehen; kein Keller, kein Speicher, aber alles hell bequem und warm, so dass ich ohne Mädchen gut fertig werde.'[2]
\r\n\r\nNonetheless, a number of Jewish women from Germany found temporary work and often accommodation with the Frank family. Domestic workers from Germany also made their appearance with the Werthauer, Goslar and Ledermann families. The following were employed successively at the Frank family home:
\r\n\r\nExcept for the first one, they all lived with the family. After the last one left, Edith Frank wrote to a friend in December 1937 that she was now doing everything on her own again.[3] Shortly afterwards, the first subtenant, Ernst Katz, appeared on the scene.
\r\n\r\nWithin the migrant community of Amsterdam-Zuid, people from the same city of origin often gravitated towards each other. Renate Wolf was also from Frankfurt, as was Malli Aschenbrand. The latter left the Frank family to join another family from that city.
\r\n\r\nNiet iedereen die na de Duitse machtsovername in januari 1933 naar Nederland wilde komen kon zich hier zomaar vestigen. Het Comité voor Joodsche Vluchtelingen hielp zoveel mogelijk Joodse vrouwen toelating tot Nederland te krijgen door werk als huishoudelijke hulp voor ze te zoeken.[1] Edith Frank schreef in december 1933 aan een vroeger buurmeisje: 'Unser Wohnung ist ähnlich der in der Ganghofer Str., nur viel kleiner. In unserem Schlafzimmer kann ausser den Betten nichts mehr stehen; kein Keller, kein Speicher, aber alles hell bequem und warm, so dass ich ohne Mädchen gut fertig werde.'[2]
\r\n\r\nDesondanks vond een aantal Joodse vrouwen uit Duitsland bij de familie Frank tijdelijk werk en veelal ook onderkomen. Ook bij de families Werthauer, Goslar en Ledermann maakten uit Duitsland afkomstige huishoudelijke hulpen hun opwachting. Bij de familile Frank verschenen achtereenvolgens:
\r\n\r\nBehalve de eerste woonden ze allemaal bij het gezin in. Na het vertrek van de laatste schrijft Edith Frank in december 1937 aan een vriendin dat ze nu weer alles alleen doet.[3] Kort daarna verscheen de eerste onderhuurder, Ernst Katz, ten tonele.
\r\n\r\nBinnen de migrantengemeenschap van Amsterdam-Zuid trokken mensen uit dezelfde herkomststad dikwijls naar elkaar toe. Renate Wolf kwam ook uit Frankfurt, net als Malli Aschenbrand. De laatste vertrok bij de familie Frank om bij een ander gezin uit die stad te gaan werken.
\r\n\r\nNot everyone who wanted to come to the Netherlands after the German coup in January 1933 could just settle here. The Committee for Jewish Refugees helped as many Jewish women as possible gain admission to the Netherlands by seeking work as domestic help for them.[1] Edith Frank wrote to a former girl next door in December 1933: 'Unser Wohnung ist ähnlich der in der Ganghofer Str., nur viel kleiner. In unserem Schlafzimmer kann ausser den Betten nichts mehr stehen; kein Keller, kein Speicher, aber alles hell bequem und warm, so dass ich ohne Mädchen gut fertig werde.'[2]
\r\n\r\nNonetheless, a number of Jewish women from Germany found temporary work and often accommodation with the Frank family. Domestic workers from Germany also made their appearance with the Werthauer, Goslar and Ledermann families. The following were employed successively at the Frank family home:
\r\n\r\nExcept for the first one, they all lived with the family. After the last one left, Edith Frank wrote to a friend in December 1937 that she was now doing everything on her own again.[3] Shortly afterwards, the first subtenant, Ernst Katz, appeared on the scene.
\r\n\r\nWithin the migrant community of Amsterdam-Zuid, people from the same city of origin often gravitated towards each other. Renate Wolf was also from Frankfurt, as was Malli Aschenbrand. The latter left the Frank family to join another family from that city.
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe Rivierenbuurt is een in het oosten van het Amsterdamse stadsdeel Zuid gelegen buurt, die wordt begrensd door de Amstelrivier in het oosten, de Boerenwetering in het westen, het Amstelkanaal in het noorden, en de Zuidelijke Wandelweg in het zuiden. Het maakt deel uit van Plan Zuid, een stedenbouwkundig plan voor Amsterdam-Zuid, dat in het begin van de 20e eeuw werd ontworpen door de architect H.P Berlage.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid bestond uit drie delen: de Apollobuurt en de Stadionbuurt, gericht op welgestelden, middenklasse en arbeidersklasse, en de Rivierenbuurt, gericht op de middenklasse. Ook een groot deel van de buurt Nieuwe Pijp behoort tot het Plan Zuid. In het stedenbouwkundig plan was bedacht dat drie hoofdstraten (de Amstellanen) de buurt in een Y-vorm zouden doorsnijden, en samen zouden komen op het Daniël Willinkplein, een vernoeming naar de Nederlandse schrijver Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] Dit waren de Amstellaan (na de oorlog werd dit de Stalinlaan en in 1956, na de Russische inval in Hongarije, gewijzigd in Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (nu Churchill-laan) en Zuider Amstellaan (nu Rooseveltlaan).[3] De overige straatnamen in de buurt werden vernoemd naar Nederlandse rivieren.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe woningen in de Rivierenbuurt oefenden vanaf het begin van de jaren dertig grote aantrekkingskracht uit op Joodse Amsterdammers uit de middenklasse. Qua grootte en voorzieningen staken zij bijzonder gunstig af tegen de kleine, slechte woningen in de overbevolkte Jodenbuurt rond het Waterlooplein. Toch was er in de jaren dertig veel leegstand, en daardoor streken ook veel Duitse Joden die vanuit nazi-Duitsland naar Nederland vluchtten, hier neer, waaronder ook de families Frank en Van Pels en een aantal van hun vrienden en kennissen. De immigranten voelden zich thuis in deze buurt met de vele geloofsgenoten. Uiteindelijk woonde in 1940 zo'n 40% van de in Amsterdam wonende Joden in dit deel van de stad.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","description_nl":"Onder verblijf wordt verstaan een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.
","description_en":"Accommodation refers to a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.
","summary":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","summary_nl":"Verblijf is een plek om te wonen en/of te werken, tijdelijk of permanent.","summary_en":"Accommodation is a place in which to live and/or work, either temporarily or permanently.","same_as":null,"parent":396124413,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04bc398b-9132-421d-be07-26d89aecf727","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bbed7414-1fa4-4417-bca3-a5ee40c96d09","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c05767e4-ac67-4d2e-a8f1-fdcfc93c3cdc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f4d47668-4071-4530-95f0-5c463fddbc60","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5e6e4c0b-e255-4b81-9abc-a8b22fd9d87c","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/ee99471c-eda3-4963-a448-a980cb61c5f2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4caabcc8-204b-438d-915c-1e6ea54630bb","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f139a0d3-6359-4ad4-946d-b2ee153e7b99","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b654804b-25a1-4c46-affd-0de941f99790","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05463aca-21a7-4238-8686-0a4a606e10f5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8eb86b87-b516-415d-a0de-410bb88a0ab6","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5f77d005-c71e-437e-8877-2ec3088e2031","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/03c56548-11fe-4e75-9a79-f1585bd2372a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b4236d95-43dd-42e6-93d5-c44eaba41b23","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/1194af60-b60a-49ae-8762-cf8567fd21fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36022488-7682-43ff-918c-a2b970789006","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c730f47b-7508-4ea2-978e-331073f46ee4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/889ae572-cc0a-4847-b3c9-3bf177af8ecc","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/64af952c-9403-4db9-b2cb-5ba310b33332","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/efee09b0-5605-4f5b-894c-91a96938e30d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ce70ffc-474f-4743-a9a8-dd4ed4e59c77","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4a5dbef2-cafa-46af-acfe-3470825a92a7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/88db758b-1dac-4579-86c6-33cc2bdc5273","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e48c8d0c-8825-4c34-bd22-8c2a28adb089","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/9c7b897a-5803-4d3a-a810-d05792a6ff5f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6b0dbaa0-4815-4f3e-ab1c-e0ee6196188e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/36a662f9-f828-44ad-9609-bd8901c723f4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/07627e87-1438-47e2-a29c-847e27ce51c8","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa3cb90f-e2cc-4611-b0cb-316c6202e75b","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/92a283be-fc1d-4610-8241-6f9e604e4ce0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/663c8bc9-dc5c-4dd1-bced-88ce12738280","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c4260f04-7551-463d-89f5-a7ce48eeecd3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/4837c7f7-8098-4daf-8fb4-3408adb041fd","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/dd7e96a8-2902-4144-99a7-2aef084ed61d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/59a5ed20-0f01-42b5-a1da-785936de9c47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/84d67272-953d-4e09-8014-20cd8a55bd15","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c65659a4-793a-47f1-a7c5-ee2f49ee46b9","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/cc6c2172-d1f5-49c4-86b0-c31aa8bd02ea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/903ba158-f1e0-4d0f-b613-eae91df2893e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/bd069b91-d876-4eb7-99e7-e62aa158eae4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/995b7432-6739-42b0-9434-5c3801327d6a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b6bed785-6178-42d2-9f90-a90e7730c21e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/5c9289eb-d4f6-46b8-afe7-5c15df9164c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/f3ea591a-9ec2-49fa-aede-0308f0c1ea5e","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aab06445-fe04-4578-9fba-19e679b65d6d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/8f078d07-0749-4824-9317-cca40a1f8c17","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/49fb0306-d233-4742-8133-c98fdba59175","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/c6d71313-a017-4e4e-b05c-f56259c2bf72","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/592362c0-d64f-42be-8319-f7e3973610d3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6a58ce7e-02e2-4517-85ce-5b03eb20b753","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0bfa905d-38bd-4422-85ed-a4f2ecc7b506","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7e61c0df-f509-437a-8f9f-5d70bdd92934","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b7c73757-981c-409e-95cc-cc8eab873a93","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/150fa41e-02ba-4cae-9f32-62460252007f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/043a50b5-46ac-4222-8001-6ad28d51a1e2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/da7429b4-b23f-4947-b6d8-e5e6c0f143c3","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/6660d32e-d2b0-468d-b7e7-01ceefc4376d","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/05693431-6b99-47b4-8e47-59ab3e95a889","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/04f5ebdc-fe09-4ce6-991b-cf851a81c198","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a423c2ce-aac1-4ff6-86b1-f5233e4b77ff","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/0ccf3db9-1774-4848-ad11-627e3fc64cea","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/a7bd22a6-e3e0-45e6-9bef-449b9894f0db","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db15398a-d845-4147-9ceb-1530e7e9a4e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/b5ad5b8d-2494-42ad-bf1f-d2a1f9250bb2","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2c4e9ad5-bb38-4440-ae2f-7b3fc3fba34a","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/697cb023-79af-4e61-864a-49adce1e8f82","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/db594671-5a23-4c77-94e5-719f47bf03e4","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/e8477cf1-0664-404d-a851-fe6a97e01e47","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/7d0da592-ac93-4786-b1c3-932a0fd9dcf5","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/aa7d60c3-6d94-4f52-a729-96440eeb4d5f","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/2ff53ce1-d866-4190-a138-16c32a9eca43"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6/","published":true,"name":"Merwedeplein 37-II, Amsterdam","name_nl":"Merwedeplein 37-II, Amsterdam","name_en":"Merwedeplein 37-II, Amsterdam","uuid":"838a9a83-171f-44ec-8a97-0024ebf8b5b6","content":"Anne first wrote in her diary, which she was given for her thirteenth birthday on 12 June 1942, in the apartment. Three weeks later the family went into hiding.
\r\n\r\nThe Ymere housing corporation bought the property in 2004, and restored the building in its original 1930s style in partnership with the Anne Frank House,[1] which became the owner of the Frank’s family former home on Merwedeplein in 2017.
\r\n\r\nFour Stolpersteine (stumbling stones) commemorate the stay of the Frank family at this address.[2] The interior of the Frank's family former home can be seen in 3D via Google Arts & Culture.[3]
\r\n\r\nAnne schreef hier voor het eerst in het dagboek dat ze voor haar dertiende verjaardag, op 12 juni 1942, kreeg. Drie weken later dook de familie Frank onder.
\r\n\r\nWoningcorporatie Ymere kocht de woning in 2004 en restaureerde het pand in de oorspronkelijke jaren-dertig-stijl, in samenwerking met de Anne Frank Stichting,[1] die in 2017 eigenaar werd van de voormalige woning van de familie Frank aan het Merwedeplein.
\r\n\r\nVier Stolpersteine herinneren aan het verblijf van de familie Frank op dit adres.[2] Op de website en app van Google Arts & Culture kunnen bezoekers alle vertrekken van het voormalige woonhuis van de familie Frank bekijken door middel van 360 graden beelden.[3]
\r\n\r\nAnne first wrote in her diary, which she was given for her thirteenth birthday on 12 June 1942, in the apartment. Three weeks later the family went into hiding.
\r\n\r\nThe Ymere housing corporation bought the property in 2004, and restored the building in its original 1930s style in partnership with the Anne Frank House,[1] which became the owner of the Frank’s family former home on Merwedeplein in 2017.
\r\n\r\nFour Stolpersteine (stumbling stones) commemorate the stay of the Frank family at this address.[2] The interior of the Frank's family former home can be seen in 3D via Google Arts & Culture.[3]
\r\n\r\nThis was a reprisal for attacks on buildings used by the Wehrmacht. 310 men, including friends and neighbors of the Frank family, were arrested and deported to Mauthausen via Camp Schoorl on 26 June 1941.[1]
\r\n\r\nDit was een represaille voor aanslagen op gebouwen die in gebruik waren bij de Wehrmacht. Hierbij werden 310 mannen, waaronder vrienden en buurtgenoten van de familie Frank, opgepakt en via Kamp Schoorl op 26 juni 1941 gedeporteerd naar Mauthausen.[1]
\r\n\r\nThis was a reprisal for attacks on buildings used by the Wehrmacht. 310 men, including friends and neighbors of the Frank family, were arrested and deported to Mauthausen via Camp Schoorl on 26 June 1941.[1]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe Rivierenbuurt is een in het oosten van het Amsterdamse stadsdeel Zuid gelegen buurt, die wordt begrensd door de Amstelrivier in het oosten, de Boerenwetering in het westen, het Amstelkanaal in het noorden, en de Zuidelijke Wandelweg in het zuiden. Het maakt deel uit van Plan Zuid, een stedenbouwkundig plan voor Amsterdam-Zuid, dat in het begin van de 20e eeuw werd ontworpen door de architect H.P Berlage.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid bestond uit drie delen: de Apollobuurt en de Stadionbuurt, gericht op welgestelden, middenklasse en arbeidersklasse, en de Rivierenbuurt, gericht op de middenklasse. Ook een groot deel van de buurt Nieuwe Pijp behoort tot het Plan Zuid. In het stedenbouwkundig plan was bedacht dat drie hoofdstraten (de Amstellanen) de buurt in een Y-vorm zouden doorsnijden, en samen zouden komen op het Daniël Willinkplein, een vernoeming naar de Nederlandse schrijver Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] Dit waren de Amstellaan (na de oorlog werd dit de Stalinlaan en in 1956, na de Russische inval in Hongarije, gewijzigd in Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (nu Churchill-laan) en Zuider Amstellaan (nu Rooseveltlaan).[3] De overige straatnamen in de buurt werden vernoemd naar Nederlandse rivieren.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe woningen in de Rivierenbuurt oefenden vanaf het begin van de jaren dertig grote aantrekkingskracht uit op Joodse Amsterdammers uit de middenklasse. Qua grootte en voorzieningen staken zij bijzonder gunstig af tegen de kleine, slechte woningen in de overbevolkte Jodenbuurt rond het Waterlooplein. Toch was er in de jaren dertig veel leegstand, en daardoor streken ook veel Duitse Joden die vanuit nazi-Duitsland naar Nederland vluchtten, hier neer, waaronder ook de families Frank en Van Pels en een aantal van hun vrienden en kennissen. De immigranten voelden zich thuis in deze buurt met de vele geloofsgenoten. Uiteindelijk woonde in 1940 zo'n 40% van de in Amsterdam wonende Joden in dit deel van de stad.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nAs part of the construction of Plan-Zuid (South Plan), the Amsterdam city council took the decision on 16 February 1927 to name the square, bordered by Waalstraat, Jekerstraat and Roerstraat, Merwedeplein.[1] The square has become well known because of the home of Otto Frank and his family, located at number 37 II.[2] They lived there from 1933 until they went into hiding in July 1942. But they were not the only Jewish families on this square and in this neighbourhood. In addition to the many Dutch Jewish families, many foreign Jews lived on this square, many of them German Jewish refugees.[3] The half-Jewish son of the famous German comedian Rudolf Nelson lived at number 23. And at number 59 II lived Michel Velleman with his family. Velleman, better known by the stage name Ben Ali Libi, was a Dutch magician and illusionist. The family of Anne Frank's friend Hanneli Goslar moved into an apartment on Merwedeplein in February 1933 and Fritzi Markovits, Otto Frank's second wife, also lived on Merwedeplein before the war with her then husband Erich Geiringer, son Heinz and daughter Eva.[4]
\r\n\r\nAnne Frank referred to the square twice in her diary as 'the Merry'.[5] Daily life in her old neighbourhood provided many memories. She missed the old life on Merwedeplein for all kinds of reasons, but also because of the comfort: she preferred central heating to smoky stoves.[6]
\r\n\r\nIn het kader van de aanleg van Plan-Zuid nam de Amsterdamse gemeenteraad op 16 februari 1927 het besluit om het Plein, begrensd door de Waalstraat, de Jekerstraat en de Roerstraat de naam Merwedeplein te geven.[1] Het plein is overbekend geworden vanwege het op nummer 37 II gevestigde woonhuis van Otto Frank en zijn gezin.[2] Zij woonden daar van 1933 tot hun onderduik in juli 1942. Maar zij waren niet de enige Joodse gezinnen aan dit plein en in deze buurt. Naast de vele Nederlands-Joodse gezinnen woonden er veel buitenlandse Joden op dit plein, voor een groot deel Duitse-Joodse vluchtelingen.[3] Op nummer 23 woonde de half Joodse zoon van de beroemde Duitse cabaretier Rudolf Nelson. En op nummer 59 II Michel Velleman met zijn gezin. Velleman, beter bekend onder de artiestennaam Ben Ali Libi, was een Nederlandse goochelaar en illusionist. De familie van Anne Franks vriendinnetje Hanneli Goslar betrok in februari 1933 een appartement aan het Merwedeplein en ook Fritzi Markovits, de tweede vrouw van Otto Frank, woonde voor de oorlog met Erich Geiringer, haar toenmalige echtgenoot, zoon Heinz en dochter Eva aan het Merwedeplein.[4]
\r\n\r\nAnne Frank duidde het plein in haar dagboek twee keer aan als ‘het Merry’.[5] Het dagelijks leven in haar oude buurt leverde veel herinneringen. Ze miste het oude leven op het Merwedeplein om allerlei redenen, maar mede vanwege het comfort: ze had liever centrale verwarming dan rokerige kachels.[6]
\r\n\r\nAs part of the construction of Plan-Zuid (South Plan), the Amsterdam city council took the decision on 16 February 1927 to name the square, bordered by Waalstraat, Jekerstraat and Roerstraat, Merwedeplein.[1] The square has become well known because of the home of Otto Frank and his family, located at number 37 II.[2] They lived there from 1933 until they went into hiding in July 1942. But they were not the only Jewish families on this square and in this neighbourhood. In addition to the many Dutch Jewish families, many foreign Jews lived on this square, many of them German Jewish refugees.[3] The half-Jewish son of the famous German comedian Rudolf Nelson lived at number 23. And at number 59 II lived Michel Velleman with his family. Velleman, better known by the stage name Ben Ali Libi, was a Dutch magician and illusionist. The family of Anne Frank's friend Hanneli Goslar moved into an apartment on Merwedeplein in February 1933 and Fritzi Markovits, Otto Frank's second wife, also lived on Merwedeplein before the war with her then husband Erich Geiringer, son Heinz and daughter Eva.[4]
\r\n\r\nAnne Frank referred to the square twice in her diary as 'the Merry'.[5] Daily life in her old neighbourhood provided many memories. She missed the old life on Merwedeplein for all kinds of reasons, but also because of the comfort: she preferred central heating to smoky stoves.[6]
\r\n\r\nAfter the summer vacation of 1934, Hanneli Goslar came to the kindergarten on Niersstraat. She did not know anyone there. At the bell table, she met Anne, who had been at the school since April that year.[1] She had seen Anne once before in a shop. They embraced and struck up a friendship without words: "From that day on, we were friends, and through us, our parents became friends, too."[2]
\r\n\r\nDirect na de zomervakantie van 1934 kwam Hanneli Goslar naar de kleuterschool aan de Niersstraat. Zij kwam daar nieuw en onbekend binnen. Bij de bellentafel zag zij Anne staan, die al sinds april op de school zat.[1] Ze had Anne een keer eerder gezien in een winkel. Nu omarmden ze elkaar en sloten zonder woorden vriendschap: 'Vanaf die dag waren we vriendinnen, en door ons ook onze ouders'.[2]
\r\n\r\nAfter the summer vacation of 1934, Hanneli Goslar came to the kindergarten on Niersstraat. She did not know anyone there. At the bell table, she met Anne, who had been at the school since April that year.[1] She had seen Anne once before in a shop. They embraced and struck up a friendship without words: "From that day on, we were friends, and through us, our parents became friends, too."[2]
\r\n\r\nAnne Frank attended the Sixth Montessori School in Amsterdam from school year 1935-36 until school year 1940-41.
\r\n\r\nEdith wrote to Gertrud Naumann on 26 March 1935: 'Denk dir: heute muss ich Anne für die Schule anmelden; sie wird wohl weiter in der Montessori Schule bleiben.'[1] Later she writes: 'Anne kommt erst im August in die Schule.'[2] The date of Anne's admission to the 6th Montessori School was 16 August 1935.[3] She was placed in class 1B with Mr. Van Gelder. He remained Anne's teacher up to and including the fourth grade. In the fifth grade (1939- '40) she was with Miss Godron and in class 6A (1940-'41) with Mrs. Kuperus.
