Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:38:32.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Internment Camp at Terezín, 1919

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2009

Todd Huebner
Todd Huebner
Affiliation:
historian at the Office of Special Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although the fortress at Terezín attained a dubious international distinction during World War II as the Nazi concentration camp. Theresienstadt, it already possessed a gloomy history as a place of imprisonment, having held Austrian political offenders since the first half of the nineteenth century. Gavrilo Princip had been confined there along with his fellow conspirators after assassinating Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo; the young man ultimately died in the garrison hospital. During World War I, Terezín became the largest prisoner-of-war camp in Bohemia, housing its mostly Russian prisoners in makeshift subcamps scattered outside the fortress. In 1919 the new Czechoslovak state employed some of these same facilities to intern various “suspicious elements” from Slovakia. Unfortunately the zeal with which the authorities took people into custody produced a flood of internees for which Terezín was ill prepared, and conditions in the debilitated Austrian camp soon threatened to provoke a public scandal. The circumstances of this rather unpleasant episode provide a revealing—though ambiguous—glimpse of the sterner side of the Czechoslovak First Republic, and by extension, post-Habsburg Central Europe.

Type
Articles
Information
Austrian History Yearbook , Volume 27 , January 1996 , pp. 199 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Center for Austrian Studies, University of Minnesota 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Votoček, Otakar and Kostková, Zdeňka, Terezín (Prague, 1980), 93–97Google Scholar.

2 There are passing references in the historical literature to the use of Terezín as an internment camp in 1919 but few details. See Král, Václav, Intervenční válka československé buržoasie proti Mad'arské sovětské republice v race 1919 (The interventionist war of the Czechoslovak bourgeoisie against the Hungarian Soviet Republic in 1919) (Prague, 1954), 84Google Scholar; Vietor, Martin, Slovenská sovietska republika v r. 1919: Príčny jej vzniku a jej vplyv na d'alší výoj robotníckeho hnutia v ČSR (The Slovak Soviet Republic in 1919: Its origins and its effect upon the further development of the workers' movement in the Czechoslovak Republic) (Bratislava, 1955), 126, 190Google Scholar (and photo); idem, Význam a miesto Slovenskej republiky rád v československých dejinách (The significance and the place of the Slovak Republic of Councils in Czechoslovak history) (Bratislava, 1969), 29Google Scholar; Dzvoník, Michal, Ohlas Vel'kej októbrovej socialistickej revolúcie na Slovensku (1918–1919) (The response in Slovakia to the Great October Socialist Revolution, 1918–1919) (Bratislava, 1957), 136Google Scholar; Hronský, Marián, “K vojenskej intervencii čs. armády proti Mad'arskej republike rád” (Concerning the military intervention of the Czechoslovak army against the Hungarian Republic of Councils), Historie a vojenství (History and military affairs), 1989, no. 5: 74–91Google Scholar, here 76.

3 Úradné noviny (Administrative news), Bratislava, Mar. 25, 1919. See also Hungary, , Magyar törvénytár (Hungarian statute book), no. 50/1914, §10Google Scholar.

4 Ivan Markovič to Edvard Beneš, Mar. 26,1919, in Štátny úsrredný archív, Bratislava (hereafter ŠÚA), osobný fond—Ivan Markovič, carton 2.

5 Šrobár, to prefects, 03 25, 1919, in Vietor, Slovenská sovietska republika, 334–35Google Scholar, and Kostický, Bohumír, ed., Slovensko 1848–1948 v zrkadle premeňov (Slovakia in the mirror of the sources, 1848–1948) (Martin, 1983), 231Google Scholar. See also Slovenská republika rád: Dokumenty (The Slovak Republic of Councils: Documents) (Bratislava, 1970), 42Google Scholar.

6 Ivanka, Milan to the Presidium of the Ministry of the Interior, 03 28, 1919Google Scholar, in Vojenský historický archiv, Prague (hereafter VHA), ministerstvo národní obrany (MNO), hlavní štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/3/1.

