MORGUE CELLARS OF BIRKENAU:
GAS SHELTERS OR DISINFESTING CHAMBERS?

by Carlo Mattogno

Edited and Copyrighted © MXMXCIX Russ Granata
Box 2145 PVP CA 90274 USA
http://www.russgranata.com/
e-mail: [email protected]

     1.0  The Samuel Crowell hypotheses in the light of history and technology.

     In the December 1997 issue of Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung appeared a long article by Samuel Crowell entitled "Technik und Arbeitsweise deutscher Gasschutzbunker im Zweiten Weltkrieg" pp. 226-243 (Technique and Operation of German Anti-Gas Shelters in the Second World War).
     Referring specifically to Auschwitz, Crowell maintains that

"jede als Indiz für die Gaskammern angeführte Spur kann genauso als Beweis für einen deutschen Luftschutzraum oder, genauer gesagt, für die Ausrüstung eines Gasschutzraumes interpretiert werden" p. 226 (every trace taken as evidence of gas chambers can also be interpreted as evidence of German bomb shelters or, more precisely their anti-gas warfare equipment).

     On the basis of that hypothesis, Crowell interprets the Pressac 39 alleged "criminal traces"¹ by postulating that there was a planning and  construction of anti-gas attack shelters inside the crematoria of Auschwitz.
     Enticing as that hypothesis may seem, it is historically flawed by resting upon the erroneous presumption that the Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung (Central Building Administration) ordered the construction of air-raid facilities there at the beginning of 1943 [the time-frame of the Crowell hypotheses] whereas historically, the order to start making air-raid precautions at Auschwitz was given by Camp Commander SS-Obersturmbannführer Liebenhenschel on 16 November 1943.²
     Furthermore, according to many documents inspected but not photocopied because as now that hypothesis was thought untenable, the anti air-raid measures which were taken there consisted essentially in protective shelters dug in the ground in compliance with standardized procedures.  Among the more than 300 building projects which were actually carried out in the Birkenau camps, the only anti air-raid construction there was that of the old Crematorium in the Stamlager which was transformed at the end of 1944 into a "Luftschutzbunker für SS-Revier mit einem Operationsraum" (air-raid shelter for SS area with an operation room).³
     During his 16 June 1944 visit to Auschwitz, Pohl approved 24 construction projects among which the only references to anti air-raid measures were the following:

"Luftschutzmassnahme - 10 Löschteiche von je 400 cbm Inhalt".
"Sicherungslinie für Lager (I) - 15 Stück 1-Mann Splitterschutzbunker"⁴

(air defense measures - 10 extinguishing ponds each of 400 cbm volume). (protective line for camp (I) - 15 1-man protection trench shelters),

but it does not appear to us that any of these projects were ever carried out.

     The Crowell position that in front of the camp's barracks there existed "Splittergräben" or Splitterbunker für Häftlinge" (trench shelters for prisoners) is at least shaky, and while there are hundreds of documents which detail the construction of the Birkenau Crematoria, not one of those documents indicates the existence of any Luftschutzräume (air-raid shelters) inside the Crematoria.  The Crowell hypothesis thus appears to be unfounded, and its reasoning also appears to be methodologically deficient inasmuch as it systematically mistakes things which are externally similar but differ as to function and aim, and then [the hypothesis attempts to confront] the lack of documentation with contentious linguistic interpretations.  The Crowell hypotheses generally postulate that the Leichenkeller for Crematoria II and III in Birkenau "tatsächlich als Leichenkeller mit einer m�glichen Zusatzfunktion als Luftschutzkeller entworfen und gebaut wurden" p. 240 (actually was designed and constructed as a morgue with the additional usage as an air-raid shelter).  We must object to this contention since no map of the Crematoria and no document indicates such an additional function of the Leichenkeller, contrary to what occurs in the case of the

"Ausbau des alten Krematoriums als Luftschutzbunker für SS-Revier mit einem Operationsraum"