\r\n\r\nIn school year 1940-'41 Anne wrote to her grandmother: "Master has been away from school for two years now, this year I am in Mrs Kuperus's class (...)". [4] In her diary, Anne wrote about Mrs. Kuperus in 1942: "In sixth grade my teacher was Mrs. Kuperus, the principal."[5] The date Anne was deregistered was 27 September 1941.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank later wrote to Mrs Kuperus: "Anne was a real Montessori child."[6] In 1968 Otto Frank wrote: "For Anne it was good that she attended a Montessori school, where each pupil was treated very individually."[7]
\r\n\r\nDue to the Montessori system, the composition of the classes changed. According to the information from the Parents' Fund, Anne had the following classmates in the various classes:
\r\n
\r\n1935-1936, class 1B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nLia v/d Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v./d. Berg, Mary Distelbrink, Bob Gatersleben (deleted: left school), Lily van Gelder, Elis Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, Sylvia Groot, Guusta Holzhausen, Sally Kimmel, Suze Koker (deleted: left school), Jo Kolthek, Leo Kramer, Ruth Langendijk (deleted: left school), Willy Lansink, Freetje de Leeuw, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Bob Overre, Sally Philipse, Betty Polk, Jacq. v. Praag, Greta Prette, Willy Reiman (deleted), A. Reiner, Alex. Schaap, Willy Smits, Rie Swillens, Lettie Tielkemeyer, Loesje Werdick, Sonja Vugts, Els Wachenhausen, Renée Weber, Benny Weiss, Paula Ovink.[8]
\r\n
\r\n1936-1937, class 2B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nL. v.d. Ancker, R. Arnoldy, M. Berg, D. Bouma, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, C. van Gelder, R. van Gelderen, E. Goslar, J. Groeneveld, F. de Groot, R. Hannes, S. Kimel, S. Krieg, H. Lansink, J. de Leeuw, J. Looy (deleted: left school), R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, B. de Muinck Keizer, E. Mulder, C. Muller, R. Müller, P. Neuhaus, Y. v Ommen (deleted B. Overre), P. Ovink, S. Philipse, A. Reiner, M. de Ruiter, H. Scholten, J. Soutendijk, J. Scholtz, J. Saltiel, L. Strakkee, R. Swillens, S. Tak, L. Verdickt, H. Vreugde, S. Vught (deleted: left school), Ebie Jekel.[9]
\r\n
\r\n1937-1938, class 3B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nDinie Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Corrie Bouwmeester, Liesje Brilleman Annie v.d. Broek, Nellie Davidson, Vera Frank, Jopie Fuchs Lily van Gelder, John Groeneveld, Bep Groot Battavé, Gerrie Hildering Paultje Jacobs, Juultje Ketellapper, Rudi Kolthek, Hetty Lansink, Chelly Metzelaar, Ella Mulder, Yvonne van Ommen (deleted), Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, Magda de Ruiter, Izaäk Slösser, Gerrie v.d. Vegte, Loesje Verdickt, Robbie Arnoly, Martha van den Berg, Mary Bos, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Liesbeth Goslar, Sally Kimel, Jaap de Leeuw, Loek Rijk, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Appie Reiner, Rietje Swillens, Dick Bouma, Freetje de Groot, Robbie Hannes, Ebie Jekel, Sonja Mug, Hans Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Leo Strackee.[10]
\r\n
\r\n1938-1939, class 4B with Mr Van Gelder./Miss Godron
\r\nSelma Agsteribbe, Diny Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v/d Berg, Mary Bos, D.Bouma, Corrie Bouwmeester, L.Brilleman, Annie v/d Broeke (deleted), Nelly Davidson, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Vera Frank, Lily van Gelder, Elisab. Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, F. de Groot, Bep van Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, Gerrie Hildering, E. Jekel, Juultje Ketellapper, Sally Kimmel, Rudi Kolthek, Willy Lansink, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Sonja Mug, Elly Mulder, Peter Neuhaus, Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, A. Reiner, Magda de Ruiter, B. Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Izaäk Slösser, Leo Strackee, Rie Swillens, Gerrie v/d Vegte, Loesje Verdick.[11]
\r\n
\r\n1939-1940, class 5B with Miss Godron.
\r\nB. Arnoldy, M van de Berg, M. Bos, D. Bouma, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, W. Engel, V. Frank, E. Goslar, F. de Groot (deleted: no longer able to pay), B. Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, G. Hildering, E. Jekel, S. Kimmel, F. Kolthek, A. Knebel (deleted: moved at the end of June), R. Kolthek, J. de Leeuw, W. Leyten, R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, P. Neuhaus, A. Reiner, L. Rustenburg, R. Salomons, H. Scheerder, J. Schlösser, H. Scholten, J. Scholtz, J. Sealtiel, L. Strackee, R. Swillens, L. Verdickt, J. Wiegel, D. Witjas (left 13/10).[12]
\r\n
\r\n1940-1941, class 6A with Miss Kuperus
\r\nS. Agsteribbe, D. Amelsbeek, B. Arnoldy, L. Bakker (deleted) , W. Basz, W. Blauw, H. Bomers, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, A. Coppenhagen, M. Coster, A. Eering, K. Egyedi, V. Frank, E. Goslar, R. de Graaf, J. Groenevelt, B. de Groot Battavé, G. Hildering, R. van Gelderen, B. Janssen, J. Kolthek, I. Koopman, S. Krieg, J. de Leeuw, E. Lentz, L. de Levie, H. Maas, R. Metzelaar, G. Mittelmeijer, G. Moes, R. Muller, K. Musikant, L. Nijssen, A. Pachter, S. Philipse, E. Polak, R. Polak, K. Slaterus, J. Slosser, J. Soutendijk, T. Steen, H. Stork, Rie Swillens, G. van der Vegte, C. Westera S. Windt.[13]
\r\n
\r\nThere is a photo of Anne's class with the caption 1936 in Mr Van Gelder's class. There is also a photo of Anne in Van Gelder's class from 1938.[14] There is also a photo of Anne together with Miss Godron, Martha van de Berg and Rebecca Salomons.[15]
Anne Frank zat van het schooljaar 1935-36 tot en met het schooljaar 1940-41 op de Zesde Montessorieschool te Amsterdam.
\r\n\r\nEdith schreef aan Gertrud Naumann op 26 maart 1935: Denk dir: heute muss ich Anne für die Schule anmelden; sie wird wohl weiter in der Montessori Schule bleiben.[1] Later schrijft ze: Anne kommt erst im August in die Schule.[2] Op 16 augustus 1935 was de dagtekening van Annes toelating op de 6e Montessorischool.[3] Ze kwam in klas 1B bij mijnheer Van Gelder. Hij bleef tot en met de vierde klas Annes meester. In de vijfde klas (`1939-‘40) zat ze bij juffrouw Godron en in klas 6A (1940-’41) bij mevrouw Kuperus.
\r\n\r\nIn het schooljaar 1940-'41 scheef Anne aan haar Oma: 'Meester is nu al twee jaar van school af, nu dit jaar ben ik bij Mevrouw Kuperus (…)'. [4] In haar dagboek schrijft Anne in 1942 over mevrouw Kuperus: '(...) kwam ik in 6C bij mevrouw Kuperus de directrice terecht, wij hielden een hartroerend afscheid aan het einde van het schooljaar (...).'[5] Dagtekening van Annes uitschrijving was 27 september 1941.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank schreef later aan mevrouw Kuperus: 'Anne was een echt Montessori-kind'.[6] In 1968 schreef Otto Frank: 'Voor Anne was het goed dat ze een Montessorischool bezocht, waar elke leerling heel individueel werd behandeld'.[7]
\r\n\r\nDoor het Montessorisysteem wisselden de klassen van samenstelling. Anne had volgens de gegevens van het ouderfonds in de diverse klassen de volgende klasgenootjes:
\r\n
\r\n1935-1936, klas 1B bij meneer van Gelder.
\r\nLia v/d Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v./d. Berg, Mary Distelbrink, Bob Gatersleben (doorgehaald: van school), Lily van Gelder, Elis Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, Sylvia Groot, Guusta Holzhausen, Sally Kimel, Suze Koker (doorgehaald: van school), Jo Kolthek, Leo Kramer, Ruth Langendijk (doorgehaald: van school), Willy Lansink, Freetje de Leeuw, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Bob Overre, Sally Philipse, Betty Polk, Jacq. v. Praag, Greta Prette, Willy Reiman (doorgehaald), A. Reiner, Alex. Schaap, Willy Smits, Rie Swillens, Lettie Tielkemeyer, Loesje Werdick, Sonja Vugts, Els Wachenhausen, Renée Weber, Benny Weiss, Paula Ovink.[8]
\r\n
\r\n1936-1937, klas 2B bij meneer van Gelder.
\r\nL. v.d. Ancker, R. Arnoldy, M. Berg, D. Bouma, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, C. van Gelder, R. van Gelderen, E. Goslar, J. Groeneveld, F. de Groot, R. Hannes, S. Kimel, S. Krieg, H. Lansink, J. de Leeuw, J. Looy (doorgehaald: van school), R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, B. de Muinck Keizer, E. Mulder, C. Muller, R. Müller, P. Neuhaus, Y. v Ommen (doorgehaald B. Overre), P. Ovink, S. Philipse, A. Reiner, M. de Ruiter, H. Scholten, J. Soutendijk, J. Scholtz, J. Saltiel, L. Strakkee, R. Swillens, S. Tak, L. Verdickt, H. Vreugde, S. Vught (doorgehaald: van school), Ebie Jekel.[9]
\r\n
\r\n1937-1938, klas 3B bij meneer van Gelder.
\r\nDinie Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Corrie Bouwmeester, Liesje Brilleman, Annie v.d. Broek, Nellie Davidson, Vera Frank, Jopie Fuchs Lily van Gelder, John Groeneveld, Bep Groot Battavé, Gerrie Hildering Paultje Jacobs, Juultje Ketellapper, Rudi Kolthek, Hetty Lansink, Chelly Metzelaar, Ella Mulder, Yvonne van Ommen (doorgehaald), Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, Magda de Ruiter, Izaäk Slösser, Gerrie v.d. Vegte, Loesje Verdickt, Robbie Arnoly, Martha van den Berg, Mary Bos, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Liesbeth Goslar, Sally Kimel, Jaap de Leeuw, Loek Rijk, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Appie Reiner, Rietje Swillens, Dick Bouma, Freetje de Groot, Robbie Hannes, Ebie Jekel, Sonja Mug, Hans Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Leo Strackee.[10]
\r\n
\r\n1938-1939, klas 4B, meneer van Gelder/juffrouw Godron
\r\nSelma Agsteribbe, Diny Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v/d Berg, Mary Bos, D.Bouma, Corrie Bouwmeester, L.Brilleman, Annie v/d Broeke (doorgehaald), Nelly Davidson, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Vera Frank, Lily van Gelder, Elisab. Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, F. de Groot, Bep van Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, Gerrie Hildering, E. Jekel, Juultje Ketellapper, Sally Kimel, Rudi Kolthek, Willy Lansink, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Sonja Mug, Elly Mulder, Peter Neuhaus, Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, A. Reiner, Magda de Ruiter, B. Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Izaäk Slösser, Leo Strackee, Rie Swillens, Gerrie v/d Vegte, Loesje Verdick.[11]
\r\n
\r\n1939-1940, klas 5B bij juffrouw Godron.
\r\nB. Arnoldy, M van de Berg, M. Bos, D. Bouma, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, W. Engel, V. Frank, E. Goslar, F. de Groot (doorgehaald, kan niet meer betalen), B. Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, G. Hildering, E. Jekel, S. Kimel, F. Kolthek, A. Knebel (doorgehaald, eind juni verhuisd), R. Kolthek, J. de Leeuw, W. Leyten, R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, P. Neuhaus, A. Reiner, L. Rustenburg, R. Salomons, H. Scheerder, J. Schlösser, H. Scholten, J. Scholtz, J. Sealtiel, L. Strackee, R. Swillens, L. Verdickt, J. Wiegel, D. Witjas (weggegaan 13/10).[12]
\r\n
\r\n1940-1941, klas 6A bij mevrouw Kuperus
\r\nS. Agsteribbe, D. Amelsbeek, B. Arnoldy, L. Bakker (doorgehaald) , W. Basz, W. Blauw, H. Bomers, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, A. Coppenhagen, M. Coster, A. Eering, K. Egyedi, V. Frank, E. Goslar, R. de Graaf, J. Groenevelt, B. de Groot Battavé, G. Hildering, R. van Gelderen, B. Janssen, J. Kolthek, I. Koopman, S. Krieg, J. de Leeuw, E. Lentz, L. de Levie, H. Maas, R. Metzelaar, G. Mittelmeijer, G. Moes, R. Muller, K. Musikant, L. Nijssen, A. Pachter, S. Philipse, E. Polak, R. Polak, K. Slaterus, J. Slosser, J. Soutendijk, T. Steen, H. Stork, Rie Swillens, G. van der Vegte, C. Westera S. Windt.[13]
\r\n
\r\nEr is een foto van de klas van Anne met het bijschrift 1936. bij mijnh. v. Gelder. Ook is er een foto van Anne in de klas van Van Gelder uit 1938.[14] Verder is er ook een foto van Anne samen met juffrouw Godron, Martha v/d Berg en Rebecca Salomons.[15]
Anne Frank attended the Sixth Montessori School in Amsterdam from school year 1935-36 until school year 1940-41.
\r\n\r\nEdith wrote to Gertrud Naumann on 26 March 1935: 'Denk dir: heute muss ich Anne für die Schule anmelden; sie wird wohl weiter in der Montessori Schule bleiben.'[1] Later she writes: 'Anne kommt erst im August in die Schule.'[2] The date of Anne's admission to the 6th Montessori School was 16 August 1935.[3] She was placed in class 1B with Mr. Van Gelder. He remained Anne's teacher up to and including the fourth grade. In the fifth grade (1939- '40) she was with Miss Godron and in class 6A (1940-'41) with Mrs. Kuperus.
\r\n\r\nIn school year 1940-'41 Anne wrote to her grandmother: "Master has been away from school for two years now, this year I am in Mrs Kuperus's class (...)". [4] In her diary, Anne wrote about Mrs. Kuperus in 1942: "In sixth grade my teacher was Mrs. Kuperus, the principal."[5] The date Anne was deregistered was 27 September 1941.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank later wrote to Mrs Kuperus: "Anne was a real Montessori child."[6] In 1968 Otto Frank wrote: "For Anne it was good that she attended a Montessori school, where each pupil was treated very individually."[7]
\r\n\r\nDue to the Montessori system, the composition of the classes changed. According to the information from the Parents' Fund, Anne had the following classmates in the various classes:
\r\n
\r\n1935-1936, class 1B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nLia v/d Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v./d. Berg, Mary Distelbrink, Bob Gatersleben (deleted: left school), Lily van Gelder, Elis Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, Sylvia Groot, Guusta Holzhausen, Sally Kimmel, Suze Koker (deleted: left school), Jo Kolthek, Leo Kramer, Ruth Langendijk (deleted: left school), Willy Lansink, Freetje de Leeuw, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Bob Overre, Sally Philipse, Betty Polk, Jacq. v. Praag, Greta Prette, Willy Reiman (deleted), A. Reiner, Alex. Schaap, Willy Smits, Rie Swillens, Lettie Tielkemeyer, Loesje Werdick, Sonja Vugts, Els Wachenhausen, Renée Weber, Benny Weiss, Paula Ovink.[8]
\r\n
\r\n1936-1937, class 2B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nL. v.d. Ancker, R. Arnoldy, M. Berg, D. Bouma, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, C. van Gelder, R. van Gelderen, E. Goslar, J. Groeneveld, F. de Groot, R. Hannes, S. Kimel, S. Krieg, H. Lansink, J. de Leeuw, J. Looy (deleted: left school), R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, B. de Muinck Keizer, E. Mulder, C. Muller, R. Müller, P. Neuhaus, Y. v Ommen (deleted B. Overre), P. Ovink, S. Philipse, A. Reiner, M. de Ruiter, H. Scholten, J. Soutendijk, J. Scholtz, J. Saltiel, L. Strakkee, R. Swillens, S. Tak, L. Verdickt, H. Vreugde, S. Vught (deleted: left school), Ebie Jekel.[9]
\r\n
\r\n1937-1938, class 3B with Mr Van Gelder.
\r\nDinie Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Corrie Bouwmeester, Liesje Brilleman Annie v.d. Broek, Nellie Davidson, Vera Frank, Jopie Fuchs Lily van Gelder, John Groeneveld, Bep Groot Battavé, Gerrie Hildering Paultje Jacobs, Juultje Ketellapper, Rudi Kolthek, Hetty Lansink, Chelly Metzelaar, Ella Mulder, Yvonne van Ommen (deleted), Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, Magda de Ruiter, Izaäk Slösser, Gerrie v.d. Vegte, Loesje Verdickt, Robbie Arnoly, Martha van den Berg, Mary Bos, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Liesbeth Goslar, Sally Kimel, Jaap de Leeuw, Loek Rijk, Gerda Moes, Peter Neuhaus, Appie Reiner, Rietje Swillens, Dick Bouma, Freetje de Groot, Robbie Hannes, Ebie Jekel, Sonja Mug, Hans Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Leo Strackee.[10]
\r\n
\r\n1938-1939, class 4B with Mr Van Gelder./Miss Godron
\r\nSelma Agsteribbe, Diny Amelsbeek, Lia van den Ancker, Bob Arnoldy, Martha v/d Berg, Mary Bos, D.Bouma, Corrie Bouwmeester, L.Brilleman, Annie v/d Broeke (deleted), Nelly Davidson, Lucy van Dijk, Käthe Egyedi, Vera Frank, Lily van Gelder, Elisab. Goslar, Johnny Groenevelt, F. de Groot, Bep van Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, Gerrie Hildering, E. Jekel, Juultje Ketellapper, Sally Kimmel, Rudi Kolthek, Willy Lansink, Jaap de Leeuw, Rijk Loek, Gerda Moes, Sonja Mug, Elly Mulder, Peter Neuhaus, Paula Ovink, Sally Philipse, A. Reiner, Magda de Ruiter, B. Scholten, Jo Sealtiel, Izaäk Slösser, Leo Strackee, Rie Swillens, Gerrie v/d Vegte, Loesje Verdick.[11]
\r\n
\r\n1939-1940, class 5B with Miss Godron.
\r\nB. Arnoldy, M van de Berg, M. Bos, D. Bouma, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, L. van Dijk, K. Egyedi, W. Engel, V. Frank, E. Goslar, F. de Groot (deleted: no longer able to pay), B. Groot Battavé, R. Hannes, G. Hildering, E. Jekel, S. Kimmel, F. Kolthek, A. Knebel (deleted: moved at the end of June), R. Kolthek, J. de Leeuw, W. Leyten, R. Loek, G. Moes, S. Mug, P. Neuhaus, A. Reiner, L. Rustenburg, R. Salomons, H. Scheerder, J. Schlösser, H. Scholten, J. Scholtz, J. Sealtiel, L. Strackee, R. Swillens, L. Verdickt, J. Wiegel, D. Witjas (left 13/10).[12]
\r\n
\r\n1940-1941, class 6A with Miss Kuperus
\r\nS. Agsteribbe, D. Amelsbeek, B. Arnoldy, L. Bakker (deleted) , W. Basz, W. Blauw, H. Bomers, C. Bouwmeester, L. Brilleman, A. Coppenhagen, M. Coster, A. Eering, K. Egyedi, V. Frank, E. Goslar, R. de Graaf, J. Groenevelt, B. de Groot Battavé, G. Hildering, R. van Gelderen, B. Janssen, J. Kolthek, I. Koopman, S. Krieg, J. de Leeuw, E. Lentz, L. de Levie, H. Maas, R. Metzelaar, G. Mittelmeijer, G. Moes, R. Muller, K. Musikant, L. Nijssen, A. Pachter, S. Philipse, E. Polak, R. Polak, K. Slaterus, J. Slosser, J. Soutendijk, T. Steen, H. Stork, Rie Swillens, G. van der Vegte, C. Westera S. Windt.[13]
\r\n
\r\nThere is a photo of Anne's class with the caption 1936 in Mr Van Gelder's class. There is also a photo of Anne in Van Gelder's class from 1938.[14] There is also a photo of Anne together with Miss Godron, Martha van de Berg and Rebecca Salomons.[15]
The Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe Rivierenbuurt is een in het oosten van het Amsterdamse stadsdeel Zuid gelegen buurt, die wordt begrensd door de Amstelrivier in het oosten, de Boerenwetering in het westen, het Amstelkanaal in het noorden, en de Zuidelijke Wandelweg in het zuiden. Het maakt deel uit van Plan Zuid, een stedenbouwkundig plan voor Amsterdam-Zuid, dat in het begin van de 20e eeuw werd ontworpen door de architect H.P Berlage.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid bestond uit drie delen: de Apollobuurt en de Stadionbuurt, gericht op welgestelden, middenklasse en arbeidersklasse, en de Rivierenbuurt, gericht op de middenklasse. Ook een groot deel van de buurt Nieuwe Pijp behoort tot het Plan Zuid. In het stedenbouwkundig plan was bedacht dat drie hoofdstraten (de Amstellanen) de buurt in een Y-vorm zouden doorsnijden, en samen zouden komen op het Daniël Willinkplein, een vernoeming naar de Nederlandse schrijver Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] Dit waren de Amstellaan (na de oorlog werd dit de Stalinlaan en in 1956, na de Russische inval in Hongarije, gewijzigd in Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (nu Churchill-laan) en Zuider Amstellaan (nu Rooseveltlaan).[3] De overige straatnamen in de buurt werden vernoemd naar Nederlandse rivieren.[4]
\r\n\r\nDe woningen in de Rivierenbuurt oefenden vanaf het begin van de jaren dertig grote aantrekkingskracht uit op Joodse Amsterdammers uit de middenklasse. Qua grootte en voorzieningen staken zij bijzonder gunstig af tegen de kleine, slechte woningen in de overbevolkte Jodenbuurt rond het Waterlooplein. Toch was er in de jaren dertig veel leegstand, en daardoor streken ook veel Duitse Joden die vanuit nazi-Duitsland naar Nederland vluchtten, hier neer, waaronder ook de families Frank en Van Pels en een aantal van hun vrienden en kennissen. De immigranten voelden zich thuis in deze buurt met de vele geloofsgenoten. Uiteindelijk woonde in 1940 zo'n 40% van de in Amsterdam wonende Joden in dit deel van de stad.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe Rivierenbuurt is a neighbourhood located in the east of Amsterdam's Zuid district, bounded by the Amstel River to the east, the Boerenwetering to the west, the Amstel Canal to the north, and the Zuidelijke Wandelweg to the south. It is part of Plan Zuid, an urban development plan for Amsterdam South designed by architect H.P Berlage in the early 20th century.[1]
\r\n\r\nPlan Zuid consisted of three parts: the Apollobuurt and Stadionbuurt, aimed at the well-to-do, middle and working classes, and the Rivierenbuurt, aimed at the middle classes. A large part of the Nieuwe Pijp neighbourhood was also part of Plan Zuid. The urban plan envisaged that three main streets (the Amstellanen) would cut through the neighbourhood in a Y-shape, converging on Daniël Willinkplein, named after the Dutch writer Daniël Willink (1676-1722).[2] These were Amstellaan (after the war this became Stalinlaan and in 1956, after the Russian invasion of Hungary, changed to Vrijheidslaan), Noorder Amstellaan (now Churchilllaan) and Zuider Amstellaan (now Rooseveltlaan).[3] The other street names in the neighbourhood were named after Dutch rivers.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe houses in the Rivierenbuurt exerted great attraction on middle-class Jewish Amsterdammers from the early 1930s. In terms of size and amenities, they contrasted particularly favourably with the small, poor houses in the overcrowded Jewish quarter around Waterlooplein. Nevertheless, there was a lot of vacancy in the 1930s, and as a result, many German Jews who fled to the Netherlands from Nazi Germany also settled here, including the Frank and Van Pels families and some of their friends and acquaintances. The immigrants felt at home in this neighbourhood with its many fellow Jews. Eventually, by 1940, around 40 per cent of the Jews living in Amsterdam lived in this part of the city.[4]
\r\n\r\nThe Sixth Montessori School is successively located on Dintelstraat, Amsterdam; Niersstraat 43 (kindergarten, May 23, 1934);[1] Niersstraat 41 (primary school).[2]
\r\n\r\nFrom 9 April 1934 to 13 July 1935, Anne Frank attended Preparatory School No. 51, the kindergarten of the Sixth Montessori School.[3] In May '34, that school moved from Dintelstraat to Niersstraat.[1] Anne moved it. She was in Miss Baldal's class. Two photos have been preserved showing Anne with Miss Baldal.[4] Head mistress of the school was Bernardina Cohen.[5] She remained so until 1941.[1] As of 1955 the school was called Blauwe Zeedistel.
\r\n\r\nAnne also received primary education at the Sixth Montessori School. Her mother wrote to a former neighbor in Frankfurt in March 1935: 'Think about it: today I have to register Anne for school; She will probably stay in the Montessori school.'[6] The date of Anne's admission was 16 August 1935.[7]
\r\n\r\nShe was successively taught by Mr. Van Gelder, Miss Godron and Miss Kuperus.[8] According to school records, Anne was in class 6A with Miss Kuperus. Miss Kuperus was head mistress of the primary school.[2]
\r\n\r\nAnne was actually supposed to attend a seventh year of primary school, but this could not happen due to the exclusion of Jews from regular education. She therefore immediately went on to secondary school, namely the Jewish Lyceum.[8] In September 1941, one hundred and fifty-eight Jewish children had to leave the Sixth Montessori School. After the war, a memorial plaque was placed in the school building. The school was named after Anne Frank on 12 June 1957. [9]
\r\n\r\nIn 1983, a large mural of a passage from Anne's diary was painted on the facade.[10] In translation, it reads: 'I love Holland. I who, having no native country, had hoped it would become my fatherland, and I hope it still will. yours, Anne M. Frank.'
\r\n\r\nDe Zesde Montessorischool is achtereenvolgens gevestigd op de Dintelstraat, Amsterdam; Niersstraat 43 (kleuterschool, 23 mei 1934);[1] Niersstraat 41 (lagere school).[2]
\r\n\r\nVan 9 april 1934 tot 13 juli 1935 zat Anne Frank op Voorbereidende school no. 51, de kleuterschool van het Zesde Montessorischool.[3] In mei ’34 verhuisde die school van de Dintelstraat naar de Niersstraat.[1] Anne maakte deze verhuizing mee. Ze zat in de klas bij juffrouw Baldal. Er zijn twee foto’s bewaard gebleven waar Anne met juffrouw Baldal opstaat.[4] Hoofd van de school was Bernardina Cohen.[5] Zij bleef dit tot 1941.[1] Vanaf 1955 heette de school de Blauwe Zeedistel.
\r\n\r\nOok het lager onderwijs volgde Anne aan de Zesde Montessorischool. Haar moeder schreef in maart ’35 aan een vroeger buurmeisje in Frankfurt: 'Denk dir: heute muss ich Anne für die Schule anmelden; sie wird wohl weiter in der Montessori Schule bleiben.'[6] De datum van Annes toelating was 16 augustus 1935.[7]
\r\n\r\nZe had achtereenvolgens les van mijnheer Van Gelder, juffrouw Godron en mevrouw Kuperus.[8] Volgens de schooladministratie zat Anne bij mevrouw Kuperus in klas 6A. Mevrouw Kuperus was hoofd van de lagere school.[2]
\r\n\r\nAnne moest eigenlijk een zevende jaar op de lagere school volgen, maar dit kon door de uitsluiting van Joden uit het reguliere onderwijs niet doorgaan. Ze ging daarom toch meteen door naar de middelbare school, en wel het Joods Lyceum.[8] In september ’41 moesten honderdachtenvijftig Joodse kinderen de Zesde Montessorischool verlaten. Na de oorlog is een herdenkingsplaquette in het schoolgebouw geplaatst. De school werd op 12 juni 1957 naar Anne Frank genoemd. [9]
\r\n\r\nIn 1983 werd op de gevel een grote muurschildering van een passage uit Annes dagboek aangebracht.[10] De tekst luidt: 'Ik houd van Nederland, ik heb eenmaal gehoopt dat het mij vaderlandsloze als vaderland mag dienen, ik hoop het nog. Je Anne M. Frank.'
\r\n\r\nThe Sixth Montessori School is successively located on Dintelstraat, Amsterdam; Niersstraat 43 (kindergarten, May 23, 1934);[1] Niersstraat 41 (primary school).[2]
\r\n\r\nFrom 9 April 1934 to 13 July 1935, Anne Frank attended Preparatory School No. 51, the kindergarten of the Sixth Montessori School.[3] In May '34, that school moved from Dintelstraat to Niersstraat.[1] Anne moved it. She was in Miss Baldal's class. Two photos have been preserved showing Anne with Miss Baldal.[4] Head mistress of the school was Bernardina Cohen.[5] She remained so until 1941.[1] As of 1955 the school was called Blauwe Zeedistel.
\r\n\r\nAnne also received primary education at the Sixth Montessori School. Her mother wrote to a former neighbor in Frankfurt in March 1935: 'Think about it: today I have to register Anne for school; She will probably stay in the Montessori school.'[6] The date of Anne's admission was 16 August 1935.[7]
\r\n\r\nShe was successively taught by Mr. Van Gelder, Miss Godron and Miss Kuperus.[8] According to school records, Anne was in class 6A with Miss Kuperus. Miss Kuperus was head mistress of the primary school.[2]
\r\n\r\nAnne was actually supposed to attend a seventh year of primary school, but this could not happen due to the exclusion of Jews from regular education. She therefore immediately went on to secondary school, namely the Jewish Lyceum.[8] In September 1941, one hundred and fifty-eight Jewish children had to leave the Sixth Montessori School. After the war, a memorial plaque was placed in the school building. The school was named after Anne Frank on 12 June 1957. [9]
\r\n\r\nIn 1983, a large mural of a passage from Anne's diary was painted on the facade.[10] In translation, it reads: 'I love Holland. I who, having no native country, had hoped it would become my fatherland, and I hope it still will. yours, Anne M. Frank.'
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl en Christina Sodenkamp trouwden op 20 februari 1919 in Amsterdam. De ouders stemden met het huwelijk in en twee zwagers traden op als getuigen.[1] Hun eerste kind werd viereneenhalve maand later geboren. Uiteindelijk kwamen er acht kinderen, op één na allen in Amsterdam geboren. Van de jongsten zijn de geboortedata om privacyredenen niet vermeld.
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door Johans overlijden op 27 november 1945 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nJohan Voskuijl and Christina Sodenkamp were married on 20 February 1919 in Amsterdam. The parents agreed to the marriage and the witnesses were two brothers-in-law.[1] Their first child was born four and a half months later. Eventually they had eight children, all but one born in Amsterdam. The dates of birth of the youngest are not given for reasons of privacy.
\r\n\r\nThe marriage was dissolved by Johan's death on 27 November 1945.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
De trouwdag van Johannes Kleiman en Johanna Catharina Reuman vond plaats op 12 juli 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' broer Cornelis en een broer van Johanna waren getuigen.[1] Het echtpaar kreeg een dochter, genaamd Johanna. Het gezin, bestaande uit Johannes (Jo), echtgenote Johanna (Jo en later Joke) en dochter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), stond ook wel bekend als: Jo, Jo en Jo.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Johannes Kleiman op 28 januari 1959 ontbonden.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Johannes Kleiman and Johanna Catharina Reuman took place on 12 July 1923 in Amsterdam. Johannes' brother Cornelis and a brother of Johanna were witnesses..[1] The couple had a daughter named Johanna.
\r\n\r\nThe family, consisting of Johannes (Jo), wife Johanna (Jo and later Joke) and daughter Johanna (Jopie, Jo), were also known as: 'Jo, Jo and Jo'.[2]
\r\n
\r\nThe marriage ended on 28 January 1959 with the death of Johannes Kleiman.[3]
The wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nDe trouwdag van Jan Gies en Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten vond plaats op 13 december 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] Het huwelijk was mogelijk door tussenkomst van de kantonrechter. Jans zwager J.H.A. van Steenvelt was getuige, samen met de verloofde van een zus van de bruid.[1] Bij het huwelijk van de laatsten in 1931 was Jan op zijn beurt getuige.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk bleef kinderloos en werd op 7 november 1940 door scheiding ontbonden. Sinds 14 januari 1936 stonden zij al niet meer op hetzelfde adres ingeschreven.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Maria Margaretha Geertruida Netten took place on 13 December 1928 in Amsterdam.[1] The marriage was made possible through the intervention of the Cantonal Judge. Jan's brother-in-law J.H.A. van Steenvelt was a witness, together with the fiancé of a sister of the bride.[1] Jan, in turn, was a witness at the marriage of the latter in 1931.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe marriage remained childless and was dissolved on 7 November 1940 by divorce. They had no longer been registered at the same address since 14 January 1936.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Jan Gies en Miep Santrouschitz vond plaats op 16 juli 1941. Jans eerdere huwelijke was door scheiding ontbonden op 7 november 1940.[1] Getuigen waren Miep haar pleegvader Laurens Nieuwenburg en Otto Frank.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp overgeleverde trouwfoto’s zijn de volgende gasten te zien: Laurens en Anna Nieuwenburg, hun kleindochter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman en Branca Boom.[3] Op een andere foto staan Hermann en Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler en twee onbekenden.[4] Er zijn ook twee foto’s gemaakt in en voor het Opektagebouw op de Prinsengracht. Hierop staan Jan en Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl en een onbekende man en vrouw.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep beschreef in haar Herinneringen hoeveel moeite het haar kostte om een geboortebewijs uit Wenen te krijgen.[6] Een afschrift van haar Geburts- und Tauf-Schein werd op 29 januari 1941 afgegeven; een afschrift van de officiële bevestiging van het vaderschap door Eipeldauer uit 1909 werd afgegeven op 2 mei 1941.[7] In de twee jaar voorafgaand aan het huwelijk werden ook de geboorte- en doopbewijzen van Mieps moeder (afschrift 29 november 1940), grootvader (afschrift 17 februari 1939) en grootmoeder (afschrift 23 februari 1939) afgegeven. Op het laatste afschrift stond gestempeld: 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung.[8] Deze documenten waren zeer waarschijnlijk met het oog op het voorgenomen huwelijk verstrekt.
\r\n\r\nIn een interview vertelde Miep dat de worst voor op het bruiloftsfeest was geregeld door Daatzelaar, vertegenwoordiger van Gies & Co. en later bonnenleverancier van het Achterhuis.[9]
\r\n\r\nTer gelegenheid van hun éénjarige huwelijk op 18 juli 1942 werd er een etentje georganiseerd in het Achterhuis. Het menukaartje is bewaard gebleven:
\r\n\r\naangeboden door "HET ACHTERHUIS" ter gelegenheid\r\n\r\n
\r\nvan het eenjarig bestaan van het huwelijk van
\r\nden Weled. heer en Mevrouw GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoastbeef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF (JUS)
\r\nzeer miniem gebruiken svp. in verband
\r\nmet verlaging v.h.boterrantsoen.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogaat)
\r\nSuiker, Kaneel, Frambozensap
\r\n
\r\nKO F F I E met suiker, room
\r\nen div. verrassingen. [10]
Ze kregen een zoon, genaamd Paul. Het huwelijk werd door het overlijden van Jan in 1993 ontbonden.
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Jan Gies and Miep Santrouschitz took place on 16 July 1941. Jan's previous marriage had been dissolved by divorce on 7 November 1940.[1] Miep's foster father Laurens Nieuwenburg and Otto Frank serves as witnesses.[2].
\r\n\r\nSurviving wedding photographs show the following guests: Laurens and Anna Nieuwenburg, their granddaughter Irene, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Bep Voskuijl, Esther Troeder, Pine Wuurman and Branca Boom.[3] Another photo shows Hermann and Auguste van Pels, Victor Kugler and two other unidentifed people.[4] Two photographs were also taken in and in front of the Opekta building on Prinsengracht. These show Jan and Miep Gies, Otto Frank, Anne Frank, Hermann van Pels, Bep Voskuijl and an unidentified man and woman.[5]
\r\n\r\nMiep describes in her Herinneringen how much trouble it took her to obtain a birth certificate from Vienna.[6] A copy of her 'Geburts- und Tauf-Schein' was issued on 29 January 1941; an extract of the 1909 official confirmation of paternity by Eipeldauer was issued on 2 May 1941.[7] In the two years preceding the marriage, the birth and baptism certificates of Miep's mother (extract 29 November 1940), grandfather (extract 17 February 1939) and grandmother (extract 23 February 1939) were also issued. The latter extract is stamped 'Gültig nur zum Nachweise der arischen Abstammung'.[8] These documents were most likely issued in view of the intended marriage.
\r\n\r\nIn an interview, Miep says that the sausage for the wedding party was arranged by Daatzelaar, representative of Gies & Co. and later voucher supplier of the Secret Annex.[9]
\r\n
\r\nTo mark their one-year wedding anniversary on 18 July 1942, a dinner was organised in the Secret Annex. The menu has been preserved:
Offered by "THE SECRET ANNEX" on the occasion\r\n\r\n
\r\nof the one-year anniversary of the marriage of
\r\nthe esteemed Mr and Mrs GIES.
\r\n
\r\nB o u i l l o n
\r\na la Hunzestraat
\r\n
\r\nRoast beef SCHOLTE
\r\nSalade Richelieu
\r\nSalade Hollandaise
\r\n1 Pomme de terre
\r\n
\r\nSAUCE DE BOEUF
\r\nvery minimal use please in connection
\r\nWith reduction in butter ration.
\r\n
\r\nRIZ a la Trautsmandorff
\r\n(Surrogate)
\r\nSugar, Cinnamon, Raspberry juice
\r\n
\r\nCO F F E E with sugar, cream
\r\nand various surprises. [10]
They had a son Paul, and the marriage ended with Jan's death in 1993 .
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn juli 1942 trouwden Rosel Goldschmidt en Paul Wronker, een voormalig huishoudster en een voormalig onderhuurder van de familie Frank. Fritz Pfeffer, op dat moment nog niet ondergedoken, was getuige bij het huwelijk.[1]
\r\n\r\nIn July 1942, Rosel Goldschmidt and Paul Wronker, a former housekeeper and a former tenant of the Frank family, got married. Fritz Pfeffer, who had not yet gone into hiding at that time, was a witness at the wedding.[1]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nIn de oorlogsjaren was Bep Voskuijl verloofd met A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). Daarna ontmoette zij Cor van Wijk. Zij trouwden op 15 mei 1946 om 14.40 uur in Amsterdam. De getuigen waren Otto Frank en Cornelis Groen, de echtgenoot van Beps jongere zus Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Verder waren onder de gasten ook Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna en Jopie Kleiman, Miep en Jan Gies.[2] Cors familie was niet aanwezig op deze dag. Zij hadden bezwaren tegen het huwelijk omdat Bep Nederlands-Hervormd was en de familie Van Wijk Rooms-Katholiek. Toen Bep beloofde de kinderen naar catechisatie en katholieke scholen te sturen, vond er acht jaar later toch ook nog een kerkelijke inzegening plaats op 26 mei 1954 in de kerk van de H.H. Martelaren van Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in de Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank stuurde op 13 mei 1971 een brief aan Bep en Cor van Wijk dat hij wegens gezondheidsredenen niet bij het zilveren huwelijksfeest aanwezig kon zijn.[4] Ter gelegenheid van de zilveren bruiloft stuurden Otto en Fritzi Frank op 15 mei 1971 een telegram aan hen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Bep Voskuijl was engaged to A.J. (Bertus) Hulsman (1918). She then met Cor van Wijk. They married on 15 May 1946 at 2:40pm in Amsterdam. The witnesses were Otto Frank and Cornelis Groen, the husband of Bep's younger sister Johanna Voskuijl.[1] Among the guests were also Charlotte Kaletta, Johanna and Jopie Kleiman, Miep and Jan Gies.[2] Cor's family were not present on this day. They objected to the wedding because Bep was Dutch Reformed and the Van Wijk family were Roman Catholic. When Bep promised to send the children to catechism and to Catholic schools, eight years later a church blessing was held on 26 May 1954 in the Church of the Holy Martyrs of Gorcum, Linnaeushof 95 in Watergraafsmeer, Amsterdam.[3]
\r\n\r\nOtto Frank sent a letter to Bep and Cor van Wijk on 13 May 1971 that he could not attend the silver wedding anniversary due to health reasons.[4] Otto and Fritzi Frank sent them a telegram congratulating them on this anniversary on 15 May 1971.[5]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nHet huwelijk tussen Victor Kugler en Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen vond plaats op 22 oktober 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noteerde deze dag in zijn agenda als volgt: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nThe wedding of Victor Kugler and Lysia Sophia Maria (Loes) van Langen took place on 22 October 1953 in Amsterdam.[1] Otto Frank noted this day in his diary as follows: Kugler + Loes.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nOp 10 november 1953 trouwden Otto Frank en Elfriede Edith (Fritzi) Markovits in Amsterdam. Het was voor allebei hun tweede huwelijk. De getuigen waren Jo Kleiman en Miep Gies.[1] Net als Otto had Fritzi haar partner verloren in een concentratiekamp. Op de dag van het huwelijk lieten zij bij notaris Jacob van Hasselt een akte van huwelijkse voorwaarden opstellen. Ook maakten allebei bij hem een testament op.[2]
\r\n\r\nHoewel Fritzi vanaf begin 1940 met haar gezin tegenover de familie Frank op Merwedeplein woonde, leerden zij en Otto elkaar pas kennen tijdens de terugreis uit Auschwitz. Volgens de dochter van Fritzi, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, bracht zij haar moeder en Otto tijdens de treinreis van Auschwitz naar Odessa in de buurt van Czernowitz met elkaar in contact.[3] Volgens Fritzi zelf ontmoette zij Otto tijdens een oponthoud vlakbij Lvov toen Eva Otto Frank bij de trein herkende als de vader van Anne met wie ze op het Merwedeplein had gespeeld.[4] Later vertelde Fritzi in haar opstel Mein Leben mit Otto Frank dat Otto haar al was opgevallen bij een door de Sovjettroepen georganiseerde 'herdenking van de revolutie' in het net bevrijde Auschwitz.[5] Volgens Otto's notitieboekje uit 1945 zou dit dan 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee kunnen zijn geweest.[6] Terug in Amsterdam ging Otto bij Fritzi langs omdat haar naam op een overlevendenlijst stond. Hij hoopte dat zij iets over Margot en Anne wist. Hij herinnerde zich de ontmoeting bij de trein niet.[3]
\r\n\r\nUit de briefwisseling tussen Otto en Fritzi in het najaar van 1952, toen Otto in verband met de toneelbewerking van het dagboek langere tijd in de Verenigde Staten verbleef, blijkt dat hun huwelijk aanstaande was.[7]
\r\n\r\nOn 10 November 1953, Otto Frank and Elfriede Edith ('Fritizi') Markovits got married in Amsterdam. It was the second marriage for both of them. The witnesses were Jo Kleiman and Miep Gies.[1] Like Otto, Fritzi had lost her partner in a concentration camp. On the day of the wedding, they had a prenuptial agreement drawn up with notary Jacob van Hasselt. Both also made a will with him.[2]
\r\n\r\nAlthough Fritzi lived with her family opposite the Frank family on Merwedeplein from the beginning of 1940, she and Otto only got to know each other during the return journey from Auschwitz. According to Fritzi's daughter, Eva Geiringer-Schloss, she introduced her mother and Otto to one another during the train journey from Auschwitz to Odessa, somewhere near Czernowitz.[3] According to Fritzi herself, she met Otto during a layover near Lvov when Eva recognised Otto Frank as the father of Anne, with whom she had played on Merwedeplein.[4] Later, Fritzi recounted in her essay Mein Leben mit Otto Frank that Otto had already caught her eye at a 'commemoration of the revolution' organised by Soviet troops in newly liberated Auschwitz.[5] According to Otto's 1945 notebook, this could then have been 23/II (1945) Tag der roten armee.[6] Back in Amsterdam, Otto went to see Fritzi because her name was on a survivors' list. He hoped she knew something about Margot and Anne. He did not remember the meeting next to the train.[3]
\r\n\r\nCorrespondence between Otto and Fritzi in the autumn of 1952, when Otto spent extended time in the United States in connection with the stage adaptation of the diary, shows that their marriage was imminent.[7]
\r\n\r\nWorld War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","description_nl":"De Tweede Wereldoorlog kostte aan ongeveer 110.000 Amsterdammers het leven. Van de omvangrijke Joodse gemeenschap overleefde het merendeel, ongeveer 75.000 Joden, de Duitse bezetting niet. Anne Frank dook in de stad onder en schreef er haar wereldberoemde dagboek. Ook de Hongerwinter eiste, zoals in heel West-Nederland, een hoge tol in de stad.