(conversion of the old crematorium into an air-raid shelter with an operations compartment),

which is attested by both maps and documents.  Since the Crowell hypothesis postulates that the Zentralbauleitung (Central Building Administration) put a permanent Luftschutzbunker in the basement of Crematories II and III corresponding to the technical prescriptions which Crowell found in the then specialized literature indicating complex articulated installations⁵ including Luftschutzräume, Entgiftungsanstalt, Dekontaminationszentrum, usw. (air raid shelters, decontamination stations, etc.), including special necessary equipment (devices for air filtering and regeneration, oxygen containers, etc.), it then follows that there should exist many maps and documents, as well as references to them, the absence of which cannot be explained merely by possible Soviet manipulations, because such air filtering and regeneration devices⁶ should figure in some way within the Krematoria Übergabeverhandlung (crematorium surrender negotiations) inventory, certainly being more important and more expensive than the regularly recorded "Brausen" or "Zapfhähne" (showers or faucets).  Besides, among the many documents, there would at least be reference to the ventilation system of the Kellergeschoss (basement), as well as to the many crematorium maps.
     The Crowell hypothesis also appears unfounded from a technological point of view:  First of all, although Leichenkeller 2, as "Auskleideraum" (disrobing room), was "ein üblicher Bestandteil" (a general part) of the Gasschutzbunker (p. 235), it was not provided with airtight doors; on the contrary, no access door to the Kellergeschoss was airtight, which is rather surprising were it to be a Gasschutzbunker.  Even more significant is the fact that contrary to the writer's contention, the ventilation system of Leichenkeller 1 and 2 of Crematorium II and III, was quite inadequate for a Luftschutzbunker.  While Crowell affirms

"zu dem entsprechen die Leistungsdaten der Lüftung denen eines Luftschutzkellers"

(corresponding to the ventilation capacity of an air-raid cellar),

he then contrarily bases the number of air changes recommended for the Luftschutzbunker on the Leichenkeller 1 ventilator capacity indicated by Pressac: "zwischen [between] 9.000 und 10.000 m³" ⁷ and even figures the air requirement (9.450 m³) "bei einem maximaler Kapazität 525 Personen" (for a maximum capacity of 525 people) (p. 239), all the while neglecting three essential ventilation factors for a Gasschutzbunker:

(1)  Since merely using anti-gas filters resulted in load-loss (Reibungsgefälle) ranging from 50 to 100 mm of water column, and considering load-loss in the piping, then the air pressure to be required in the Gasschutzbunker must have been 100-150 mm of water column or more, depending upon chamber dimensions.⁸  But instead, the intake ventilator in Leichenkeller 1 was producing a pressure of only 40 mm of water column,⁹ which means it was even insufficient to overcome merely filter resistance.

(2)  The need to have two distinct ventilation systems: that of "Hauptbeluftung, die normalerweise während der Besetzung des Bunkers betrieben wird," (the main ventilation which operates normally during the occupation of the shelter), and that of "Schutzbeluftung, die während des Gasalarm in Betrieb genommen wird" (the defense ventilation which operates during a gas alarm).¹⁰  These two systems were matched with two separate conduits supplied with an airtight closing device, and they had a unique intake, as shown in Document 1.  In this case, the intake conduit divided inside the chamber into two other pipes, both leading to the ventilator: that of "Schutzbelüftung" through the anti-gas filters, and that of "Hauptbelüftung" directly.  But in Leichenkeller 1 there existed only the "Hauptbelüftung" installation which also, as indicated above, could not function as a "Schutzbelüftung" installation due to the inadequate pressure of the intake ventilator.

(3)  The need to install the intake ventilator inside the Gasschutzbunker.  Instead the aerators (both intake and outgo) in Leichenkeller 1 were installed in the crematorium mansard under the roof ¹¹  the best position for them to be destroyed by the very first bomb to strike the crematorium.