","description_en":"World War II took the lives of approximately 110,000 Amsterdam residents. Of the sizeable Jewish community, the majority, about 75,000 Jews, did not survive the German occupation. Anne Frank went into hiding in the city and wrote her world-famous diary there. The Hunger Winter also took a heavy toll on the city, as it did throughout the Western Netherlands.
","summary":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","summary_nl":"Amsterdam is de hoofdstad van Nederland.","summary_en":"Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/locations/9577"],"parent":396124554,"files":[]}],"related_locations":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/63dce380-73c4-4db6-b629-d9e9b21c8dd0","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fa71d2a7-0c30-4015-b90a-a791f0cb4049"],"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/locaties/4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901/","published":true,"name":"Amsterdam City Hall","name_nl":"Stadhuis Amsterdam","name_en":"Amsterdam City Hall","uuid":"4265a185-f892-4973-98e7-b47650f75901","content":"","content_nl":"","content_en":"","position":"SRID=4326;POINT (4.89523 52.37098)","summary":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","summary_nl":"Het stadhuis van Amsterdam was de plek waar in die stad de huwelijken werden gesloten.","summary_en":"Amsterdam City Hall was where marriages were performed in that city.","same_as":null,"street":"Oudezijds Voorburgwal 197","zipcode":"","city":"Amsterdam","state":"Noord-Holland","land":"Nederland","location_events":[238,237,239,230,236,234,220]},"score":1.2941792},{"type":"location","instance":{"id":17,"files":[],"main_image":null,"latitude":"52.3501946183377","longitude":"4.85607111315618","events":[{"id":50,"main_image":{"id":1071,"uuid":"e4e4635a-e91e-4c32-86d4-65ba3e019818","name":"A_Kugler_III_002","title":"Het Huis van Bewaring aan de Havenstraat, Amsterdam. Victor Kugler heeft hierop met pen zijn cel met nummer aangewezen. Ongedateerd.","alt":"Vervaardiger onbekend. Fotocollectie Anne Frank Stichting, Amsterdam","url":"https://images.memorix.nl/anf/thumb/1920x1080/e7232722-4f16-be89-8dc5-dd1d30caf506.jpg","path":null,"filetype":"image","description":"Foto van de gevangenis aan de Weteringschans, waarop Victor Kugler cel en nummer (B3 11) heeft aangegeven in pen. Hier is hij, na een verblijf in de Untersuchungsgefängnis op de Amstelveenseweg, in september 1944 vastgehouden. Op 11 september 1944 is hij zonder proces naar het Polizeiliche Durchgangslager Amersfoort gebracht. Bijschrift klopt niet. Dit is de gevangenis aan de Amstelveenseweg. 9 mei 2011, KSK.","author":"Collectie kan worden ingezet voor publiek","copyright":"Publiek domein"},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/597278f2-5e8e-4f18-af23-c6cf558292ca/","subjects":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/subjects/2abdc9fe-b0e6-493d-a6cd-a8fd85baabd7","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/subjects/2e08df39-e056-499f-8465-346045ff6943","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/subjects/f565de08-feb8-4e12-802d-b3f22ff193f4"],"persons":["https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/persons/7b1f2828-0f9d-49a0-bf55-869b818e76ab","https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/persons/94d0786c-04e7-4095-ba04-876b8544e1b2"],"location":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/api/locations/fad53262-2f05-426a-8396-dbd3341f6a05","published":true,"uuid":"597278f2-5e8e-4f18-af23-c6cf558292ca","name":"Kugler and Kleiman in Detention Centre II (Amstelveenscheweg)","name_nl":"Kugler en Kleiman in Huis van Bewaring II (Amstelveenscheweg)","name_en":"Kugler and Kleiman in Detention Centre II (Amstelveenscheweg)","content":"After the people in hiding and helpers Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler were arrested on 4 August 1944, they were taken to the Zentralstelle on Adama van Scheltemaplein for interrogation. From there, Kleiman and Kugler were transferred to Detention Centre II on Amstelveenscheweg (Havenstraat 6) on the same day.[1]
\r\n\r\nKugler and Kleiman were detained at Amstelveenscheweg for about six weeks. They were locked in single cells filled with six men. Kugler was in cell B3-11, next to Kleiman. They communicated with each other by knock signals and clandestine notes.[2]
\r\n\r\nA card, probably sent to Victor Kugler's wife, confirms that Kugler was detained in cell B3-11 of HvB II (Havenstraat, German Department). The card contains a pre-printed request for clean laundry. Added in handwriting are "Shaving soap + brush. no device" and "Wooden nameplate on pillowcase."[3]
\r\n\r\nMrs Kleiman went to the Detention Centre on Amstelveenscheweg several times to bring clean clothes. She did not speak to her husband, but did receive some clandestine notes from him.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to family stories,Willy Kleiman's wife Ilse Schubert, who was German, tried to get her brother-in-law Johannes Kleiman released.
\r\n\r\nThe two helpers remained imprisoned on Amstelveenscheweg until early September 1944 and were then transferred to Detention Centre I on Weteringschans.[5]
\r\n\r\nNadat de onderduikers en helpers Johannes Kleiman en Victor Kugler waren gearresteerd op 4 augustus 1944, werden zij naar de Zentralstelle aan het Adama van Scheltemaplein gebracht voor verhoor. Van daaruit werden Kleiman en Kugler op dezelfde dag nog naar het Huis van Bewaring II op de Amstelveenscheweg (Havenstraat 6) overgebracht.[1]
\r\n\r\nOp de Amstelveenscheweg zaten Kugler en Kleiman ongeveer zes weken vast. Ze zaten opgesloten in eenpersoonscellen die gevuld waren met zes man. Kugler zat in cel B3-11, naast Kleiman. Ze communiceerden met elkaar door klopsignalen en clandestiene briefjes.[2]
\r\n\r\nEen kaartje, waarschijnlijk gestuurd aan Victor Kuglers vrouw, bevestigt dat Kugler vastzat in cel B3-11 van HvB II (Havenstraat, Duitse Afdeling). Het kaartje bevat een voorgedrukt verzoek om schoon wasgoed. In handschrift is toegevoegd: 'Scheerzeep + kwast. geen apparaat' en 'Houten naamplaatje aan kussensloop.'[3]
\r\n\r\nMevrouw Kleiman ging enkele keren naar het Huis van Bewaring aan de Amstelveenscheweg om schone kleren te brengen. Zij sprak haar man niet, maar ontving van hem wel enkele clandestiene briefjes.[4]
\r\n\r\nVolgens familieverhalen probeerde Ilse Schubert, de vrouw van Willy Kleiman, als Duitse haar zwager Jo Kleiman vrij te krijgen.[5]
\r\n\r\nDe twee helpers bleven tot begin september 1944 gevangen op de Amstelveenscheweg en werden daarna naar het Huis van Bewaring I aan de Weteringschans overgebracht.
\r\n\r\nAfter the people in hiding and helpers Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler were arrested on 4 August 1944, they were taken to the Zentralstelle on Adama van Scheltemaplein for interrogation. From there, Kleiman and Kugler were transferred to Detention Centre II on Amstelveenscheweg (Havenstraat 6) on the same day.[1]
\r\n\r\nKugler and Kleiman were detained at Amstelveenscheweg for about six weeks. They were locked in single cells filled with six men. Kugler was in cell B3-11, next to Kleiman. They communicated with each other by knock signals and clandestine notes.[2]
\r\n\r\nA card, probably sent to Victor Kugler's wife, confirms that Kugler was detained in cell B3-11 of HvB II (Havenstraat, German Department). The card contains a pre-printed request for clean laundry. Added in handwriting are "Shaving soap + brush. no device" and "Wooden nameplate on pillowcase."[3]
\r\n\r\nMrs Kleiman went to the Detention Centre on Amstelveenscheweg several times to bring clean clothes. She did not speak to her husband, but did receive some clandestine notes from him.[4]
\r\n\r\nAccording to family stories,Willy Kleiman's wife Ilse Schubert, who was German, tried to get her brother-in-law Johannes Kleiman released.
\r\n\r\nThe two helpers remained imprisoned on Amstelveenscheweg until early September 1944 and were then transferred to Detention Centre I on Weteringschans.[5]
\r\n\r\nOne 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.
\r\n\r\nThis investigative report is based on the premise that only one thing can be agreed on with certainty: on 4 August 1944, members of the Sicherheitsdienst 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 1963, 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.
\r\n\r\nConsidering 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 4 August 1944, 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.[1] Biographies about both Anne and Otto Frank also present different theories about the events leading up to the raid on 4 August 1944.[2] 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.[3] An overview of the source material used for this investigation – published as well as unpublished – is included at the end of this report.
\r\n\r\nAfter a well-orchestrated media campaign subject to strict embargo rules, a controversial book was launched in January 2022: The betrayal of Anne Frank: a Cold Case Investigation.[4] The Cold Case Team went public with the news that it could identify - with a very high probability the traitor responsible for the raid on the Secret Annex. The name of Jewish civil-law notary Arnold van den Bergh went around the world as the most likely betrayer of Anne Frank and the other occupants the Secret Annex, but there has been so much criticism of this research that it prompted publisher AmboAnthos to withdraw the Dutch version of book from sale.[5]
\r\n\r\nEen 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.
\r\n\r\nHet onderzoek is opgezet vanuit de gedachte dat er maar één ding vaststaat: er is op 4 augustus 1944 een inval van leden van de Sicherheitsdienst (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 1963 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.
\r\n\r\nHet 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 4 augustus 1944 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.[1] In biografieën over zowel Anne als Otto Frank zijn eveneens verschillende theorieën ontvouwd over het voortraject van de inval van 4 augustus.[2] 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.[3] Een overzicht van al het gebruikte materiaal, gepubliceerd en ongepubliceerd, is aan dit verslag toegevoegd.
\r\n\r\nIn januari 2022 werd met een strak geregiseerde mediacampagne een geruchtmakend boek gelanceerd: Het verraad van Anne Frank: het baanbrekende onderzoek van een internationaal Cold Case|Team in Nederland.[4] Het zogenaame Cold Case Team kwam naar buiten met het nieuws dat het met een zeer grote waarschijnlijkheid de verrader kon aanwijzen die verantwoordelijk was voor de inval in het Achterhuis. De naam van de Joodse notaris Arnold van den Bergh ging de hele wereld over als de meest waarschijnlijke verrader van Anne Frank en de andere bewoners van het Achterhuis, maar er kwam zo veel kritiek op dit onderzoek dat de uitgever AmboAnthos besloot de Nederlandse versie van het boek uit de handel te nemen.[5]
\r\n\r\nOne 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.
\r\n\r\nThis investigative report is based on the premise that only one thing can be agreed on with certainty: on 4 August 1944, members of the Sicherheitsdienst 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 1963, 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.
\r\n\r\nConsidering 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 4 August 1944, 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.[1] Biographies about both Anne and Otto Frank also present different theories about the events leading up to the raid on 4 August 1944.[2] 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.[3] An overview of the source material used for this investigation – published as well as unpublished – is included at the end of this report.
\r\n\r\nAfter a well-orchestrated media campaign subject to strict embargo rules, a controversial book was launched in January 2022: The betrayal of Anne Frank: a Cold Case Investigation.[4] The Cold Case Team went public with the news that it could identify - with a very high probability the traitor responsible for the raid on the Secret Annex. The name of Jewish civil-law notary Arnold van den Bergh went around the world as the most likely betrayer of Anne Frank and the other occupants the Secret Annex, but there has been so much criticism of this research that it prompted publisher AmboAnthos to withdraw the Dutch version of book from sale.[5]
\r\n\r\nThis prison was renamed a Detention Centre before 1940, because the Huis van Bewaring I (Weteringschans) at the Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen had been struggling with a shortage of capacity for years.[1]
\r\n\r\nAfter the arrest of the people in the Secret Annex, helpers Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler were transferred to Huis van Bewaring II. Resistance fighter Hannie Schaft was in this Huis van Bewaring when she was picked up on 17 April 1945 to be executed in the dunes near Bloemendaal.
\r\n\r\nDeze strafgevangenis was voor 1940 omgedoopt tot een Huis van Bewaring, omdat het Huis van Bewaring I (Weteringschans) bij het Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen al jaren met een tekort aan capaciteit kampte.[1]
\r\n\r\nNa de arrestatie van de onderduikers in het Achterhuis werden helpers Johannes Kleiman en Victor Kugler naar het Huis van Bewaring II overgebracht. Verzetsstrijdster Hannie Schaft zat in dit Huis van Bewaring toen zij op 17 april 1945 werd opgehaald om in de duinen bij Bloemendaal te worden geëxecuteerd.
\r\n\r\nThis prison was renamed a Detention Centre before 1940, because the Huis van Bewaring I (Weteringschans) at the Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen had been struggling with a shortage of capacity for years.[1]
\r\n\r\nAfter the arrest of the people in the Secret Annex, helpers Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler were transferred to Huis van Bewaring II. Resistance fighter Hannie Schaft was in this Huis van Bewaring when she was picked up on 17 April 1945 to be executed in the dunes near Bloemendaal.
\r\n\r\nOn 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director at Opekta's shareholders' meeting, which was called to aryanise the company pro forma. Johannes Kleiman immediately accepted the appointment as managing director. The meeting was held at the offices of A.R.W.M. Dunselman, the company's legal advisor.[1]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Otto Frank, Kleiman intended after the war: 'Once again to resign from the business, since he is interested in other matters and took up this position at the time only to help me.'[5]
\r\n\r\nKleiman owned one-fifth of the shares, Otto Frank owned the rest. In 1957, the total value was fl. 25,000.[9]
\r\n\r\nIIn 1958, Kleiman was experimenting with bigarreaux as a pastry filling. On 14 August 1958, he wrote to Otto Frank that he was hopeful about the prospects. This strengthened their negotiating position, since Dr Magin from Opekta-Köln was making overtures again. Kleiman wanted to wait and see what would happen.[8] ![](\"/media/uploads/2022/10/27/image-20221027150310-11.png\")
Kleiman's last letter to Otto Frank was dated 27 December 1958. The next letter, dated 20 April 1959, came from his widow, Johanna Kleiman-Reuman.[10] ![](\"/media/uploads/2022/10/27/image-20221027150310-12.png\")
Opekta-Köln took over the Amsterdam firm in the spring of 1959 when they acquired the shares of Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman.[11]
Op 12 december 1941 trad Otto Frank terug als directeur tijdens de aandeelhoudersvergadering van Opekta, die ten doel had het bedrijf pro forma te ariseren. Johannes Kleiman aanvaardde direct de benoeming tot directeur. De vergadering was ten kantore van mr. A.R.W.M. Dunselman.[1]
\r\n\r\nNa de oorlog wilde Kleiman volgens Otto Frank: 'Wederom uit de zaak treden, aangezien hij in andere zaken is geïnteresseerd en deze functie destijds alleen om mij te helpen heeft opgenomen.[5]
\r\n\r\n![](\"/media/uploads/2022/10/27/image-20221027150310-8.png\")
Dit was kort na Otto Franks vertrek naar Bazel.Kleiman bezat eenvijfde deel van het aandelenpakket, Otto Frank de rest. In 1957 was de totale waarde fl. 25.000,-.[9]
\r\n\r\nIn 1958 experimenteerde Kleiman intensief met bigarreaux als gebaksvulling. Op 14 augustus 1958 schreef hij aan Otto Frank dat het product inmiddels perspectieven bood. Dit versterkte hun onderhandelingspositie, nu dr. Magin van Opekta-Köln weer toenadering zocht. Hij wilde daarom eerst even afwachten.[8]
De laatste brief van Kleiman in de correspondentie met Otto Frank was van 27 december 1958. De volgende van 20 april 1959 kwam van zijn weduwe Johanna Kleiman-Reuman.[10] Opekta-Köln nam voorjaar 1959 de Amsterdamse firma over door de aandelen van Otto en Kleiman te kopen.[11]
On 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director at Opekta's shareholders' meeting, which was called to aryanise the company pro forma. Johannes Kleiman immediately accepted the appointment as managing director. The meeting was held at the offices of A.R.W.M. Dunselman, the company's legal advisor.[1]
\r\n\r\nAccording to Otto Frank, Kleiman intended after the war: 'Once again to resign from the business, since he is interested in other matters and took up this position at the time only to help me.'[5]
\r\n\r\nKleiman owned one-fifth of the shares, Otto Frank owned the rest. In 1957, the total value was fl. 25,000.[9]
\r\n\r\nIIn 1958, Kleiman was experimenting with bigarreaux as a pastry filling. On 14 August 1958, he wrote to Otto Frank that he was hopeful about the prospects. This strengthened their negotiating position, since Dr Magin from Opekta-Köln was making overtures again. Kleiman wanted to wait and see what would happen.[8]
Kleiman's last letter to Otto Frank was dated 27 December 1958. The next letter, dated 20 April 1959, came from his widow, Johanna Kleiman-Reuman.[10] Opekta-Köln took over the Amsterdam firm in the spring of 1959 when they acquired the shares of Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman.[11]
In 1928, Austrian chemist Robert Feix[1] developed a natural binder that was applicable for household use. He gave it the trade name Opekta, which stands for Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, or fruit pectin from the apple. Making jam yourself could be shortened from many hours to 10 minutes with this pectin.[2] Feix set up Opekta GmbH in Cologne and was linked to the food group Pomosin, which took up production. The Pomosin representative in the Netherlands wanted to divest itself of Opekta imports. This gave Otto Frank the opportunity to set up his own branch here.[3] On 4 July 1933, he organised the first of many demonstrations in Heerlen, where Opekta had a local depot.[4] The same month, Victor Kugler joined Opekta. Otto had the Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV registered with the Chamber of Commerce on 15 September 1933.[5]
\r\n\r\nTo start the company, Otto Frank borrowed 15,000 guilders from his brother-in-law Erich Elias on 5 August 1933. His shares served as collateral for this. He also paid two and a half per cent of his turnover as a licence and undertook to buy all Pomosin's pectin. Erich Elias was managing director of Rovag, a Swiss-based Pomosin subsidiary that was to enable Opekta branches in several European countries.[6] When Elias was forced to leave in 1939 as a result of increasing National Socialist influence on Pomosin's leadership, the debt passed to his successor Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch company was housed in the modern Candida office building at Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in Amsterdam city centre.[8] Here Ottto Frank worked together with Victor Kugler to build up the business. On 16 October 1933, Miep Gies (then Santrouschitz) and Henk van Beusekom joined Opekta.[9] After the summer season of 1934, Opekta moved to the nearby address Singel 400. Here there was slightly more space, but it remained necessary to rent external storage.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch Opekta also controlled the British Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Applam was also part of the Pomosin group and went into liquidation in 1935. Otto Frank later undertook a restart attempt, but this failed.
\r\n\r\nTo promote its products, Opekta regularly attended trade fairs. The company placed advertisements in newspapers, published its own recipe booklets and published its own newspaper at least twice: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In the summer of 1936, a promotion was organised in collaboration with newspaper De Telegraaf, where participants could win a free Opekta preserving package.[11] From January 1938, film screenings were also organised across the country, showing a more than 10-minute commercial film. In it, the use of liquid Opekta is demonstrated by Miep Gies and it also features employee Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1940, Otto Frank moved into the vacant Prinsengracht 263 building with his other company Pectacon.[7] Opekta moved with it, with Pectacon bearing the costs. With the entire building available, space problems were a thing of the past. The ground floor housed Pectacon's machinery, including two heavy spice mills. The rooms on the first floor were used as offices. The second floor functioned as storage for both companies. The third floor of the back house initially housed a laboratory where tests for Opekta's jam-making took place.[13]
\r\n\r\nShortly before this move, the German Wirtschaftsprüfstelle got involved in the 'arisation' of Dutch business. Because of its Jewish director Otto Frank, this included Opekta. In the shareholders' meeting of 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director in favour of Johannes Kleiman. His other company Pectacon, he had earlier transferred to Victor Kugler and Jan Gies and had been replaced by Gies & Co, thus seeking to present both companies as non-Jewish property. Legal adviser Ton Dunselman, associated with Opekta since 1935, took Frank's shares into custody until the Wirtschafstprüfstelle and creditor Tosin approved their sale.[7] That issue got shelved and after his return from Auschwitz, Otto Frank got them back. The shareholders welcomed him back at their meeting on 25 June 1945. They awarded him compensation of 4800 guilders. After all, he had resigned in 1941 in the interests of the firm and had thus made 'great monetary sacrifices'.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta came under the management of parent company Pomosin during the occupation. Sugar shortages and acts of war - thirty thousand Opekta bottles were lost in a bombing raid on Cologne - adversely affected results. Interference from Frankfurt brought further tension and unrest. On several occasions, representatives of the Pomosin management came to Prinsengracht 263 for business meetings. Otto Frank, while in hiding, took part in their preparations. Anne Frank describes in her diary how on one occasion, lying with his ear to the floor, he quietly listened in on the meeting in the private office below their hiding place in the annex.[15]
\r\n\r\nAfter the 4 August 1944 raid, the Opekta and Gies & Co. firms were left without management. Because, besides the eight people in hiding, their helpers Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman were also arrested. The three other helpers Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl continued running the business together with the warehouse staff. Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort on 18 September 1944 and then returned to the office. It was not until after the liberation that Otto Frank and Victor Kugler also returned.