     From a practical standpoint, since Leichenkeller 1 and 2 were still two distinct morgue chambers containing corpses (p. 239) of which there were many as is known, the Crowell hypothesis would mean that sudden air raids inevitably resulted in live persons finding themselves together with corpses. It would not have been an inviting prospect to be enclosed for hours inside a gas-tight chamber with miasmic or infected corpses!

     From a construction system point of view, the probability that Leichenkeller may have been "entworfen und gebaut" (designed and built) as a Luftschutzkeller is quite unlikely because of the radically different purposes of those two kinds of installations, and above all because of the logical consequences that they would in that case enclose living people together with the dead.  Which engineer would have issued such a gruesome project so contrary to the most elementary hygienic-sanitary rules?
     Allow us now to consider some specific contentions.  The Crowell hypotheses includes critiquing the Pressac "criminal evidence" via convoluted linguistics; the typical example concerns the word "Vergasung."  After making it clear that

"der Begriff Vergasungs[keller] taucht in keinem anderen bisher bekannten Dokument und in keiner anderen Publikation der damaligen Ära auf" (p.223)  

(the concept Vergasungskeller occurs in no other known document or publication from that era),

     Crowell presents an academic linguistic disquisition on German prefixes and suffixes, meant to demonstrate that the term "Vergasung" does not refer to the Schädlingsbekämpfung (pest control), since the correct term for that would be Begasung, and that Vergasung

"auch einfach auf etwas vergastes, gasförmig gemachtes Bezug nehmen kann" pp. 233-234  

(may also simply refer to something gasified, something made gaseous).

     Thus the conclusion that the "Vergasungskeller" in document NO-4473 was

"einen Keller ... der zur Aufnahme von Gasverletzen gedacht ist" p. 234

(a cellar planned for the reception of those injured by poison gas),

or else, according to the A.R. Butz theory, the term in question might mean "Gaskeller" and might be a synonym for "Gasschutzkeller" (p. 238).  This interpretation lacks foundation because first of all, the term "Vergasung" appears in the "Erläuterungsbericht zum Vorentwurf für den Neubau des Kriegsgefangenenlagers der Waffen-SS, Auschwitz O/S" (Clarifying Report of Designs of New Construction of POW Camp Auschwitz) dated 30 October 1941, where "Vergasungsraum" refers to the HCN-Gaskammer (hydrocyanic gas chamber) in the "Entlausungsbaracke" 1 and 2 (delousing barracks 1 and 2) that is, BW 5a and 5b in Birkenau.¹²  Thus, that term is strongly connected to Schädlingsbekämpfung (pest control) and to HCN.  Secondly, the Crowell linguistic analyses are too convoluted; the document in which the term "Vergasungskeller" first appears is in the letter dated 29 January 1943 by SS-Hauptsturmführer Bischoff, Leiter der Zentralbauleitung Auschwitz to SS-Brigadeführer Kammler, Chef der Amtgruppe C of the WVHA.  Now can we seriously believe that Bischoff would twist his tongue like that in an official document by using the term "Vergasungskeller" to designate "etwas vergastes" or "Gasschutzkeller"?  Tarnsprache? (code/disguised/camouflaged language?).
     The Crowell hypotheses offers another example of a problem in an explanation of the terms "Gasskammer" and "Gassdichtenfenster" in relation to Crematorium IV and V, whereby those two terms are used as synonyms for "Gasschutzraumdichtenfenster" (gas-shelter gas-tight window) and "Gasschutzkammer" (gas protection chamber) (p. 237), on the contention that Luftschutzräume (air-raid shelters) were also placed in these crematoria.  Now since those facilities were entirely surface-buildings with walls of only 25cm thickness¹³, and had very fragile roofing ("Bretternagelbinder, doppelte Pappdeckung, Decke mit Heraklithplatten benagelt"¹⁴ (nailed boarding, double felt-paper roofing, roofing with nailed Heraklith sheets), then the Crowell theory appears to be technically flawed, because according to a technical manual of the 1930s,