\r\n\r\nIn the post-war years, Opekta was still not always doing well. In the mid-1950s, the company left its badly run-down building on Prinsengracht and settled in new premises on Van Slingelandstraat in the Staatsliedenbuurt neighbourhood in Amsterdam's West district. Opekta remained active and tried to find larger customers at well-known chocolate factories. On the initiative of Johannes Kleiman, the new pectin product Supec entered the market. During the 1950s, Opekta faced competition from a pectin manufacturer in Denmark and lost a large share of the market partly as a result. Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman spent years negotiating with the sister company in Cologne to take over their shares. The time had come in 1959, but in January that year Johannes Kleiman died unexpectedly at his desk. Led from Cologne, Opekta continued to work in Amsterdam until the 1980s. The entire Opekta conglomerate merged into the Dr Oetker concern.[3]
\r\n\r\nAddresses: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nIn 1928 ontwikkelde de Oostenrijkse scheikundige Robert Feix[1] een natuurlijk bindmiddel dat toepasbaar was voor huishoudelijk gebruik. Hij gaf het de handelsnaam Opekta, wat staat voor Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, oftewel vruchtpectine uit de appel. Het zelf maken van jam kon met deze pectine worden verkort van vele uren tot tien minuten.[2] Feix vestigde zich met Opekta GmbH in Keulen en was verbonden aan het levensmiddelenconcern Pomosin, dat de productie ter hand nam. De Pomosin-vertegenwoordiger in Nederland wilde de import van Opekta afstoten. Daardoor kreeg Otto Frank de kans hier een eigen vestiging op te zetten.[3] Op 4 juli 1933 organiseerde hij in Heerlen, waar Opekta een plaatselijk depot had, de eerste van vele demonstraties.[4] Dezelfde maand trad Victor Kugler bij Opekta in dienst. Otto liet de Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV op 15 september 1933 inschrijven bij de Kamer van Koophandel.[5]
\r\n\r\nVoor het starten van het bedrijf leende Otto Frank van zijn zwager Erich Elias op 5 augustus 1933 vijftienduizend gulden. Zijn aandelen dienden daarbij als onderpand. Verder betaalde hij twee en een half procent van zijn omzet als licentie en verplichtte hij zich alle pectine van Pomosin af te nemen. Erich Elias was directeur van Rovag, een in Zwitserland gevestigde Pomosin-dochteronderneming die Opekta-vestigingen in diverse Europese landen mogelijk moest maken.[6] Toen Elias in 1939 als gevolg van toenemende nationaal-socialistische invloed op de leiding van Pomosin gedwongen moest vertrekken, ging de schuld over op zijn opvolger Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nHet Nederlandse bedrijf had onderdak in het moderne kantorengebouw Candida op Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in de Amsterdamse binnenstad.[8] Hier werkte Ottto Frank met Victor Kugler aan de opbouw van de zaak. Op 16 oktober 1933 kwamen Miep Gies (toen nog Santrouschitz) en Henk van Beusekom bij Opekta in dienst.[9] Na het zomerseizoen van 1934 verhuisde Opekta naar het nabijgelegen adres Singel 400. Hier was iets meer ruimte, maar het bleef nodig om externe opslag te huren.[7]
\r\n\r\nDe Nederlandse Opekta had ook de controle over de Britse Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Ook Applam maakte deel uit van het Pomosin-concern en ging in 1935 in liquidatie. Otto Frank ondernam later een poging tot doorstart, maar dit mislukte.
\r\n\r\nTer promotie van zijn producten was Opekta regelmatig te vinden op beursen. Het bedrijf plaatste advertenties in kranten, publiceerde eigen receptenboekjes en gaf minstens tweemaal een eigen krant uit: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In de zomer van 1936 werd in samenwerking met De Telegraaf een actie georganiseerd, waarbij deelnemers een gratis Opekta-inmaakpakket konden winnen.[11] Ook werden er vanaf januari 1938 door het hele land filmvertoningen georganiseerd, waarbij een ruim tien minuten durende reclamefilm werd vertoond. Hierin wordt de werking van vloeibare Opekta door Miep Gies gedemonstreerd en figureert ook medewerkster Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nEind 1940 betrok Otto Frank met zijn andere onderneming Pectacon het leegstaande pand Prinsengracht 263.[7] Opekta verhuisde mee, waarbij Pectacon de kosten droeg. Met het hele gebouw ter beschikking behoorden de ruimteproblemen tot het verleden. Op de begane grond stond het machinepark van Pectacon opgesteld, bestaande uit onder meer twee zware specerijenmolens. De ruimtes op de eerste verdieping werden gebruikt als kantoren. De tweede verdieping functioneerde als opslag voor beide bedrijven. Op de derde verdieping van het achterhuis was aanvankelijk een laboratorium ingericht waar proeven voor Opekta's jammakerij plaatsvonden.[13]
\r\n\r\nKort voor deze verhuizing ging de Duitse Wirtschaftsprüfstelle zich met de 'arisering' van het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven bezighouden. Vanwege de Joodse directeur Otto Frank, kwam daarbij ook Opekta in beeld. In de aandeelhoudersvergadering van 12 december 1941 trad Otto Frank als directeur terug ten gunste van Johannes Kleiman. Zijn andere onderneming Pectacon had hij eerder al overgedragen aan Victor Kugler en Jan Gies en was vervangen door Gies & Co. Zo wilde hij beide bedrijven als niet-Joods eigendom presenteren. Juridisch adviseur Ton Dunselman, sinds 1935 aan Opekta verbonden, nam Franks aandelen in bewaring totdat de Wirtschafstprüfstelle en schuldeiser Tosin de verkoop ervan zouden goedkeuren.[7] Die kwestie raakte op de lange baan en na zijn terugkeer uit Auschwitz kreeg Otto Frank ze weer terug. De aandeelhouders verwelkomden hem terug in hun vergadering van 25 juni 1945. Zij kenden hem een schadevergoeding van achtenveertighonderd gulden toe. Hij was tenslotte in 1941 in het belang van de firma teruggetreden en had zo 'groote geldelijke offers' gebracht.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta kwam tijdens de bezetting onder beheer van moedermaatschappij Pomosin te staan. Suikerschaarste en oorlogshandelingen - dertigduizend Opektaflesjes gingen verloren bij een bombardement op Keulen - waren van ongunstige invloed op de resultaten. De bemoeienissen vanuit Frankfurt brachten verdere spanning en onrust met zich mee. Verschillende keren kwamen vertegenwoordigers van de Pomosin-directie naar Prinsengracht 263 voor zakelijke besprekingen. Otto Frank nam, terwijl hij was ondergedoken, deel aan de voorbereidingen daarvan. Anne Frank beschrijft in haar dagboek hoe hij in een keer, liggend met zijn oor tegen de vloer, stilletjes meeluisterde met de vergadering in het privé-kantoor onder hun schuilplaats in het achterhuis.[15]
\r\n\r\nDe firma's Opekta en Gies & Co. bleven na de inval op 4 augustus 1944 zonder directie achter. Naast de acht onderduikers werden namelijk ook hun helpers Victor Kugler en Johannes Kleiman gearresteerd. De drie andere helpers Miep en Jan Gies en Bep Voskuijl zetten de zaken samen met het magazijnpersoneel voort. Johannes Kleiman kwam op 18 september 1944 vrij uit Kamp Amersfoort en keerde toen terug naar kantoor. Pas na de bevrijding keerden ook Otto Frank en Victor Kugler terug.
\r\n\r\nIn de naoorlogse jaren ging het nog steeds niet altijd goed met Opekta. Midden jaren vijftig verliet het bedrijf het sterk vervallen gebouw aan de Prinsengracht en streek neer in een nieuw bedrijfspand aan de Van Slingelandstraat in de Staatsliedenbuurt in Amsterdam-West. Opekta bleef actief en probeerde grotere afnemers te vinden bij bekende chocoladefabrieken. Met name op initiatief van Johannes Kleiman kwam het nieuwe pectineproduct Supec op de markt. In de loop van de jaren vijftig kreeg Opekta concurrentie te verduren van een pectinefabrikant in Denemarken en verloor mede daardoor een groot deel van de markt. Otto Frank en Johannes Kleiman onderhandelden jaren met het zusterbedrijf in Keulen over de overname van hun aandelen. In 1959 was het dan zover, maar in januari van dat jaar overleed onverwacht Johannes Kleiman achter zijn bureau. Onder leiding vanuit Keulen werkte Opekta in Amsterdam nog tot in de jaren tachtig voort. Het gehele Opekta-conglomeraat ging op in het concern Dr. Oetker.[3]
\r\n\r\nAdressen: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nIn 1928, Austrian chemist Robert Feix[1] developed a natural binder that was applicable for household use. He gave it the trade name Opekta, which stands for Obstpektin aus dem Apfel, or fruit pectin from the apple. Making jam yourself could be shortened from many hours to 10 minutes with this pectin.[2] Feix set up Opekta GmbH in Cologne and was linked to the food group Pomosin, which took up production. The Pomosin representative in the Netherlands wanted to divest itself of Opekta imports. This gave Otto Frank the opportunity to set up his own branch here.[3] On 4 July 1933, he organised the first of many demonstrations in Heerlen, where Opekta had a local depot.[4] The same month, Victor Kugler joined Opekta. Otto had the Nederlandsche Opekta Maatschappij NV registered with the Chamber of Commerce on 15 September 1933.[5]
\r\n\r\nTo start the company, Otto Frank borrowed 15,000 guilders from his brother-in-law Erich Elias on 5 August 1933. His shares served as collateral for this. He also paid two and a half per cent of his turnover as a licence and undertook to buy all Pomosin's pectin. Erich Elias was managing director of Rovag, a Swiss-based Pomosin subsidiary that was to enable Opekta branches in several European countries.[6] When Elias was forced to leave in 1939 as a result of increasing National Socialist influence on Pomosin's leadership, the debt passed to his successor Max Tosin.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch company was housed in the modern Candida office building at Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126 in Amsterdam city centre.[8] Here Ottto Frank worked together with Victor Kugler to build up the business. On 16 October 1933, Miep Gies (then Santrouschitz) and Henk van Beusekom joined Opekta.[9] After the summer season of 1934, Opekta moved to the nearby address Singel 400. Here there was slightly more space, but it remained necessary to rent external storage.[7]
\r\n\r\nThe Dutch Opekta also controlled the British Applam Fruit Company in Somerset. Applam was also part of the Pomosin group and went into liquidation in 1935. Otto Frank later undertook a restart attempt, but this failed.
\r\n\r\nTo promote its products, Opekta regularly attended trade fairs. The company placed advertisements in newspapers, published its own recipe booklets and published its own newspaper at least twice: Opekta Nieuws.[10] In the summer of 1936, a promotion was organised in collaboration with newspaper De Telegraaf, where participants could win a free Opekta preserving package.[11] From January 1938, film screenings were also organised across the country, showing a more than 10-minute commercial film. In it, the use of liquid Opekta is demonstrated by Miep Gies and it also features employee Isa Monas.[12]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1940, Otto Frank moved into the vacant Prinsengracht 263 building with his other company Pectacon.[7] Opekta moved with it, with Pectacon bearing the costs. With the entire building available, space problems were a thing of the past. The ground floor housed Pectacon's machinery, including two heavy spice mills. The rooms on the first floor were used as offices. The second floor functioned as storage for both companies. The third floor of the back house initially housed a laboratory where tests for Opekta's jam-making took place.[13]
\r\n\r\nShortly before this move, the German Wirtschaftsprüfstelle got involved in the 'arisation' of Dutch business. Because of its Jewish director Otto Frank, this included Opekta. In the shareholders' meeting of 12 December 1941, Otto Frank stepped down as managing director in favour of Johannes Kleiman. His other company Pectacon, he had earlier transferred to Victor Kugler and Jan Gies and had been replaced by Gies & Co, thus seeking to present both companies as non-Jewish property. Legal adviser Ton Dunselman, associated with Opekta since 1935, took Frank's shares into custody until the Wirtschafstprüfstelle and creditor Tosin approved their sale.[7] That issue got shelved and after his return from Auschwitz, Otto Frank got them back. The shareholders welcomed him back at their meeting on 25 June 1945. They awarded him compensation of 4800 guilders. After all, he had resigned in 1941 in the interests of the firm and had thus made 'great monetary sacrifices'.[14]
\r\n\r\nOpekta came under the management of parent company Pomosin during the occupation. Sugar shortages and acts of war - thirty thousand Opekta bottles were lost in a bombing raid on Cologne - adversely affected results. Interference from Frankfurt brought further tension and unrest. On several occasions, representatives of the Pomosin management came to Prinsengracht 263 for business meetings. Otto Frank, while in hiding, took part in their preparations. Anne Frank describes in her diary how on one occasion, lying with his ear to the floor, he quietly listened in on the meeting in the private office below their hiding place in the annex.[15]
\r\n\r\nAfter the 4 August 1944 raid, the Opekta and Gies & Co. firms were left without management. Because, besides the eight people in hiding, their helpers Victor Kugler and Johannes Kleiman were also arrested. The three other helpers Miep and Jan Gies and Bep Voskuijl continued running the business together with the warehouse staff. Johannes Kleiman was released from Camp Amersfoort on 18 September 1944 and then returned to the office. It was not until after the liberation that Otto Frank and Victor Kugler also returned.
\r\n\r\nIn the post-war years, Opekta was still not always doing well. In the mid-1950s, the company left its badly run-down building on Prinsengracht and settled in new premises on Van Slingelandstraat in the Staatsliedenbuurt neighbourhood in Amsterdam's West district. Opekta remained active and tried to find larger customers at well-known chocolate factories. On the initiative of Johannes Kleiman, the new pectin product Supec entered the market. During the 1950s, Opekta faced competition from a pectin manufacturer in Denmark and lost a large share of the market partly as a result. Otto Frank and Johannes Kleiman spent years negotiating with the sister company in Cologne to take over their shares. The time had come in 1959, but in January that year Johannes Kleiman died unexpectedly at his desk. Led from Cologne, Opekta continued to work in Amsterdam until the 1980s. The entire Opekta conglomerate merged into the Dr Oetker concern.[3]
\r\n\r\nAddresses: Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 120-126, Amsterdam (1933-'34);[8] Singel 400 (1934-'40);[16] Prinsengracht 263 (1940-'55);[7] Van Slingelandtstraat 8–10 (1955-'62);[17] Van Slingelandtstraat 2 (1962-'87).[18]
\r\n\r\nOpekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
De pectinehandel van Opekta was seizoensgebonden omdat fruit alleen in de zomer en nazomer verkrijgbaar was. Om de omzetfluctuaties die hier het gevolg van waren af te vlakken, zocht Otto Frank andere producten. Die vond hij in 1938 bij Pectacon, handelsonderneming in specerijen en conserveermiddelen, dat hij vlak na oprichting overnam van Johannes Kleiman en Antonius Dunselman.
\r\n\r\n1 juni 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., een bedrijf voor handel en fabricatie van chemische producten en levensmiddelen, werd opgericht door Jo Kleiman en Ton Dunselman bij notaris E.J.M. Luykx.[1] Al op 21 oktober 1938 nam Otto Frank de aandelen over van de oprichters.[2] Grondstoffen importeerde Pectacon uit Hongarije en België; naar België vond ook afzet plaats.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn het jaarverslag van 1939 maakte Opekta melding van de samenwerking met Pectacon. De handel van Pectacon was, in tegenstelling tot die van Opekta, voornamelijk in de wintermaanden geconcentreerd. Opekta hoopte het volgende jaar van de samenwerking te kunnen profiteren.[4]
\r\n\r\nIn mei '41 registreerde Pectacon een beeldmerk met daarbij de toelichting:
\r\n\r\n'Soort der waren: kruiden en specerijen en vervangingsmiddelen voor kruiden en specerijen; chemische producten en smaakstoffen (aroma's) voor het aromatiseeren en/of conserveeren van voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; pharmaceutische producten, medicijnen, chemische producten voor medische en hygiënische doeleinden; drogerijen; graan- en meelproducten; zetmeel en zetmeelproducten; zoetstoffen; reuk- en smaakessences; thee, koffie, cacao, honing en vervangingsstoffen voor deze waren; sappen, bouillon en extracten van vleesch, visch, week- en schaaldieren, planten, zaden en vruchten in vloeibaren-, vasten- en pastavorm; kleurstoffen voor voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; soepen en soeppreparaten; gist en gistpreparaten, rijsmiddelen, bakkerijcrêmes, bakpoeders; puddingpoeders, saus- en juspreparaten, geconserveerde plantendeelen (zooals gember, angelique, sucade); mout, moutextract en andere moutproducten, voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken, die in hoofdzaak bestaan uit mout, moutextract of moutproducten; diëtische voedingsmiddelen, vitaminepreparaten; pectine, bindmiddelen; poets-, polijst-, schuur- en reinigingsmiddelen.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon deed onder meer zaken met makelaar in specerijen Van Jinnelt. In september en oktober '39 kwamen via deze zakenpartner de volgende goederen binnen:
\r\n\r\nSommige van deze goederen verkocht het bedrijf meteen door. Andere werden eerst verwerkt. In deze periode leverde Pectacon aan de kruideniersketen SPAR:
\r\n\r\nIn januari '41 kwam er nog eens 1000 kg Marokkaanse koriander.
\r\n\r\nIn oktober '41 verkocht Pectacon aan worstkruidenhandel EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHier waren al de eerste surrogaatproducten in opkomst.
\r\n\r\nIn eerste instantie profiteerde het bedrijf van de hervorming van de Nederlandse voedselvoorziening. De reductie van de veestapel stimuleerde de vleesverwerkende industrie, waarvoor Pectacon kruidenmengels produceerde.[7] In tegenstelling tot Opekta vonden er voor dit bedrijf wel productieactiviteiten plaats in het pand. Daarvoor schafte Pectacon begin 1941 bij Peppink twee specerijmolens aan, die het bij de 'arisering' weer doorverkocht aan Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp 25 maart 1942 ging de tenaamstelling van de vergunning over op Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn september 1941 had het bedrijf al meer dan 22.000 gulden aan onverdeelde winsten op de balans staan. Dat was elf maal zoveel als het ingelegde aandelenkapitaal van eind 1938. Kortom, tot aan de liquidatie was Pectacon een uitermate winstgevende onderneming.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 oktober 1940: afkondiging Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), gepubliceerd 26 oktober 1940. Deze verordening verplichtte Joodse eigenaren hun bedrijven aan te melden. Het was de eerste stap in de zogenaamde Wirtschaftsentjudung (bedrijfseconomische 'arisering').
\r\n\r\n23 oktober 1940: omdat Otto Frank directeur was van Pectacon en om bij gedwongen arisering een alternatief achter de hand te hebben werd La Synthèse opgericht met Kugler als directeur en Jan Gies als commissaris. Op 8 mei 1941 nam deze firma de naam N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co aan. De doelstelling en de werkzaamheden waren gelijk aan die van Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nVolgens eigen opgave werd op de aandeelhoudersvergadering van 13 februari 1941 besloten de zich nog in portefeuille bevindende aandelen terwaarde van fl. 8.000 te plaatsen. Op 4 april 1941 stortten de oprichters Kleiman en Dunselman hiertoe respectievelijk fl. 5.000 en fl. 3.000.[2] Als gevolg hiervan zakte Otto's aandeel in het aandelenkapitaal naar 20 procent. Dat betekende dat zijn aandeel daarmee onder de cruciale grens van 25 procent kwam, die gold als criterium van een 'Joodse' onderneming en zodoende voor aanmelding bij de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nOp 4 april 1941 werden nieuwe interimbewijzen voor de nieuw uitgegeven aandelen verstrekt.[9]
\r\n\r\n12 september 1941: K.O.M. Wolters werd op grond van paragraaf 7 van de Verordening tot verwijdering van joden uit het bedrijfsleven tot bewindvoerder van Pectacon aangesteld, met de opdracht het bedrijf te liquideren.[10] Kleiman en Otto gingen naar Wolters’ kantoor om de zaak te bespreken. Wolters ging akkoord met Kleimans voorstel om zelf in acht tot tien dagen tot liquidatie over te gaan. Daardoor hadden Kleiman en Otto de mogelijkheid machines en voorraden door te sluizen naar Gies & Co., toen nog in Hilversum.[11] Ze verkochten vrijwel alles met verlies aan Gies & Co. Alleen op de kantoorinventaris werd winst gemaakt; die verkochten ze aan Wolters zelf.[2] Het gemaakte verlies tijdens de liquidatie bedroeg 14.000 gulden.
\r\n\r\nHet saldo na liquidatie bedroeg 18.000 gulden. Kleiman kreeg 5.000 gulden en Dunselman 3.000 gulden. De resterende 10.000 gulden werd na aftrek van 2.300 gulden voor de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, gestort bij de bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. verhuisde naar Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was tijdens de liquidatiefase gevestigd op Rokin 6, Wolters’ kantoor (het Peek & Cloppenburg-gebouw op de Dam in Amsterdam).[11] De verdeling van de liquidatiewaarde ging overigens in tegen het voorstel van Wolters. Die had namelijk voorgesteld het resterende saldo naar rato van het aandelenbezit te verdelen, d.w.z. 50 procent naar Kleiman, 30 procent naar Dunselman en de resterende 20 procent naar Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, ten gunste van Otto Frank.[2] In praktijk ontvingen Kleiman en Dunselman alleen hun inleg uit april 1941 retour, zonder winstdeling.
\r\n\r\nToen Otto Frank uit Auschwitz terugkwam werd Pectacon nieuw leven ingeblazen.
\r\n\r\nEen zoon van Joop Hofhuis wilde in 1959 Opekta kopen, maar viste achter het net. Jaren later kwam hij Kleimans opvolger, J. Dikker, bij Pectacon tegen en nam het bedrijf vervolgens alsnog over. [21] Dit was rond 1977. In een interview met Dineke Stam, d.d. 10 december 1997, zei Hofhuis dat hij Pectacon “20 jaar geleden” kocht.[22] Pectacon bestond voort als Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, met als KvK-nummer 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWanneer en hoe Otto zijn Pectacon-aandelen van de hand deed, is op dit moment bij gebrek aan bronnen niet te zeggen.
\r\n
\r\nAdressen: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (kantoor Wolters), Amsterdam.
Opekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
The objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","description_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.
","description_en":"The objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","summary":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","summary_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.","summary_en":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2210"],"parent":null,"files":[]},{"id":396124628,"image":null,"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/c3233be2-3492-455a-94e0-74b662bf1976/","published":true,"uuid":"c3233be2-3492-455a-94e0-74b662bf1976","name":"Pectacon N.V., Handelsmaatschappij","name_nl":"Pectacon N.V., Handelsmaatschappij","name_en":"Pectacon N.V., Handelsmaatschappij","description":"Opekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
De pectinehandel van Opekta was seizoensgebonden omdat fruit alleen in de zomer en nazomer verkrijgbaar was. Om de omzetfluctuaties die hier het gevolg van waren af te vlakken, zocht Otto Frank andere producten. Die vond hij in 1938 bij Pectacon, handelsonderneming in specerijen en conserveermiddelen, dat hij vlak na oprichting overnam van Johannes Kleiman en Antonius Dunselman.