"medium weight bombs, when falling from a normal bombing height, have a penetration of 0.40 to 0.50 m into reinforced concrete, and a penetration of circa 1.20 m into an ordinary full-brick wall and even deeper into a hollow brick wall."¹⁵

Therefore

"to protect from the effects of a medium bomb explosion you need a covering of circa 0.80 m thickness."¹⁶

     It is thus clear that the first bomb would have destroyed those hypothetical air-raid shelters together with the crematoria, and Pressac in this instance may be correct in indicating that this appears to be simply a case of erroneous spelling for "Gaskammer" and "Gasdichtefenster."
     Regarding "4 Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtungen" (4 wire-meshed inserting devices) and "Holzblenden" (wooden shutters), the Crowell hypothesis here is also rather surprising.  It begins by indicating that the terms "Drahtnetz" and "Blenden" also appear in the Luftschutzliteratur (air-raid defense literature), and then notices that

"die Auschwitzer Auftragsnummer-Nr. 353 vom 27. April 1943 enthält folgende Bestellung: '12 Stücke Fenstergitter 50 x 70 cm', was allgemein als Drahtnetzgitter für jene 12 gasdichten Fenster (oder Türen) angesehen wird, die wir oben als identisch mit den Blenden und Holzblenden festgehalten hatten" (p. 236)

(the Auschwitz work order Nr. 353 for April 27, 1943 contains the following '12 window screening or grating 50 cm by 70 cm' which in general is understood as wire mesh for the 12 gas-tight windows (or doors), which we have shown above are identical to Blenden and Holzblenden).

     But this postulation does not take into account the remarkable fact that the terms which are at issue here are in the Übergabeverhandlung (surrendering negotiations) document on Crematorium II, in reference to Leichenkeller 2.¹⁷  Taking that for granted, then where were the 4 Öffnungen (vents) located which were furnished with the 4 Holzblenden?  They did not exist in either Leichenkeller 1 or 2.
     Therefore "gasdichte Fenster" (gas-tight windows) concerning Crematoria IV and V has nothing to do with "gasdichte Blenden" concerning Luftschutzbunker, and that is clear by the very fact that they closed only from the outside, and we can see that from the photographs showing "gasdichte Fenster" with Crematorium IV published by Pressac.¹⁸
     Likewise untenable is the hypothesis that "Fenstergitter" of Crematorium IV and V were "Drahtnetzgitter", as we can see by reading Auftrag Nr. 127 of 29 March 1943 for Crematorium IV and V regarding the

"Herstellung von Eisengitter für nachstehenden Fenster: 30 Stück 1.00 x 1.500 m,  Stück 0.50 x 1.00 m,  4 Stück 0.30 x 0.40 m."¹⁹

(fabricating iron grating for the remaining windows: 30 etc. and 4 etc).

It is therefore obvious that "Fenstergitter" were "Eisengitter".

     Regarding "Gasprüfer", S. Crowell offers nothing and limits himself to accepting the explanation of A.R. Butz, which I have held as untenable,²⁰ and the writer's explanation of other minor Pressac alleged criminal indications are instead explained by Crowell with the same methodology.

     Recapitulating, the Crowell hypotheses are unfounded historically, technically, and documentally for the following reasons:


1) Absolutely no anti air-raid protective measures were undertaken in Auschwitz-Birkenau before the end of 1943;

2) The existence of Gasschutzbunker in Crematoria II and III would have been unfeasible because:


a) all the accesses to the Kellergeschoss were private gas-proof doors;

b) the ventilation system of the Kellergeschoss was entirely inadequate and could not function with the required antigas filters;

c) the Kellergeschoss ventilators were located in the attic of the crematorium and would have gone out of service right after the first bomb had reached the building;

d) to use morgue cellars as anti-gas shelters is in any case contrary to all the most elementary hygienic-sanitary custom.


3) The existence of Gasschutzräume in Crematoria IV and V is technically unfeasible because those buildings could not offer protection against bombs.

4) There is not any document that contains a single confirmation of the Crowell hypotheses, not even in the documents that should contain specific references to it, for instance in the Übergabeverhandlung of the crematorium.


2.0  The documents related to the hygienic-sanitary installations in the crematorium of Birkenau.

     Ruling out the Gasschutzräume hypothesis as untenable while also excluding the groundless hypothesis of homicidal gas-chambers, how do we now explain the Pressac indicators?  Even though a valid answer to this question is somewhat difficult, there does exist some documentation which helps us to comprehend the intentions of the Auschwitz Zentralbauleitung and which help us reconstruct the general situation into which such evidence is historically placed; above all I am referring to the weighty evidence of certain documents, some of which have been cited herein.
     Now in an "Aufstellung" [in this case a list or itemization] by the Topf company dated 13 April 1943 concerning requested metals to be used in the construction of certain machinery for Crematory II at Auschwitz, the following piece of information appears:
"2 Topf Entwesungs�fen für das Krema II im Kriegsgefangenenlager, Auschwitz."²¹

(2 Topf disinfestation heaters for Crematory II in the prisoner of war camp Auschwitz).

On 14 May, Bischoff sent Topf the following "dringendes Telegramm" [urgent]:


"Mitbringt Montag überschlägiges Projekt für Warmwasserbereitung für ca. 100 Brausen.  Einbau von Heizschlagen oder Boiler in den im Bau begriffenen Müllverbrennungsofen Krem. III oder Fuchs zwecks Ausnutzung der hohen Abgangstemperaturen.  Evtl. Höhermauerung des Ofens zwecks Unterbringung eines grossen Reservebehälters ist möglich. Es wird gebeten entsprechende Zeichnung Hernn Prüfer am Montag den 17.5. mitzugeben."²²

(On Monday bring the overdue warm water project for approximately 100 showers.  Installation of water heater or boiler in the still under construction trash incinerator Crematorium III or flue for the purpose of utilizing the high emission temperature.  Contingently higher walling of the oven for the purpose of accommodating a large reserve container is possible.  It is being requested to send along the appropriate designs with Hernn Prüfer on Monday 17.5.).

     On 05 June 1942, Topf sent Drawing D60446 to the Zentralbauleitung "den Einbau der Boiler in den Müllverbrennings-Ofen betreffend." (regarding the installation of the boilers in the trash incinerator.) This project also involved the installations for Crematorium II.²³
     In an undated "Fragebogen" (questionnaire) apparently written in June 1943 regarding the Birkenau crematoria, in answer to the question, "Werden die Abgase verwertet?" (are the exhaust gases utilized?), the head of the Zentralbauleitung, Bischoff, responded: "geplant aber nicht ausgeführt" (planned but not carried out), and in response to the following question: "Wenn ja zu welchem Zweck?" (If yes, to what purpose?), Bischoff answered: "für Badeanlagen im Krema. II und III."²⁴ (for bath facilities in Crematorium II and III).
     Finally, there is a Rechnung (a bill) from the firm VEDAG  Vereinigte Dachpappen-Fabriken Aktiengesellschaft (United Roofing-Felt Factories, Incorporated) dated 28 July 1943 with the subject "Auschwitz-Krematorium" referring to "ausgeführte Abdichtungsarbeiten für die Entwesungsanlage" [emphasis added] (completed sealing work for the disinfestation facility) which was carried out between 21 May and 16 July.²⁵
     Before drawing any conclusions, a few explanations are required.  While both Topf Entwesungsöfen (disinfestation heaters) were then installed in the Zentralsauna, the document cited above refers them to Crematorium II.  The project for the installation of 100 showers in Crematorium III (and in Crematorium II) could not have been for the prisoners of the "Sonderkommando" of the crematoria, since only 50 showers were installed in the "Brauseraum" (shower-room) of the Zentralsauna, which had been designed for the camp;²⁶ therefore it is clear that the "Badeanlagen im Krema II and III" in the "Fragebogen" quoted above, were for the prisoners of the entire camp.