\r\n\r\n1 juni 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., een bedrijf voor handel en fabricatie van chemische producten en levensmiddelen, werd opgericht door Jo Kleiman en Ton Dunselman bij notaris E.J.M. Luykx.[1] Al op 21 oktober 1938 nam Otto Frank de aandelen over van de oprichters.[2] Grondstoffen importeerde Pectacon uit Hongarije en België; naar België vond ook afzet plaats.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn het jaarverslag van 1939 maakte Opekta melding van de samenwerking met Pectacon. De handel van Pectacon was, in tegenstelling tot die van Opekta, voornamelijk in de wintermaanden geconcentreerd. Opekta hoopte het volgende jaar van de samenwerking te kunnen profiteren.[4]
\r\n\r\nIn mei '41 registreerde Pectacon een beeldmerk met daarbij de toelichting:
\r\n\r\n'Soort der waren: kruiden en specerijen en vervangingsmiddelen voor kruiden en specerijen; chemische producten en smaakstoffen (aroma's) voor het aromatiseeren en/of conserveeren van voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; pharmaceutische producten, medicijnen, chemische producten voor medische en hygiënische doeleinden; drogerijen; graan- en meelproducten; zetmeel en zetmeelproducten; zoetstoffen; reuk- en smaakessences; thee, koffie, cacao, honing en vervangingsstoffen voor deze waren; sappen, bouillon en extracten van vleesch, visch, week- en schaaldieren, planten, zaden en vruchten in vloeibaren-, vasten- en pastavorm; kleurstoffen voor voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; soepen en soeppreparaten; gist en gistpreparaten, rijsmiddelen, bakkerijcrêmes, bakpoeders; puddingpoeders, saus- en juspreparaten, geconserveerde plantendeelen (zooals gember, angelique, sucade); mout, moutextract en andere moutproducten, voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken, die in hoofdzaak bestaan uit mout, moutextract of moutproducten; diëtische voedingsmiddelen, vitaminepreparaten; pectine, bindmiddelen; poets-, polijst-, schuur- en reinigingsmiddelen.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon deed onder meer zaken met makelaar in specerijen Van Jinnelt. In september en oktober '39 kwamen via deze zakenpartner de volgende goederen binnen:
\r\n\r\nSommige van deze goederen verkocht het bedrijf meteen door. Andere werden eerst verwerkt. In deze periode leverde Pectacon aan de kruideniersketen SPAR:
\r\n\r\nIn januari '41 kwam er nog eens 1000 kg Marokkaanse koriander.
\r\n\r\nIn oktober '41 verkocht Pectacon aan worstkruidenhandel EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHier waren al de eerste surrogaatproducten in opkomst.
\r\n\r\nIn eerste instantie profiteerde het bedrijf van de hervorming van de Nederlandse voedselvoorziening. De reductie van de veestapel stimuleerde de vleesverwerkende industrie, waarvoor Pectacon kruidenmengels produceerde.[7] In tegenstelling tot Opekta vonden er voor dit bedrijf wel productieactiviteiten plaats in het pand. Daarvoor schafte Pectacon begin 1941 bij Peppink twee specerijmolens aan, die het bij de 'arisering' weer doorverkocht aan Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp 25 maart 1942 ging de tenaamstelling van de vergunning over op Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn september 1941 had het bedrijf al meer dan 22.000 gulden aan onverdeelde winsten op de balans staan. Dat was elf maal zoveel als het ingelegde aandelenkapitaal van eind 1938. Kortom, tot aan de liquidatie was Pectacon een uitermate winstgevende onderneming.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 oktober 1940: afkondiging Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), gepubliceerd 26 oktober 1940. Deze verordening verplichtte Joodse eigenaren hun bedrijven aan te melden. Het was de eerste stap in de zogenaamde Wirtschaftsentjudung (bedrijfseconomische 'arisering').
\r\n\r\n23 oktober 1940: omdat Otto Frank directeur was van Pectacon en om bij gedwongen arisering een alternatief achter de hand te hebben werd La Synthèse opgericht met Kugler als directeur en Jan Gies als commissaris. Op 8 mei 1941 nam deze firma de naam N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co aan. De doelstelling en de werkzaamheden waren gelijk aan die van Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nVolgens eigen opgave werd op de aandeelhoudersvergadering van 13 februari 1941 besloten de zich nog in portefeuille bevindende aandelen terwaarde van fl. 8.000 te plaatsen. Op 4 april 1941 stortten de oprichters Kleiman en Dunselman hiertoe respectievelijk fl. 5.000 en fl. 3.000.[2] Als gevolg hiervan zakte Otto's aandeel in het aandelenkapitaal naar 20 procent. Dat betekende dat zijn aandeel daarmee onder de cruciale grens van 25 procent kwam, die gold als criterium van een 'Joodse' onderneming en zodoende voor aanmelding bij de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nOp 4 april 1941 werden nieuwe interimbewijzen voor de nieuw uitgegeven aandelen verstrekt.[9]
\r\n\r\n12 september 1941: K.O.M. Wolters werd op grond van paragraaf 7 van de Verordening tot verwijdering van joden uit het bedrijfsleven tot bewindvoerder van Pectacon aangesteld, met de opdracht het bedrijf te liquideren.[10] Kleiman en Otto gingen naar Wolters’ kantoor om de zaak te bespreken. Wolters ging akkoord met Kleimans voorstel om zelf in acht tot tien dagen tot liquidatie over te gaan. Daardoor hadden Kleiman en Otto de mogelijkheid machines en voorraden door te sluizen naar Gies & Co., toen nog in Hilversum.[11] Ze verkochten vrijwel alles met verlies aan Gies & Co. Alleen op de kantoorinventaris werd winst gemaakt; die verkochten ze aan Wolters zelf.[2] Het gemaakte verlies tijdens de liquidatie bedroeg 14.000 gulden.
\r\n\r\nHet saldo na liquidatie bedroeg 18.000 gulden. Kleiman kreeg 5.000 gulden en Dunselman 3.000 gulden. De resterende 10.000 gulden werd na aftrek van 2.300 gulden voor de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, gestort bij de bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. verhuisde naar Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was tijdens de liquidatiefase gevestigd op Rokin 6, Wolters’ kantoor (het Peek & Cloppenburg-gebouw op de Dam in Amsterdam).[11] De verdeling van de liquidatiewaarde ging overigens in tegen het voorstel van Wolters. Die had namelijk voorgesteld het resterende saldo naar rato van het aandelenbezit te verdelen, d.w.z. 50 procent naar Kleiman, 30 procent naar Dunselman en de resterende 20 procent naar Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, ten gunste van Otto Frank.[2] In praktijk ontvingen Kleiman en Dunselman alleen hun inleg uit april 1941 retour, zonder winstdeling.
\r\n\r\nToen Otto Frank uit Auschwitz terugkwam werd Pectacon nieuw leven ingeblazen.
\r\n\r\nEen zoon van Joop Hofhuis wilde in 1959 Opekta kopen, maar viste achter het net. Jaren later kwam hij Kleimans opvolger, J. Dikker, bij Pectacon tegen en nam het bedrijf vervolgens alsnog over. [21] Dit was rond 1977. In een interview met Dineke Stam, d.d. 10 december 1997, zei Hofhuis dat hij Pectacon “20 jaar geleden” kocht.[22] Pectacon bestond voort als Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, met als KvK-nummer 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWanneer en hoe Otto zijn Pectacon-aandelen van de hand deed, is op dit moment bij gebrek aan bronnen niet te zeggen.
\r\n
\r\nAdressen: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (kantoor Wolters), Amsterdam.
Opekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
Address: Eerste Weteringdwarsstraat 16, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nSince 1934, S.J. Roozendaal Tokita managed this cannery and preserving factory, where pickles, sauces, and canned fish, chicken, rabbit and the like were produced.[2] Commercial intelligence from the Van der Graaf company shows that Tokita wanted to establish business ties with Pectacon. Van der Graaf was not entirely positive about Roozendaal and advised to ensure good guarantees.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn an interview Henk van Beusekom claims that there was collaboration with a food factory in the Weteringstraat area in the late 1930s.[3] Bep Voskuijl also knew Tokita employees.[4]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Tokita's activities came to an end. Supplies, vehicles and machinery became dispersed.[5] Anne Frank writes in her diary that Mr. Rozendaal from Tokita was arrested because he did not have a 'J' in his passport.[6]
\r\n\r\nAdres: Eerste Weteringdwarsstraat 16, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nSinds 1934 runde S.J. Roozendaal Tokita deze inblikkerij en conservenfabriek, waar ingelegde zuren, sauzen, en ingeblikte vis, kip, konijn en dergelijke werden geproduceerd.[2] Handelsinlichtingen van de firma Van der Graaf tonen aan dat Tokita zakelijke banden wilde aanknopen met Pectacon. Van der Graaf was niet onverdeeld positief over Roozendaal en adviseerde voor goede borgstellingen te zorgen.[3]
\r\n\r\nHenk van Beusekom zegt in een interview dat er eind jaren dertig met een levensmiddelenfabriek uit de omgeving van de Weteringstraat is samengewerkt.[3] Ook Bep Voskuijl kende personeelsleden van Tokita.[4]
\r\n\r\nIn de oorlogsjaren kwam er een einde aan de activiteiten van Tokita. Voorraden, wagen- en machinepark raakten verspreid.[5] Anne Frank schrijft in haar dagboek dat meneer Rozendaal van Tokita is opgepakt omdat hij geen 'J' in zijn paspoort had.[6]
\r\n\r\nAddress: Eerste Weteringdwarsstraat 16, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nSince 1934, S.J. Roozendaal Tokita managed this cannery and preserving factory, where pickles, sauces, and canned fish, chicken, rabbit and the like were produced.[2] Commercial intelligence from the Van der Graaf company shows that Tokita wanted to establish business ties with Pectacon. Van der Graaf was not entirely positive about Roozendaal and advised to ensure good guarantees.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn an interview Henk van Beusekom claims that there was collaboration with a food factory in the Weteringstraat area in the late 1930s.[3] Bep Voskuijl also knew Tokita employees.[4]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Tokita's activities came to an end. Supplies, vehicles and machinery became dispersed.[5] Anne Frank writes in her diary that Mr. Rozendaal from Tokita was arrested because he did not have a 'J' in his passport.[6]
\r\n\r\nThe objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","description_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.
","description_en":"The objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","summary":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","summary_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.","summary_en":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2210"],"parent":null,"files":[]},{"id":396124465,"image":{"id":1002,"uuid":"74898da1-bdff-4cbb-8b9e-c3dd1c2a711a","name":"Papier en clichés Gies & Co.","title":"Papier en clichés Gies & Co.","alt":"Fotograaf: Allard Bovenberg. Collectie: Anne Frank Stichting.","url":"","path":"https://research.annefrank.org/media/Papier_en_stempels_Gies__Co.jpg","filetype":"image","description":"Papier en clichés Gies & Co. De locatie van het bedrijf, aan de voet van de Westertoren, zit verwerkt in het logo.","author":"De collectie kan worden ingezet voor publiek","copyright":"AFS rechthebbende"},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/b2254eb9-cc97-4f61-8c16-566f80f4eecf/","published":true,"uuid":"b2254eb9-cc97-4f61-8c16-566f80f4eecf","name":"Gies & Co., N.V. Handelsvereeniging","name_nl":"Gies & Co., N.V. Handelsvereeniging","name_en":"Gies & Co., N.V. Handelsvereeniging","description":"The Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. was set up because Pectacon, one of Otto Frank's companies, was in danger of being liquidated due to anti-Jewish measures. Initially, the company was called La Synthèse. This firm was founded on 23 October 1940 by Victor Kugler and Jan Gies. On 4 November 1940, the new firm was registered in the trade register with Victor Kugler as owner and director and Jan Gies as supervisory director and shareholder.[1] La Synthèse was located at Victor Kugler's private address in Hilversum. Kugler owned 15 shares worth 1,500 guilders in total; Jan Gies owned the rest of the shares worth 500 guilders.[2] Its representatives were Martin Brouwer and Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nLike Pectacon, the company focused on trading and manufacturing chemicals and foodstuffs.[1] On 8 May 1941, Kugler and Gies changed the company name to N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. This was by order of the secretary-general of Justice.[4] Otto Frank said about this in 1963 that the business "had to drop its French-sounding name, as it was a company of German origin.''[5] On 19 August 1941, the Trade Register registered the new company name, and Jan Gies was registered as a supervisory director of Gies & Co.[6] As supervisory director, Jan Gies had the authority to enter all the premises of the company. So it was also not uncommon for him to be present a lot and later speak to night watchman Slegers, for example, about the burglary in April 1944.
\r\n\r\nFrom September 1941, at the suggestion of Johannes Kleiman, Pectacon went into liquidation. Stocks and machinery were sold at a loss to Gies & Co. All kinds of other costs were also still charged to Pectacon.[7] That artifice prevented these goods, or their value, from benefiting German institutions.
\r\n\r\nWhen Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263 on 29 October 1941, it took over the lease from Opekta. Opekta then became a subtenant of Gies & Co.[8] It also received an advance of 5,000 guilders from Opekta.[9] With Opekta's advance and the costs borne by Pectacon, Gies & Co. was able to get off to a flying start.
\r\n\r\nAlmost certainly Gies & Co. was the most important factor in financing the period of hiding in the Secret Annex. There are three clues to the importance of Gies & Co. in this context. First, Otto Frank explicitly mentioned that Kugler sold spices off the books to finance the needs in the Secret Annex.[10] Second, Gies & Co. was completely 'Aryan', which made it easy to evade German scrutiny. Third, Van Pels and Otto Frank were furious when Kugler conducted laboratory tests instead of approving the supply by spice broker Westermann. All this underlines the fact that Gies & Co. was crucial to the period in hiding.
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Otto Frank obviously had no formal ties with the company. A note in the Hofhuis archives lists share ownership, presumably dated late 1943 or early 1944. On paper, Kleiman had shareholdings of 3,500 guilders, Gies 2,500 and Kugler 4,000. Kleiman and Otto Frank's investments in shares and deposit were so intermingled that it looks as if Otto's and Kleiman's money formed a single entity. Exactly who was entitled to what is not clear. What is clear, however, is that Otto invested in Gies & Co.[11] Otto Frank gave up owning Gies & Co. shares with a nominal value of 5,800 guilders as of 1 September 1945.[12] In 1948, he owned 58 per cent of the shares.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn April 1950, Otto Frank and Pal Klein joined the N.V. as supervisory directors.[14] In January 1954, Otto Frank owned 9,000 guilders worth of shares in Gies & Co (and 20,000 guilders worth of Opekta shares and 2,000 guilders worth of shares in Pectacon).[15] Indeed, Pectacon had not been liquidated in the end.
\r\n\r\nDe Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. werd opgezet omdat Pectacon, een van de bedrijven van Otto Frank, wegens ariseringsmaatregelen gevaar liep te worden geliquideerd. Aanvankelijk heette het bedrijf La Synthèse. Deze firma werd op 23 oktober 1940 opgericht door Victor Kugler en Jan Gies. Op 4 november 1940 werd de nieuwe firma ingeschreven in het handelsregister met Victor Kugler als eigenaar en directeur en Jan Gies als commissaris en aandeelhouder.[1] La Synthèse was gevestigd op het privé-adres van Victor Kugler in Hilversum. Kugler bezat vijftien aandelen ter waarde van 1.500 gulden in totaal; Jan Gies bezat de rest van de aandelen ter waarde van 500 gulden.[2] Vertegenwoordigers waren Martin Brouwer en Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nEvenals Pectacon legde het bedrijf zich toe op handel in en fabricage van chemicaliën en levensmiddelen.[1] Op 8 mei 1941 veranderden Kugler en Gies de bedrijfsnaam in N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. Dit op last van de secretaris-generaal van Justitie.[4] Otto Frank zei hierover in 1963 dat de zaak "haar Frans klinkende naam, wijl zij een onderneming was van Duitse afkomst, moest laten vallen."[5] Aanwijzingen dat het ministerie bezwaar tegen Frans klinkende namen had zijn er verder niet. Wel bepaalde het vaker dat wijziging nodig was, bijvoorbeeld wanneer een bedrijfsnaam teveel op een andere leek. Op 19 augustus 1941 registreerde het Handelsregister de nieuwe bedrijfsnaam, en werd Jan Gies ingeschreven als commissaris van Gies & Co.[6] Als commissaris had Jan Gies de bevoegdheid alle lokaliteiten van de onderneming te betreden. Zodoende was het ook niet ongewoon dat hij veel aanwezig was en later bijvoorbeeld met nachtwaker Slegers over de inbraak van april 1944 sprak.
\r\n\r\nVanaf september 1941 ging Pectacon, op voorstel van Johannes Kleiman, in liquidatie. De voorraden en machines werden met verlies aan Gies & Co. verkocht. Ook allerhande andere kosten kwamen nog ten laste van Pectacon.[7] Die kunstgreep voorkwam dat deze goederen, of hun waarde, ten goede kwamen van Duitse instellingen.
\r\n\r\nToen Gies & Co. op 29 oktober 1941 verhuisde naar de Prinsengracht 263, nam het het huurcontract over van Opekta. Opekta werd vervolgens onderhuurder van Gies & Co.[8] Ook ontving het een voorschot van 5.000 gulden van Opekta.[9] Met het voorschot van Opekta en de door Pectacon gedragen kosten kon Gies & Co. een vliegende start maken.
\r\n\r\nVrijwel zeker was Gies & Co. het belangrijkst voor de financiering van de onderduik in het Achterhuis. Voor het belang van Gies & Co. in dit verband zijn drie aanwijzingen. Als eerste benoemde Otto Frank expliciet dat Kugler specerijen verkocht buiten de boekhouding ter financiering van de noden in het Achterhuis.[10] Ten tweede was Gies & Co. volledig ‘arisch’ waardoor het zich makkelijk aan Duits toezicht kon onttrekken. Ten derde, Van Pels en Otto Frank waren woedend toen Kugler laboratoriumproefjes deed in plaats van de leverantie voor specerijenmakelaar Westermann in orde te maken. Dit alles onderstreept dat Gies & Co. van cruciaal belang was voor de onderduik.
\r\n\r\nTijdens de oorlogsjaren had Otto Frank uiteraard geen formele banden met het bedrijf. Een briefje in het Hofhuisarchief geeft een overzicht van het aandelenbezit, vermoedelijk gedateerd in eind 1943 of begin 1944. Op papier bezat Kleiman 3.500, Gies 2.500 en Kugler 4.000 gulden. De investeringen in aandelen en deposito van Kleiman en Otto Frank liepen zo door elkaar heen, dat het erop lijkt alsof Otto's en Kleimans geld één geheel vormden. Wie welke aanspraak precies kon maken is niet helder. Wel is duidelijk dat Otto in Gies & Co. heeft geïnvesteerd.[11] Otto Frank gaf op per 1 september 1945 aandelen Gies & Co. te bezitten met een nominale waarde van 5.800 gulden.[12] In 1948 beschikte hij over 58 procent van de aandelen.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn april ’50 traden Otto Frank en Pal Klein als commissarissen tot de N.V. toe.[14] In januari 1954 bezat Otto Frank voor 9.000 gulden aandelen in Gies & Co. (en 20.000 gulden aandelen Opekta en 2.000 gulden aandelen in Pectacon).[15] Pectacon was uiteindelijk namelijk niet geliquideerd.
\r\n\r\nThe Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. was set up because Pectacon, one of Otto Frank's companies, was in danger of being liquidated due to anti-Jewish measures. Initially, the company was called La Synthèse. This firm was founded on 23 October 1940 by Victor Kugler and Jan Gies. On 4 November 1940, the new firm was registered in the trade register with Victor Kugler as owner and director and Jan Gies as supervisory director and shareholder.[1] La Synthèse was located at Victor Kugler's private address in Hilversum. Kugler owned 15 shares worth 1,500 guilders in total; Jan Gies owned the rest of the shares worth 500 guilders.[2] Its representatives were Martin Brouwer and Pieter Daatzelaar.[3]
\r\n\r\nLike Pectacon, the company focused on trading and manufacturing chemicals and foodstuffs.[1] On 8 May 1941, Kugler and Gies changed the company name to N.V. Handelsvereeniging Gies & Co. This was by order of the secretary-general of Justice.[4] Otto Frank said about this in 1963 that the business "had to drop its French-sounding name, as it was a company of German origin.''[5] On 19 August 1941, the Trade Register registered the new company name, and Jan Gies was registered as a supervisory director of Gies & Co.[6] As supervisory director, Jan Gies had the authority to enter all the premises of the company. So it was also not uncommon for him to be present a lot and later speak to night watchman Slegers, for example, about the burglary in April 1944.
\r\n\r\nFrom September 1941, at the suggestion of Johannes Kleiman, Pectacon went into liquidation. Stocks and machinery were sold at a loss to Gies & Co. All kinds of other costs were also still charged to Pectacon.[7] That artifice prevented these goods, or their value, from benefiting German institutions.
\r\n\r\nWhen Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263 on 29 October 1941, it took over the lease from Opekta. Opekta then became a subtenant of Gies & Co.[8] It also received an advance of 5,000 guilders from Opekta.[9] With Opekta's advance and the costs borne by Pectacon, Gies & Co. was able to get off to a flying start.
\r\n\r\nAlmost certainly Gies & Co. was the most important factor in financing the period of hiding in the Secret Annex. There are three clues to the importance of Gies & Co. in this context. First, Otto Frank explicitly mentioned that Kugler sold spices off the books to finance the needs in the Secret Annex.[10] Second, Gies & Co. was completely 'Aryan', which made it easy to evade German scrutiny. Third, Van Pels and Otto Frank were furious when Kugler conducted laboratory tests instead of approving the supply by spice broker Westermann. All this underlines the fact that Gies & Co. was crucial to the period in hiding.
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, Otto Frank obviously had no formal ties with the company. A note in the Hofhuis archives lists share ownership, presumably dated late 1943 or early 1944. On paper, Kleiman had shareholdings of 3,500 guilders, Gies 2,500 and Kugler 4,000. Kleiman and Otto Frank's investments in shares and deposit were so intermingled that it looks as if Otto's and Kleiman's money formed a single entity. Exactly who was entitled to what is not clear. What is clear, however, is that Otto invested in Gies & Co.[11] Otto Frank gave up owning Gies & Co. shares with a nominal value of 5,800 guilders as of 1 September 1945.[12] In 1948, he owned 58 per cent of the shares.[13]
\r\n\r\nIn April 1950, Otto Frank and Pal Klein joined the N.V. as supervisory directors.[14] In January 1954, Otto Frank owned 9,000 guilders worth of shares in Gies & Co (and 20,000 guilders worth of Opekta shares and 2,000 guilders worth of shares in Pectacon).[15] Indeed, Pectacon had not been liquidated in the end.
\r\n\r\nOpekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
De pectinehandel van Opekta was seizoensgebonden omdat fruit alleen in de zomer en nazomer verkrijgbaar was. Om de omzetfluctuaties die hier het gevolg van waren af te vlakken, zocht Otto Frank andere producten. Die vond hij in 1938 bij Pectacon, handelsonderneming in specerijen en conserveermiddelen, dat hij vlak na oprichting overnam van Johannes Kleiman en Antonius Dunselman.