     Now I think that it is not irrelevant to note here that in this project the water heating system for the showers was connected to the Müllverbrennungs-Ofen (trash incinerator) and not to the crematory oven, as for example in the five-muffle oven of the Lublin KL.  In my opinion, the reason for that decision was the fact that the crematory ovens did not ensure a continuity of use to be able to provide sufficient hot water throughout the entire day; in other words, the crematory ovens were not used enough to ensure efficient operation of the water heating system.
     The VEDAG 'Rechnung' ²⁷ refers to the Entwesungs-Heißluftkammern [hot-air disinfesting chambers] installed in the Zentralsauna. This definitely proves a VEDAG Einzelrechnung [single bill] which has the same date and the same contents as the Rechnung noted above, but it refers to the "BW 32 = Entwesungsanlage", that is to say, precisely in the Zentralsauna. ^27a But for what reason does the Rechnung have as its subject: "Auschwitz-Krematorium"? This heading has an obvious relationship to the aforesaid Topf "Aufstellung" of 13 April 1943 concerning "2 Topf Entwesungsöfen für das Krema II" which were then installed in the Zentralsauna. In any case, the two documents establish the correlation Krematorium-Entwesung and portray the expression of a plan or at least of a Zentralbauleitung intention to combine cremation and disinfestation within the same edifice. [Note by Russ Granata: Carlo Mattogno asks me to date this replacement paragraph with its note as of 22 June 1999].

     It is important to note that the Pressac so-called "criminal evidence"  as I have shown elsewhere,²⁸ coincides with a recurrence of the typhus epidemic which had broken out at the beginning of July 1942.  During the following months, hygiene and health in the camp were in a very serious situation.  At the end of March 1943 there were cases of typhus even among the civilian workers at the camp.  On 01 April, the SS-Standortarzt wrote a letter to Bischoff which began with these words:
"Die in letzter Zeit sich häufenden Fleckfieberfälle unter den Zivilarbeitern machen die Durchführung einer abermaligen gründlichsten Entlausung erforderlich, damit seitens der zivilen Beh�rden nicht Massnahmen verlangt werden, die eine Einstellung oder Erschwerung der Durchführung der kriegswichtigen Aufgaben bedeuten könnten."²⁹

(The recent breakout of typhus among the civilian workers makes carrying out of another thorough delousing necessary, although the civilian authorities do not want measures which could suspend or complicate the carrying out of important war assignments.)

     On 07 May a meeting was held at the Auschwitz Führerheim (the dwelling of the Auschwitz Commandant) chaired by Kammler and attended by Höss, Möckel, Leiter der SS-Standortverwaltung (head of the SS garrison administration), Caesar, Leiter der Landwirtschaftsbetriebe (head of the agricultural operation), SS-Standortartzt Wirths (the SS garrison physician Wirths), and also by Bischoff and Kirschnek of the Zentralbauleitung (the central building administration).  Two days later, Bishoff drew up an "Aktenvermerk" (memo) in which among other things, is the following:

"Um eine endgültige Lösung für die Entlausung im KGL zu schaffen, wurde von Standortarzt angeregt, für jeden Unterabschnitt der Bauabschnitte, das sind 10 neue komplette Entwesungsanlagen, einschliesslich Bademöglichkeit zu schaffen.  Dem gegenüber wurde vom Leiter der ZBL darauf hingewiesen, dass sich die grosse Entwesungsanlage [Zentralsauna] des KGL im Bau befindet und erst fertiggestellt muss."³⁰

(In order to come to a final solution of the delousing of the camp, the garrison physician suggests the construction of complete disinfestation facilities including bathing provisions for each section of the building stage, which means 10. The opposite was recommended by the head of the Zentralbauleitung, that the large disinfestation facility of the camp [the Centralsauna] which is under construction, must be completed first.)