\r\n\r\n1 juni 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., een bedrijf voor handel en fabricatie van chemische producten en levensmiddelen, werd opgericht door Jo Kleiman en Ton Dunselman bij notaris E.J.M. Luykx.[1] Al op 21 oktober 1938 nam Otto Frank de aandelen over van de oprichters.[2] Grondstoffen importeerde Pectacon uit Hongarije en België; naar België vond ook afzet plaats.[3]
\r\n\r\nIn het jaarverslag van 1939 maakte Opekta melding van de samenwerking met Pectacon. De handel van Pectacon was, in tegenstelling tot die van Opekta, voornamelijk in de wintermaanden geconcentreerd. Opekta hoopte het volgende jaar van de samenwerking te kunnen profiteren.[4]
\r\n\r\nIn mei '41 registreerde Pectacon een beeldmerk met daarbij de toelichting:
\r\n\r\n'Soort der waren: kruiden en specerijen en vervangingsmiddelen voor kruiden en specerijen; chemische producten en smaakstoffen (aroma's) voor het aromatiseeren en/of conserveeren van voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; pharmaceutische producten, medicijnen, chemische producten voor medische en hygiënische doeleinden; drogerijen; graan- en meelproducten; zetmeel en zetmeelproducten; zoetstoffen; reuk- en smaakessences; thee, koffie, cacao, honing en vervangingsstoffen voor deze waren; sappen, bouillon en extracten van vleesch, visch, week- en schaaldieren, planten, zaden en vruchten in vloeibaren-, vasten- en pastavorm; kleurstoffen voor voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken; soepen en soeppreparaten; gist en gistpreparaten, rijsmiddelen, bakkerijcrêmes, bakpoeders; puddingpoeders, saus- en juspreparaten, geconserveerde plantendeelen (zooals gember, angelique, sucade); mout, moutextract en andere moutproducten, voedings- en genotmiddelen en dranken, die in hoofdzaak bestaan uit mout, moutextract of moutproducten; diëtische voedingsmiddelen, vitaminepreparaten; pectine, bindmiddelen; poets-, polijst-, schuur- en reinigingsmiddelen.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon deed onder meer zaken met makelaar in specerijen Van Jinnelt. In september en oktober '39 kwamen via deze zakenpartner de volgende goederen binnen:
\r\n\r\nSommige van deze goederen verkocht het bedrijf meteen door. Andere werden eerst verwerkt. In deze periode leverde Pectacon aan de kruideniersketen SPAR:
\r\n\r\nIn januari '41 kwam er nog eens 1000 kg Marokkaanse koriander.
\r\n\r\nIn oktober '41 verkocht Pectacon aan worstkruidenhandel EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHier waren al de eerste surrogaatproducten in opkomst.
\r\n\r\nIn eerste instantie profiteerde het bedrijf van de hervorming van de Nederlandse voedselvoorziening. De reductie van de veestapel stimuleerde de vleesverwerkende industrie, waarvoor Pectacon kruidenmengels produceerde.[7] In tegenstelling tot Opekta vonden er voor dit bedrijf wel productieactiviteiten plaats in het pand. Daarvoor schafte Pectacon begin 1941 bij Peppink twee specerijmolens aan, die het bij de 'arisering' weer doorverkocht aan Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nOp 25 maart 1942 ging de tenaamstelling van de vergunning over op Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nIn september 1941 had het bedrijf al meer dan 22.000 gulden aan onverdeelde winsten op de balans staan. Dat was elf maal zoveel als het ingelegde aandelenkapitaal van eind 1938. Kortom, tot aan de liquidatie was Pectacon een uitermate winstgevende onderneming.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 oktober 1940: afkondiging Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), gepubliceerd 26 oktober 1940. Deze verordening verplichtte Joodse eigenaren hun bedrijven aan te melden. Het was de eerste stap in de zogenaamde Wirtschaftsentjudung (bedrijfseconomische 'arisering').
\r\n\r\n23 oktober 1940: omdat Otto Frank directeur was van Pectacon en om bij gedwongen arisering een alternatief achter de hand te hebben werd La Synthèse opgericht met Kugler als directeur en Jan Gies als commissaris. Op 8 mei 1941 nam deze firma de naam N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co aan. De doelstelling en de werkzaamheden waren gelijk aan die van Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nVolgens eigen opgave werd op de aandeelhoudersvergadering van 13 februari 1941 besloten de zich nog in portefeuille bevindende aandelen terwaarde van fl. 8.000 te plaatsen. Op 4 april 1941 stortten de oprichters Kleiman en Dunselman hiertoe respectievelijk fl. 5.000 en fl. 3.000.[2] Als gevolg hiervan zakte Otto's aandeel in het aandelenkapitaal naar 20 procent. Dat betekende dat zijn aandeel daarmee onder de cruciale grens van 25 procent kwam, die gold als criterium van een 'Joodse' onderneming en zodoende voor aanmelding bij de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nOp 4 april 1941 werden nieuwe interimbewijzen voor de nieuw uitgegeven aandelen verstrekt.[9]
\r\n\r\n12 september 1941: K.O.M. Wolters werd op grond van paragraaf 7 van de Verordening tot verwijdering van joden uit het bedrijfsleven tot bewindvoerder van Pectacon aangesteld, met de opdracht het bedrijf te liquideren.[10] Kleiman en Otto gingen naar Wolters’ kantoor om de zaak te bespreken. Wolters ging akkoord met Kleimans voorstel om zelf in acht tot tien dagen tot liquidatie over te gaan. Daardoor hadden Kleiman en Otto de mogelijkheid machines en voorraden door te sluizen naar Gies & Co., toen nog in Hilversum.[11] Ze verkochten vrijwel alles met verlies aan Gies & Co. Alleen op de kantoorinventaris werd winst gemaakt; die verkochten ze aan Wolters zelf.[2] Het gemaakte verlies tijdens de liquidatie bedroeg 14.000 gulden.
\r\n\r\nHet saldo na liquidatie bedroeg 18.000 gulden. Kleiman kreeg 5.000 gulden en Dunselman 3.000 gulden. De resterende 10.000 gulden werd na aftrek van 2.300 gulden voor de Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, gestort bij de bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. verhuisde naar Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was tijdens de liquidatiefase gevestigd op Rokin 6, Wolters’ kantoor (het Peek & Cloppenburg-gebouw op de Dam in Amsterdam).[11] De verdeling van de liquidatiewaarde ging overigens in tegen het voorstel van Wolters. Die had namelijk voorgesteld het resterende saldo naar rato van het aandelenbezit te verdelen, d.w.z. 50 procent naar Kleiman, 30 procent naar Dunselman en de resterende 20 procent naar Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, ten gunste van Otto Frank.[2] In praktijk ontvingen Kleiman en Dunselman alleen hun inleg uit april 1941 retour, zonder winstdeling.
\r\n\r\nToen Otto Frank uit Auschwitz terugkwam werd Pectacon nieuw leven ingeblazen.
\r\n\r\nEen zoon van Joop Hofhuis wilde in 1959 Opekta kopen, maar viste achter het net. Jaren later kwam hij Kleimans opvolger, J. Dikker, bij Pectacon tegen en nam het bedrijf vervolgens alsnog over. [21] Dit was rond 1977. In een interview met Dineke Stam, d.d. 10 december 1997, zei Hofhuis dat hij Pectacon “20 jaar geleden” kocht.[22] Pectacon bestond voort als Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, met als KvK-nummer 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWanneer en hoe Otto zijn Pectacon-aandelen van de hand deed, is op dit moment bij gebrek aan bronnen niet te zeggen.
\r\n
\r\nAdressen: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (kantoor Wolters), Amsterdam.
Opekta's pectin business was seasonal, as fruit was only available in the summer and late summer. To smooth out the sales fluctuations that resulted from this, Otto Frank looked for other products. He found these in 1938 at Pectacon, a trading company in spices and preservatives, which he took over from Johannes Kleiman and Antonius Dunselman shortly after its foundation.
\r\n\r\n1 June 1938: Handelsmaatschappij Pectacon N.V., a company for trading and manufacturing chemical products and foodstuffs, was founded by Jo Kleiman and Ton Dunselman before notary E.J.M. Luykx.[1] As early as 21 October 1938, Otto Frank took over the shares from the founders.[2] Pectacon imported raw materials from Hungary and Belgium; sales were also made to Belgium.[3]
\r\n
\r\nIn its 1939 annual report, Opekta noted its cooperation with Pectacon. Pectacon's trade, unlike Opekta's, was mainly concentrated in the winter months. Opekta hoped to benefit from the cooperation the following year.[4]
In May '41, Pectacon registered a logo with the explanation:
\r\n\r\n'Type of goods: herbs and spices and substitutes for herbs and spices; chemicals and flavourings (aromas) for flavouring and/or preserving food and beverages; pharmaceuticals, medicines, chemicals for medical and hygienic purposes; drying agents; cereal and flour products; starches and starch products; sweeteners; odouriferous substances and flavourings; tea, coffee, cocoa, honey and substitutes for these products; juices, broths and extracts of meat, fish, molluscs and crustaceans, plants, seeds and fruits in liquid, solid or paste form food or beverage colours; soups and soup preparations; yeast and yeast substitutes, raising agents, baking creams, baking powders; custard powders, sauce or gravy preparations, preserved vegetables (for example, ginger, angelica, sucade) malt, malt extract and other malt products, food preparations and beverages consisting essentially of malt, malt extract or malt products; dietetic foodstuffs, vitamin preparations; pectin, binders; polishing, scouring and cleaning preparations.'[5]\r\n\r\n
Pectacon did business with spice broker Van Jinnelt, among other parties. In September and October '39, the following goods arrived through this business partner:
\r\n\r\nSome of these goods the company sold on immediately. Others were processed first. During this period, Pectacon supplied grocery chain SPAR:
\r\n\r\nAnother 1,000 kg of Moroccan coriander arrived in January '41.
\r\n\r\nIn October '41, Pectacon sold to sausage seasoning business EFWEKA:
\r\n\r\nHere we see the first surrogate products already emerging.
\r\n\r\nInitially, the company benefitted from the reform of the Dutch food supply. The reduction in livestock boosted the meat processing industry, for which Pectacon produced spice mixes.[7] Unlike Opekta, production activities for this company took place on the premises. To this end, Pectacon purchased two spice mills from Peppink in early 1941, which it resold to Gies & Co when it was 'aryanised'.[2]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the ascription of the licence passed to Gies & Co.[2]
\r\n\r\nBy September 1941, the company already had more than 22,000 guilders in undistributed profits on its balance sheet. That was eleven times as much as the paid-in share capital at the end of 1938. In short, until its liquidation, Pectacon was an extremely profitable company.[2]
\r\n\r\n22 October 1940: promulgation of Verordnung über die Anmeldung von Unternehmen (VO 189/40), published 26 October 1940. This regulation required Jewish owners to register their businesses. It was the first step in the so-called Wirtschaftsentjudung (business 'aryanisation').
\r\n\r\n23 October 1940: because Otto Frank was managing director of Pectacon and to have an alternative in the wings in case of forced aryanisation, La Synthèse was founded with Kugler as managing director and Jan Gies as supervisory director. On 8 May 1941, this firm adopted the name N.V. Handelsvereniging Gies & Co. Its objective and operations were similar to those of Pectacon.[8]
\r\n\r\nAccording to its own statement, it was decided at the shareholders' meeting on 13 February 1941 to place the shares still in the portfolio worth NLG 8,000. On 4 April 1941, the founders Kleiman and Dunselman paid NLG 5,000 and NLG 3,000 respectively in this context.[2] As a result, Otto's share in the share capital dropped to 20 per cent. This meant that his share thus fell below the crucial limit of 25 per cent, which was the criterion for a 'Jewish' company and thus for registration with the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle.
\r\n\r\nNew interim certificates for the newly issued shares were issued on 4 April 1941.[9]
\r\n\r\nOn 12 September 1941: K.O.M. Wolters was appointed administrator of Pectacon under section 7 of the Ordinance for the Removal of Jews from Business, with instructions to liquidate the company.[10] Kleiman and Otto went to Wolters' office to discuss the matter. Wolters agreed to Kleiman's proposal to initiate liquidation himself within eight to 10 days. This allowed Kleiman and Otto to channel machinery and stock to Gies & Co, then still in Hilversum.[11] They sold almost everything at a loss to Gies & Co. Only the office inventory made a profit; they sold it to Wolters himself.[2] The loss made during the liquidation was 14,000 guilders.
\r\n\r\nThe balance after liquidation was 18,000 guilders. Kleiman received 5,000 guilders and Dunselman 3,000 guilders. The remaining 10,000 guilders, after deducting 2,300 guilders for the Wirtschaftsprüfstelle, was deposited at the bank Lippmann-Rosenthal-Sarphatistraat. Gies & Co. moved to Prinsengracht 263; Pectacon was located at Rokin 6, Wolters' office (the Peek & Cloppenburg building on Dam Square in Amsterdam) during the liquidation phase.[11] Moreover, the distribution of the liquidation value went against Wolters' proposal. The latter had in fact proposed to divide the remaining balance in proportion to share ownership, i.e. 50 per cent to Kleiman, 30 per cent to Dunselman and the remaining 20 per cent to Lippmann, Rosenthal & co Sarphatistraat, in favour of Otto Frank.[2] In practice, Kleiman and Dunselman only received their April 1941 deposit back, with no profit sharing.
\r\n\r\nWhen Otto Frank returned from Auschwitz, Pectacon was revived.
\r\n\r\nA son of Joop Hofhuis wanted to buy Opekta in 1959, but missed out. Years later, he met Kleiman's successor, J. Dikker, at Pectacon and subsequently took over the company after all. [21] This was around 1977. In an interview with Dineke Stam, dated 10 December 1997, Hofhuis said he bought Pectacon "20 years ago".[22] Pectacon continued to exist as Hofhuis F.I.A. Pectacon BV, with the Chamber of Commerce number 31019094.[23]
\r\n
\r\nWhen and how Otto disposed of his Pectacon shares is unclear at the moment, in the absence of sources.
\r\n
\r\nAddresses: Singel 400, Amsterdam; Prinsengracht 263, Amsterdam; Rokin 6 (Wolters office), Amsterdam.
Address: Looiersgracht 32-38, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nThis factory emerged from an old mill making company. The Peppink family has been practicing this profession since the industry worked on wind power. In 1878, one of the remaining windmills of the old bulwark at the Bloemgracht disappeared. The Peppink company rebuilt it on the Haarlemmerweg on behalf of two timber traders.[2].With the further demise of the windmill, the company started to focus on mechanical engineering, in particular on industrial cross mills.
\r\n\r\nIn the spring of 1941, Peppink set up the Pectacon mill and applied for the necessary licence under the Nuisance Act.[3] Peppink supplied a spice mill of the model 300AN.[4] This mill was suitable for grinding finer products.[5]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the license was transferred to Gies & Co.[3] When the inventory from Pectacon was transferred to Gies & Co. because of the 'Aryanization', the two Peppink mills were included.[6]
\r\n\r\nKugler later had a small Peppink mill made of stainless steel in his office.[7] Peppinkmolens users included Bakery. W.J. Siemons and the O.V.V. dairy factory.
\r\n\r\nFrom 1997 onwards, the Machine factory G.R. Veerman continues the activities of the Peppink company, under the name Peppink Mills.[8]
\r\n\r\nAdres: Looiersgracht 32-38, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nDeze fabriek kwam voort uit een oud molenmakersbedrijf. De familie Peppink oefende dit beroep al uit sinds de industrie op windkracht werkte. In 1878 verdween een van de resterende windmolens van het oude bolwerk bij de Bloemgracht. De firma Peppink herbouwde hem aan de Haarlemmerweg in opdracht van twee houthandelaren.[2].
\r\nMet de verdere teloorgang van de windmolen ging het bedrijf zich op machinebouw richten, in het bijzonder op industriële slagkruismolens.
In het voorjaar van 1941 richte Peppink de maalderij van Pectacon in en vroeg de daarvoor benodigde Hinderwetvergunning aan.[3] Peppink leverde een specerijenmolen van het model 300AN.[4] Deze molen was geschikt voor het malen van fijnere producten.[5]
\r\n\r\nOp 25 maart 1942 ging de tenaamstelling van de vergunning over op Gies & Co.[3] Bij de overdracht van de inventaris van Pectacon naar Gies & Co. vanwege de 'arisering', gingen de twee Peppinkmolens mee.[6]
\r\n\r\nKugler had later een kleine Peppinkmolen van roestvast staal op zijn kantoor staan.[7] Tot de gebruikers van Peppinkmolens behoorden onder meer bakkerij Wed. W.J. Siemons en melkfabriek O.V.V.
\r\n\r\nVanaf 1997 zette de Machinefabriek G.R. Veerman de activiteiten van de firma Peppink voort, onder de naam Peppink Mills.[8]
\r\n\r\nAddress: Looiersgracht 32-38, Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nThis factory emerged from an old mill making company. The Peppink family has been practicing this profession since the industry worked on wind power. In 1878, one of the remaining windmills of the old bulwark at the Bloemgracht disappeared. The Peppink company rebuilt it on the Haarlemmerweg on behalf of two timber traders.[2].With the further demise of the windmill, the company started to focus on mechanical engineering, in particular on industrial cross mills.
\r\n\r\nIn the spring of 1941, Peppink set up the Pectacon mill and applied for the necessary licence under the Nuisance Act.[3] Peppink supplied a spice mill of the model 300AN.[4] This mill was suitable for grinding finer products.[5]
\r\n\r\nOn 25 March 1942, the license was transferred to Gies & Co.[3] When the inventory from Pectacon was transferred to Gies & Co. because of the 'Aryanization', the two Peppink mills were included.[6]
\r\n\r\nKugler later had a small Peppink mill made of stainless steel in his office.[7] Peppinkmolens users included Bakery. W.J. Siemons and the O.V.V. dairy factory.
\r\n\r\nFrom 1997 onwards, the Machine factory G.R. Veerman continues the activities of the Peppink company, under the name Peppink Mills.[8]
\r\n\r\nThe Carlton Hotel in Amsterdam was used by the Germans during the occupation to house officers of the Luftwaffe and their entourage. Other buildings in the area were also in use by the Luftwaffe. This naturally attracted the attention of the Allies but German anti-aircraft fire managed to hit an RAF aircraft, it crashed into a number of residential houses behind the Carlton Hotel also causing a lot of damage to the hotel.[1]
\r\n\r\nAnne describes this in her diary:
\r\n\r\n"The Carlton Hotel is smashed to bits. Two British planes loaded with incendiary bombs feel right on top of the 'Offizierenheim'. The whole Vijzelstraat-Singel corner is burnt down."[2]\r\n\r\n
The Germans were forced to move the command post.[3]
\r\n\r\nHet Carlton Hotel in Amsterdam was tijdens de bezetting door de Duitsers in gebruik om er officieren van de Luftwaffe en hun aanhang onder te brengen. Ook andere gebouwen in de omgeving waren bij de Luftwaffe in gebruik. Dit trok natuurlijk de aandacht van de geallieerden maar het Duitse afweergeschut wist een RAF toestel te raken, het stortte neer op een aantal woonhuizen achter het Carlton Hotel waarbij ook veel schade ontstond aan het hotel.[1]
\r\n\r\nAnne beschrijft dit in haar dagboek:
\r\n\r\n'Het Carlton Hotel is kapot, twee Engelse vliegers met een grote lading brandbommen aan boord zijn precies op het "Offiziersheim" gevallen. De hele hoek Vijzelstraat-Singel is afgebrand.'[2]\r\n\r\n
De Duitsers moesten noodgedwongen het commando verplaatsen.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe Carlton Hotel in Amsterdam was used by the Germans during the occupation to house officers of the Luftwaffe and their entourage. Other buildings in the area were also in use by the Luftwaffe. This naturally attracted the attention of the Allies but German anti-aircraft fire managed to hit an RAF aircraft, it crashed into a number of residential houses behind the Carlton Hotel also causing a lot of damage to the hotel.[1]
\r\n\r\nAnne describes this in her diary:
\r\n\r\n"The Carlton Hotel is smashed to bits. Two British planes loaded with incendiary bombs feel right on top of the 'Offizierenheim'. The whole Vijzelstraat-Singel corner is burnt down."[2]\r\n\r\n
The Germans were forced to move the command post.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","description_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.
","description_en":"The objective of businesses is to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.
","summary":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","summary_nl":"Bedrijven hebben tot doel producten en/of diensten te verkopen aan klanten, waardoor omzet kan worden gedraaid.","summary_en":"Businesses aim to sell products and/or services to customers, thereby generating revenue.","same_as":["https://data.niod.nl/WO2_Thesaurus/2210"],"parent":null,"files":[]},{"id":194,"image":{"id":970,"uuid":"08ca1ef9-c15a-4001-a1fb-26ce9e07998a","name":"Landkaart van Normandië met de voortgang van de Geallieerde troepen na de invasie van 6 juni 1944","title":"Landkaart van Normandië met de voortgang van de Geallieerde troepen na de invasie van 6 juni 1944","alt":"Collectie: Anne Frank Stichting","url":"https://images.memorix.nl/anf/thumb/1920x1080/82d3da0f-6fa3-05a7-74e5-bb5576ebdd91.jpg","path":null,"filetype":"image","description":"Dit kaartje stond op 7 en 8 juni 1944 op de voorpagina van de Telegraaf. Gezien de vouw, links van Deauville, is het waarschijnlijk het kaartje uit de Telegraaf van 8 juni. Op 6 juni 1944, ofwel D-Day, landden de geallieerden in Normandië in Frankrijk. Otto Frank knipte het landkaartje uit de Telegraaf en hing het naast de groeistreepjes op de muur van de woon- slaapkamer. Met knopspelden hield hij de vorderingen van de geallieerden bij. Op de wand geprikt in de kamer van Otto , Edith en Margot Frank in het achterhuis op de tweede verdieping van Prinsengracht 263.\r\nDit object maakt deel uit van een reeks onderdelen van het interieur van het achterhuis. Het Achterhuis bestond uit zes verdiepingen. Op de begane grond en de eerste verdieping bevond zich het achtermagazijn kantoorruimte en opslagruimte. De onderduikers leefden op de tweede en derde verdieping. Op de vierde en de vijfde verdieping bevonden zich de zolder en de vliering.","author":"De collectie kan worden ingezet voor publiek","copyright":"Publiek domein"},"url":"https://research.annefrank.org/en/onderwerpen/3c23b216-9276-456b-b53d-370173d568f8/","published":true,"uuid":"3c23b216-9276-456b-b53d-370173d568f8","name":"The war in the Secret Annex","name_nl":"De oorlog in het Achterhuis","name_en":"The war in the Secret Annex","description":"There was a lot of talk about 'politics' in the Secret Annex. In concrete terms, this mainly concerned military operations and their course. And of course the very specific anti-Jewish measures, as part of the war conditions in general, that made going into hiding necessary. These measures are discussed in the topic Anti-Jewish measures. Here we are concerned with the perception of the more general wartime developments in the Netherlands and abroad. Since the Allied victory was obviously vital for the people in hiding, they followed the progress closely. Their information came from the radio, was related by the helpers or came from the mainstream or underground newspapers and magazines they brought with them.