     On 04 June 1943, replying to a WVHA letter, Bischoff requested approval for the original Zentralsauna project, giving the following reasons:

"Mit den Bauarbeiten für die Entwesungs- und Desinfektionsanlage nach dem ursprünglichen Entwurf musste sofort begonnen werden, da wegen der Belegung des noch im Bau befindlichen Lagers sowohl vom Artz als auch vom Lagerkommandanten sofortige Massnahmen für eine Entwesungsmöglichkeit gefordert werden.  Nachdem im Zigeunerlager Fleckfieber ausbebrochen ist, wurde die Erstellung einer Desinfektionsanlage derart dringend notwendig, dass mit den Bauarbeiten im Rahmen der von SS-Brigadeführer und Generalmajor der Waffen-SS Dr.Ing.Kammler angeordneten Sonderbaumassnahmen zur Verbesserung des hygienischen Verhältnisse sofort begonnen wurde." ³¹

(The construction work for the disinfesting and disinfecting facilities had to begin immediately according to the original plan because the Camp Physician as well as the Commandant are asking for immediate steps for disinfection feasibility for the quartering of the camp. After the outbreak of typhus in the gypsy camp, the installation of disinfection facilities became urgently necessary for the improvement of hygienic conditions, so that special construction work was started immediately on the orders of SS-Brigadeführer and Generalmajor Waffen-SS Dr.Ing. Kammler.)

From these documents there can be drawn only one conclusion:
The projects involving the crematoria shown above were part of the "Sonderbaumassnahmen zur Verbesserung des hygienischen Verhältnisse"
(special construction measures for the improvement of hygienic standards) as provisional emergency measures; therefore, the Jean-Claude Pressac so-called "criminal evidence" were not part of any attempt to exterminate prisoners, but rather to save their lives.


---

NOTES ¹ J.C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers. The Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York, 1989, pp. 429-457.

² Standortbefehl Nr. 51/43 of 16 November 1943.  Gosudarstvennji Archiv Rossiiskoi Federatzii, Moscow, 7021-108-32, p. 73.  Leibehenschel named "ortlicher Luftschutzleiter" to SS-Untersturmführer Jothann, who as of 01 October 1943 was head of the Central Building Administration.

³  The referenced Kostenüberschlag is dated 02 November 1944. Tsentr Chranenija Istoriko-dokumental'nich Kollektsii, Moscow
     (henceforth: TCIDK), 502-2-147, pp. 126-127.

⁴  Aktenvermerk of 17.6.1944. NO-2359.
⁵  The complexity of a gas-proof air-raid shelter is evident in Document 1
     [Fig. 83.]

⁶  Such devices are complex and costly. Photograph of Document 2 [Fig. 82] shows an Italian manufactured device of the 1930s.

⁷  The true capacity was 4,800³ of air per hour.  Also the volume of Leichenkeller 1 indicated by S. Crowell (525 m³) is erroneous. The site measured m 30x7x2.41=506.1 m³.  The effective volume  if we do not include the volume taken up by the 7 reinforced concrete columns and the reinforced concrete beam supporting the ceiling of that room  was 499 m³.

⁸  Captain Doctor Attilio Izzo, Guerra chimica e difesa antigas. Hoepli, Milano, 1935, pp. 259-261.

⁹ "Gebläse zur F�rderung von stündl. 4800 cbm Luft gegen 40 mm WS Gesamtpressung."  Topf Rechnung Nr. 171 dated 22.2.43, and Nr. 729 of 27.5.43 regarding "Lieferung von Be- und Entlüftungsanlagen" for Crematories II and III.  TCIDK, 502-I-327, p. 25, and p. 16.  The ventilator pressure (Gebläse) of Leichenkeller 2 was less than that: 35 mm of water column.  Ibidem.