\r\n\r\nAnne occasionally wrote in her diary, which she started in June 1942, about the invasion of the Netherlands in May 1940. She did not include any concrete memories of those battles, despite the fact that there had been a lot of air activity over Amsterdam-Zuid because of its proximity to Schiphol Airport. Three days before her thirteenth birthday, on 9 June 1942, a transmitting device from an English plane came down on the roof of Merwedeplein 8,[1] but Anne did not talk about this. A few days after her birthday, she remembered that she couldn't celebrate her birthday in 1940 because of the invasion that had just taken place.[2] In July 1942, Anne wrote retrospectively about the war in Europe, the invasion of the Netherlands and the increasingly far-reaching measures against the Jews.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe diary does contain several references to resistance activities and German reactions to them. For example, in October 1942, newspapers carried the news that 15 hostages had been shot, which Anne recorded in her diary.[4] She also mentions arson at the Labour Exchange and the Register of Population. She places these events, when she writes the note in 1944, "a few days" apart.[5] In reality, the incidents took place on 10 February[6] and 27 March 1943.[7] The discrepancies between the A and B versions of Anne's diary play a confusing role in this respect.
\r\n\r\nDue to the frequent air activity, the air raid alarm often went off in Amsterdam. This frightened Anne, especially when anti-aircraft guns were in action. 'Shooting' is a theme that often recurs.[8] Anne mentions in her diary the heavy attacks on the Fokker factories in Noord and on the port of IJmuiden.[9] Her notes on Fokker, in which she mentions the many alerts from the Air Protection Service, correspond well with the 'air hazard' reports recorded by the police.[10] This seems to indicate that she based this note in the B-version, in which 1943 is only discussed retrospectively, on her earlier notes - which have been lost.
\r\n\r\nIn addition to a plane crashing into the Carlton Hotel in late April 1943,[11] two more planes crashed close to the Secret Annex. On 22 March 1944, an American bomber crashed into a school on Spaarndammerstraat.[12] In an air battle on 3 May, several Allied aircraft exploded in the sky over Amsterdam, and others crashed in and around the city.[13] One plane came down in Van Bossestraat.[11] All three of these locations were less than a kilometre and a half away. Anne also notes these incidents.[14]
\r\n\r\nIn early 1944, fears grew that the Netherlands could become a warzone. German authorities warned of the far-reaching consequences of this, such as the inundation of parts of the country. The Haagsche Post published a map showing what consequences inundation of the western Netherlands would have.[15] Seyss-Inquart refuted the rumours about evacuation of the cities in the west, and had proclamations posted urging the population to continue their daily lives.[16] In the Secret Annex, these proclamations and notices led to fear. Anne refers to the inundation map, and describes making plans to stockpile water in basket bottles. The possible consequences of an evacuation were discussed with Jan Gies, among others.[17]
\r\n\r\nIn June 1944, it came to Anne's attention that Anton Mussert announced he would serve in the German army in the event of an Allied invasion of the Netherlands. That announcement, made at a meeting in the Concertgebouw, made its way into the daily newspapers on Anne's birthday.[18] Some two weeks later, she put it in her diary.[19]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1942, Anne wrote that Stalingrad had still not been captured by the Germans.[20] She kept pretty good track of subsequent developments on the Eastern Front. She notes when Soviet troops are at the Gouvernement-Generale, near Romania, in front of Odessa and around Ternopil.[21] Further notes follow in June and July 1944, including on the fall of Zhlobin and Orsja.[22] Her notes match the information available through legal and illegal channels at the time.[23]
\r\n\r\nThe British offensive in North Africa in autumn 1942 fuelled hopes that Germany would soon be defeated. Anne, however, showed a fear of "new blunders".[24] By the latter, she was most likely referring to Operation Jubilee, the so-called 'trial landing' at Dieppe that was widely seen as a fiasco.[25] Anne continued to report in her diary on the course of the battle in North Africa.[26] By the end of 1942, 'the gentlemen' were upbeat about the course of the battle.[27]
\r\n\r\nAfter the Allies landed in Italy, their progress was discussed. Or the lack of it, when the offensive at Monte Cassino stalled.[28] However, days before D-Day, she noted the Fifth Army's capture of Rome.[29]
\r\n\r\nIn March '43, Turkey's position in the international arena shifted. Confusing reports of this emerge in the Secret Annex and in Anne's diary.[30]
\r\n\r\nLike countless others in the Netherlands and worldwide, the people in the Secret Annex were eagerly awaiting the opening of the 'third front' in Western Europe. In early 1944, everyone seemed to think that it was almost there. Churchill predicted that within weeks the world was about to witness the biggest military operation in history.[31] This increased the 'invasion mood' in the Secret Annex.[32] In the following months, this kept the people in hiding busy. In early May, Anne wrote that the Allies could not just leave everything to the Soviets after all.[33] She lost a bet with Mrs Van Pels about it.[34] When the invasion did start on 6 June 1944, the people in hiding still thought at breakfast that it was another 'trial landing'.[35] Anne described the course of the battle after D-Day, also mentioning the capture of five German generals and the deployment of the German 'miracle weapons'.[36] They kept track of Allied progress on a map cut from De Telegraaf .[37] Optimism among them was high again. Otto Frank and Hermann van Pels claimed they would be free by 10 October at the latest.[38] Following the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, Anne last noted anything to do with the war developments on 21 July 1944.[39]
\r\n\r\nThe outcome is well known: on 4 August 1944, the Sicherheitsdienst arrested the people in the Secret Annex, as well as the helpers Kugler and Kleiman. All cherished hopes of timely liberation were thus dashed.
\r\n\r\nEr wordt in het Achterhuis zeer veel over ‘de politiek’ gesproken. De facto gaat het dan vooral om militaire operaties en hun verloop. Verder zijn het uiteraard de zeer specifieke anti-Joodse maatregelen, als onderdeel van de oorlogsomstandigheden in het algemeen, die het onderduiken noodzakelijk maken. Deze maatregelen komen in het onderwerp Anti-Joodse maatregelen aan bod. Hier gaat het om de beleving van de algemenere oorlogsontwikkelingen in Nederland en daarbuiten. Omdat de geallieerde overwinning voor de onderduikers natuurlijk van levensbelang is, volgen ze de voortgang op de voet. Hun informatie komt van de radio, wordt verteld door de helpers of is afkomstig uit de (boven- of ondergrondse) bladen die deze meebrengen.
\r\n\r\nAnne schrijft in haar in juni 1942 begonnen dagboek af en toe over de oorlogsdagen van mei ‘40 in Nederland. Concrete herinneringen aan de strijd in de meidagen zijn daar niet bij, terwijl boven Amsterdam-Zuid vanwege de nabijheid van Schiphol veel luchtactiviteit is geweest. Drie dagen voor haar dertiende verjaardag, op 9 juni 1942, kwam een zendapparaat uit een Engels vliegtuig neer op het dak van Merwedeplein 8,[1] maar Anne heeft het hier niet over. Een paar dagen na haar verjaardag bedenkt ze dat haar verjaardag er in 1940 bij inschoot vanwege de oorlog die toen net was uitgevochten.[2] In juli ’42 schrijft Anne in retrospectieve zin over de oorlog in Europa, de inval in Nederland en de steeds verdergaande maatregelen tegen de Joden.[3]
\r\n\r\nEr staan in het dagboek wel meerdere verwijzingen naar verzetsactiviteiten en de Duitse reacties daarop. Zo brachten de kranten in oktober ’42 het nieuws dat er vijftien gijzelaars waren doodgeschoten, wat Anne in haar dagboek opnam.[4] Ze maakt ook melding van brandstichtingen bij de Arbeidsbeurs en het Bevolkingsregister. Deze gebeurtenissen plaatst ze, als ze in 1944 de notitie schrijft, 'een paar dagen' na elkaar.[5] In werkelijkheid vonden de incidenten plaats op respectievelijk 10 februari[6] en 27 maart 1943.[7] Hier spelen de discrepanties tussen A- en B- versies van Annes dagboek een verwarrende rol.
\r\n\r\nDoor de vele luchtactiviteit ging in Amsterdam vaak het luchtalarm af. Dit joeg Anne angst aan, vooral als daarbij de luchtafweer in actie kwam. Het ‘schieten’ is een thema dat vaak terugkomt.[8] De zware aanvallen op de Fokkerfabrieken in Noord en op de haven van IJmuiden vinden een plaats in Annes dagboek.[9] Haar notities over Fokker, waarin ze de vele alarmeringen van de Luchtbescherming noemt, stemmen goed overeen met de ‘luchtgevaar’-meldingen die de politie optekende.[10] Dat lijkt er op te wijzen dat ze deze notitie in de B-versie, waarin 1943 alleen in retrospectief aan bod komt, baseerde op haar eerdere aantekeningen - die verloren zijn gegaan.
\r\n\r\nNaast een vliegtuig dat eind april ‘43 op het Carlton Hotel neerkwam,[11] stortten er nog twee keer vliegtuigen dichtbij het Achterhuis neer. Op 22 maart 1944 kwam een Amerikaanse bommenwerper terecht op een school in de Spaarndammerstraat.[12] Bij een luchtgevecht op 3 mei ontploften boven Amsterdam enkele geallieerde toestellen in de lucht; andere stortten in en om de stad neer.[13] Een toestel kwam neer in de Van Bossestraat.[11] Deze locaties waren alle drie op minder dan anderhalve kilometer afstand. Anne noteert ook deze incidenten.[14]
\r\n\r\nBegin ’44 nam de vrees toe dat Nederland strijdtoneel kan worden. Duitse autoriteiten waarschuwden voor de verstrekkende gevolgen, zoals het inunderen van delen van het land. De Haagsche Post publiceerde een landkaartje waarop is aangegeven welke gevolgen inundatie van West-Nederland zou hebben.[15] Seyss-Inquart weersprak de geruchten over evacuatie van de steden in het westen, en liet proclamaties aanplakken die de bevolking aanmaandn het dagelijks leven voort te zetten.[16] In het Achterhuis leidden die proclamaties en berichten tot angst. Anne refereert aan het inundatiekaartje, en beschrijft het maken van plannen om een watervoorraad in mandflessen aan te leggen. De mogelijke gevolgen van een evacuatie werden met onder andere Jan Gies besproken.[17]
\r\n\r\nIn juni ’44 kwam het Anne ter ore dat Anton Mussert aankondigde bij een geallieerde inval in Nederland dienst in het Duitse leger te zullen nemen. Die aankondiging, gedaan op een bijeenkomst in het Concertgebouw, kwam op Annes verjaardag in de dagbladen terecht.[18] Zo’n twee weken later zet ze het in haar dagboek.[19]
\r\n\r\nEind ’42 schrijft Anne dat Stalingrad nog altijd niet door de Duitsers veroverd was.[20] De latere ontwikkelingen aan het Oostfront hield ze vrij goed bij. Ze noteert wanneer de Sovjettroepen bij het Gouvernement-Generaal, vlakbij Roemenië, voor Odessa en rondom Ternopil staan.[21] In juni en juli ’44 volgen er nog notities over onder meer over de val van Zhlobin en Orsja.[22] Haar notities stemmen overeen met de destijds via legale en illegale kanalen beschikbare informatie.[23]
\r\n\r\nHet Engelse offensief in Noord-Afrika voedde in de herfst van 1942 de hoop dat Duitsland snel zou zijn verslagen. Anne toont zich echter wel bevreesd voor ‘nieuwe blunders’.[24] Met dit laatste doelde ze zeer waarschijnlijk op Operation Jubilee, de zogenaamde ‘proeflanding’ bij Dieppe die algemeen als een fiasco wordt gezien.[25] Anne blijft in haar dagboek verslag doen van het verloop van de strijd in Noord-Afrika.[26] Tegen het einde van 1942 waren ‘de heren’ vrolijk over het verloop van de strijd.[27]
\r\n\r\nNadat de geallieerden de sprong naar Italië maakten, komen hun vorderingen aan de orde. Of het gebrek er aan, toen het offensief bij Monte Cassino vastliep.[28] Daags voor D-Day kan ze echter de verovering van Rome door het Vijfde Leger noteren.[29]
\r\n\r\nIn maart ’43 verschoof de positie van Turkije in het internationale krachtenveld. De verwarrende berichten hierover komen in het Achterhuis en in Annes dagboek terecht.[30]
\r\n\r\nNet als talloze anderen in Nederland en wereldwijd wachtten de onderduikers met smart op de opening van het ‘derde front’ in West-Europa. Begin ’44 leejt iedereen te denken dat het bijna zo ver was. Churchill voorspelde dat de wereld binnen enkele weken de grootste militaire operatie uit de geschiedenis ging meemaken.[31] De ‘invasie-stemming’ in het Achterhuis nam hierdoor toe.[32] In de volgende maanden hield dit de onderduikers bezig. Begin mei schrijft Anne dat de geallieerden toch niet alles maar aan de Sovjettroepen over kunnen laten.[33] Ze verliest er een weddenschap over met mevrouw Van Pels.[34] Als op 6 juni 1944 de invasie toch komt, denken de onderduikers aan het ontbijt nog dat het opnieuw een ‘proeflanding’ is.[35] Anne beschrijft het verloop van de strijd na D-Day, en vermeldt daarbij ook het gevangennemen van vijf Duitse generaals en de inzet van de Duitse ‘wonderwapens’.[36] De onderduikers hielden de geallieerde vorderingen op een uit De Telegraaf geknipt kaartje bij.[37] Het optimisme onder hen was opnieuw groot. Otto Frank en Hermann van Pels beweerdn dat ze uiterlijk 10 oktober vrij zouden zijn.[38] Naar aanleiding van de mislukte aanslag op Hitler noteert Anne op 21 juli 1944 voor het laatst iets dat met de oorlogsontwikkelingen heeft te maken.[39]
\r\n\r\nDe afloop is bekend: op 4 augustus 1944 arresteerde de Sicherheitsdienst de onderduikers in het Achterhuis, en ook de helpers Kugler en Kleiman. Alle gekoesterde hoop op tijdige bevrijding werd hiermee gelogenstraft.
\r\n\r\nThere was a lot of talk about 'politics' in the Secret Annex. In concrete terms, this mainly concerned military operations and their course. And of course the very specific anti-Jewish measures, as part of the war conditions in general, that made going into hiding necessary. These measures are discussed in the topic Anti-Jewish measures. Here we are concerned with the perception of the more general wartime developments in the Netherlands and abroad. Since the Allied victory was obviously vital for the people in hiding, they followed the progress closely. Their information came from the radio, was related by the helpers or came from the mainstream or underground newspapers and magazines they brought with them.
\r\n\r\nAnne occasionally wrote in her diary, which she started in June 1942, about the invasion of the Netherlands in May 1940. She did not include any concrete memories of those battles, despite the fact that there had been a lot of air activity over Amsterdam-Zuid because of its proximity to Schiphol Airport. Three days before her thirteenth birthday, on 9 June 1942, a transmitting device from an English plane came down on the roof of Merwedeplein 8,[1] but Anne did not talk about this. A few days after her birthday, she remembered that she couldn't celebrate her birthday in 1940 because of the invasion that had just taken place.[2] In July 1942, Anne wrote retrospectively about the war in Europe, the invasion of the Netherlands and the increasingly far-reaching measures against the Jews.[3]
\r\n\r\nThe diary does contain several references to resistance activities and German reactions to them. For example, in October 1942, newspapers carried the news that 15 hostages had been shot, which Anne recorded in her diary.[4] She also mentions arson at the Labour Exchange and the Register of Population. She places these events, when she writes the note in 1944, "a few days" apart.[5] In reality, the incidents took place on 10 February[6] and 27 March 1943.[7] The discrepancies between the A and B versions of Anne's diary play a confusing role in this respect.
\r\n\r\nDue to the frequent air activity, the air raid alarm often went off in Amsterdam. This frightened Anne, especially when anti-aircraft guns were in action. 'Shooting' is a theme that often recurs.[8] Anne mentions in her diary the heavy attacks on the Fokker factories in Noord and on the port of IJmuiden.[9] Her notes on Fokker, in which she mentions the many alerts from the Air Protection Service, correspond well with the 'air hazard' reports recorded by the police.[10] This seems to indicate that she based this note in the B-version, in which 1943 is only discussed retrospectively, on her earlier notes - which have been lost.
\r\n\r\nIn addition to a plane crashing into the Carlton Hotel in late April 1943,[11] two more planes crashed close to the Secret Annex. On 22 March 1944, an American bomber crashed into a school on Spaarndammerstraat.[12] In an air battle on 3 May, several Allied aircraft exploded in the sky over Amsterdam, and others crashed in and around the city.[13] One plane came down in Van Bossestraat.[11] All three of these locations were less than a kilometre and a half away. Anne also notes these incidents.[14]
\r\n\r\nIn early 1944, fears grew that the Netherlands could become a warzone. German authorities warned of the far-reaching consequences of this, such as the inundation of parts of the country. The Haagsche Post published a map showing what consequences inundation of the western Netherlands would have.[15] Seyss-Inquart refuted the rumours about evacuation of the cities in the west, and had proclamations posted urging the population to continue their daily lives.[16] In the Secret Annex, these proclamations and notices led to fear. Anne refers to the inundation map, and describes making plans to stockpile water in basket bottles. The possible consequences of an evacuation were discussed with Jan Gies, among others.[17]
\r\n\r\nIn June 1944, it came to Anne's attention that Anton Mussert announced he would serve in the German army in the event of an Allied invasion of the Netherlands. That announcement, made at a meeting in the Concertgebouw, made its way into the daily newspapers on Anne's birthday.[18] Some two weeks later, she put it in her diary.[19]
\r\n\r\nIn late 1942, Anne wrote that Stalingrad had still not been captured by the Germans.[20] She kept pretty good track of subsequent developments on the Eastern Front. She notes when Soviet troops are at the Gouvernement-Generale, near Romania, in front of Odessa and around Ternopil.[21] Further notes follow in June and July 1944, including on the fall of Zhlobin and Orsja.[22] Her notes match the information available through legal and illegal channels at the time.[23]
\r\n\r\nThe British offensive in North Africa in autumn 1942 fuelled hopes that Germany would soon be defeated. Anne, however, showed a fear of "new blunders".[24] By the latter, she was most likely referring to Operation Jubilee, the so-called 'trial landing' at Dieppe that was widely seen as a fiasco.[25] Anne continued to report in her diary on the course of the battle in North Africa.[26] By the end of 1942, 'the gentlemen' were upbeat about the course of the battle.[27]
\r\n\r\nAfter the Allies landed in Italy, their progress was discussed. Or the lack of it, when the offensive at Monte Cassino stalled.[28] However, days before D-Day, she noted the Fifth Army's capture of Rome.[29]
\r\n\r\nIn March '43, Turkey's position in the international arena shifted. Confusing reports of this emerge in the Secret Annex and in Anne's diary.[30]
\r\n\r\nLike countless others in the Netherlands and worldwide, the people in the Secret Annex were eagerly awaiting the opening of the 'third front' in Western Europe. In early 1944, everyone seemed to think that it was almost there. Churchill predicted that within weeks the world was about to witness the biggest military operation in history.[31] This increased the 'invasion mood' in the Secret Annex.[32] In the following months, this kept the people in hiding busy. In early May, Anne wrote that the Allies could not just leave everything to the Soviets after all.[33] She lost a bet with Mrs Van Pels about it.[34] When the invasion did start on 6 June 1944, the people in hiding still thought at breakfast that it was another 'trial landing'.[35] Anne described the course of the battle after D-Day, also mentioning the capture of five German generals and the deployment of the German 'miracle weapons'.[36] They kept track of Allied progress on a map cut from De Telegraaf .[37] Optimism among them was high again. Otto Frank and Hermann van Pels claimed they would be free by 10 October at the latest.[38] Following the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, Anne last noted anything to do with the war developments on 21 July 1944.[39]
\r\n\r\nThe outcome is well known: on 4 August 1944, the Sicherheitsdienst arrested the people in the Secret Annex, as well as the helpers Kugler and Kleiman. All cherished hopes of timely liberation were thus dashed.
\r\n\r\nAddress: Vijzelstraat 2-14, te Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nAs one of Amsterdam's more prestigious hotels in the 1930s, the Carlton was the setting for countless concerts, parties, meetings, bridge and chess competitions.[2]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, the Carlton was used as a Luftgaukommando by the Germans.[3] On the night of 26-27 April 1943, a plane crashed right behind the Carlton in Reguliersdwarsstraat. The hotel and many nearby buildings were destroyed.[4] Anne writes about this in het diary.[5]
\r\n\r\nAdres: Vijzelstraat 2-14, te Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nHet Carlton was in de jaren dertig als een van prestigieuzere hotels van Amsterdam het decor van talloze concerten, feesten, vergaderingen, bridge- en schaakwedstrijden.[2]
\r\n\r\nTijdens de oorlogsjaren was het Carlton als Luftgaukommando door de Duitsers in gebruik.[3] In de nacht van 26 op 27 april 1943 stortte een vliegtuig vlak achter het Carlton in de Reguliersdwarsstraat neer. Het hotel en veel gebouwen in de omgeving zijn verwoest.[4] Anne beschrijft dit in haar dagboek.[5]
\r\n\r\nAddress: Vijzelstraat 2-14, te Amsterdam.[1]
\r\n\r\nAs one of Amsterdam's more prestigious hotels in the 1930s, the Carlton was the setting for countless concerts, parties, meetings, bridge and chess competitions.[2]
\r\n\r\nDuring the war years, the Carlton was used as a Luftgaukommando by the Germans.[3] On the night of 26-27 April 1943, a plane crashed right behind the Carlton in Reguliersdwarsstraat. The hotel and many nearby buildings were destroyed.[4] Anne writes about this in het diary.[5]
\r\n\r\n