¹⁰  Dipl. Ing. Hermann Kämper, Die technische Einrichnungen von Luftschutzräumen  verschiedener Art, in "Gesundheits-Ingenieur", 65Jg., 1942, Heft 37/38, p. 296.

¹¹  See J.C. Pressac, Die Krematorien von Auschwitz. Die Technik des Massenmordes. Piper,  München, Zürich, 1994, documents 13, 14, 15.

¹²  TCIDK, 502-1-233, pp. 14 and 16.

¹³  This results from Plan 2036(p) of 11 January 1943. J.P. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, p. 399.

¹⁴ Übergabeverhandlung (surrender negotiation) of Crematory IV, Gebäudebeschreibung TCIDK, 502-2-54, p. 26.  The wooden roof construction of Crematories IV and V are shown by Zentralbauleitung design n. 1361 of 14.10.42. See J.C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, p. 397.

¹⁵  A. Izzo, Guerra chimica e difesa antigas, p. 343.

¹⁶  Ibidem, p. 344.

¹⁷  This refers to the "Verzeichnis der Einrichtnugsgegenstände" of the Übergabeverhandlung of Crematorium II  a square pre-formatted module which in the left margin in horizontal lines shows the names of the rooms and in the vertical right column are the references to the objects of furnishings. Leichenkeller 1 and 2 are shown in the first two lines of the inventory.  Pressac, by looking at Crematory Plan 2197, was reminded that in the vertical column "Zapfhähne", the figures referring to Leichenkeller 1 are attributed to Leichenkeller 2 and vice-versa, while not concluding that such an inversion had also been made in the columns "Drahtnetzeinschiebvorrichtung" and "Holzblenden," thus attributing these devices to Leichenkeller 1.  (Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, pp. 429-430).  The argument appears unfounded because in the document, only the figures of this column are inverted.  The figures of the column related to the lamps are, in fact, correctly attributed.

¹⁸  J.C. Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers, pp. 426-427.  In the photograph of the crematorium the windows of the West wing open towards the outside.

¹⁹  Höss trial, Volume 11a, p. 89.  Given that the direction of the opening of the windows was towards the outside, those Gitter could only be walled from the inside of the room which would have greatly complicated homicidal gassing!

²⁰  See my Critique of the A.R. Butz article, "Gas Detectors in Auschwitz Crematorium II"          http://www.codoh.com/viewpoints/vpmatbutz.html
Russ Granata, editor.

²¹  Archiwum Panstwowego Muzeum w Oswiecimiu (henceforth: APMO), BW 30/34, p. 47.

²²  APMO, BW 30/34, p. 40.

²³  TCIDK, 502-1-336 (page number illegible).

²⁴  TCIDK, 502-1-312, p. 8.

²⁵  TCIDK, 502-1-316, p. 431, "Zweitschrift" in 502-1-323, p. 137.
      See Document 3.

²⁶  Inventory of the Übergabeverhandlung of "Disinfektion und Entwesunsanlage" (Zentralsauna) of 22 January 1944.
     TCIDK, 532-1-335, p. 3.  

²⁷  TCIDK, 502-1-265, p. 457.

^27a  TCIDK, 502-1-316, p. 430. This document was courteously made available to me by Germar Rudolf.

²⁸  See the third paragraph of my article Die "Gasprüfer" von Auschwitz, in VffG, Heft 1, März 1998, p. 16.

²⁹  TCIDK, 502-1-332, p. 222.

³⁰  TCIDK, 502-1-233, p. 37.

³¹  TCIDK, 502-1-336, p. 106.
     



---



TCIDK = Moscow Center for the Custody of Historical Document collection

APMO = Archive of the National Museum of Auschwitz

APMM = Archive of the National Museum of Majdanek