7 Draft order no. 10,519, dated Apr. 4,1919 (but issued the next day), in ibid.

8 Report of Apr. 14, 1919, in ibid., sign. 38/3/2.

9 Minutes from a meeting of Slovak prefects and parliamentary deputies, Apr. 11–13, 1919, in ŠÚA, osobný fond—Vavro Šrobár, carton 5, inv. no. 29. Since the Paris Peace Conference would not establish the Czechoslovak-Hungarian frontier for another two months, the largely Magyar border population, at least, had no legal obligation to recognize Czechoslovak sovereignty.

10 Two reports of May 2, 1919, in VHA, MNO, hlavní štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/3/1/1.

11 Report of May 13, 1919, in ibid., sign. 38/3/1/2.

12 Report of May 18, 1919, in ibid., sign. 38/3/1/3.

13 Report of May 31, 1919, in ibid., carton 14, sign. 35/3/3.

14 Hughesogram of June 5, 1919, in Státní úsrtřední archiv, Prague (hereafter SÚA), předsednictvo ministerské rady (PMR), carton 3196, sign. 712, no. 604/19.

15 Telephone message of June 9, 1919, in VHA, MNO, hlavní štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/3/2/2.

16 Telegram of June 12, 1919, and Klofáč's signed authorization of June 13, 1919, both in VHA, MNO, prezídium, carton 172, sign. 8767/7.

17 Report of June 14, 1919, in ibid.; another copy is in VHA, generální inspektorát branné moci, carton 4, no. 1463/19. At this time the standard civilian bread ration was 1,400 grams per week (Kocman, Alois et al. , eds., Boj o směr vývoje československého státu [The struggle over the direction of development of the Czechoslovak state], 2 vols. [Prague, 1965–1969], 1:369)Google Scholar. Since 10 grams is only about one-third of an ounce, the officers' parenthetical exclamation mark is understandable!

18 Soukup to Šrobár, Apr. 27,1919, in ŠÚA, Šrobár, carton 15, inv. no. 122.

19 Šámal's notes, May 7, 1919, in Archiv Národního muzea, Prague (hereafter ANM), pozůstalost Přemysla Šámala. Šrobár had interned all twelve members of the executive committee of the Bratislava Social Democratic organization on March 25 (Sociální demokrat, Prague, Apr. 4, 1919).

20 Dula to Šrobár, June 12, 1919, in Štátny oblastný archív Bratislava (hereafter ŠOBA Bratislava), župa bratislavská I. (ŽB-I), prezidiálne spisy župana, no. 2045/19. It had been Lehocký who brought the situation in Ilava to Soukup's attention in April. He was from Bratislava, so he may well have been the source of Masaryk's information also.

21 Šámal's notes, June 18, 1919, in ANM, Šámal.

22 Markovič to Šrobár, June 17, 1919, in ŠÚA, Markovič, carton 2.

23 Keller to Švehla, June 18, 1919, in SÚA, prezídium ministerstva vnitra, carton 452, no. 405/19 osob. Titta was not actually interned at the camp itself but was held briefly in an officers' lockup at one of the infantry barracks. On June 23 he was transferred to Prague (“Aus den Lebenserinnerungen Doktor Tittas,” Sudetendeutsches Jahrbuch 3 [1927]: 86–100Google Scholar, here 92, 94).

24 Právo lidu, Prague, June 18, 1919.

25 Stenographic report of the 36th meeting of the Defense Committee, June 24, 1919, in Archiv Parlamentu České republiky, Prague, Revoluční národní shromáždění, carton 7, inv. no. 191, item 3.

26 Speech of June 25, 1919, in Czechoslovakia, shromáždění, Národní, Těsnopisecké zprázry o schůzich Národního shromáždění československého v Praze (Stenographic reports of the meetings of the Czechoslovak National Assembly in Prague), 4 vols. (Prague, 1919–1920), 2:1752–54Google Scholar.

27 Speech of June 26, 1919, in ibid., 2:1768–72.

28 List dated June 24, 1919, in ŠÚA, Šrobár, carton 4, inv. no. 20, fol. 4–11.

29 Markovič to Šrobár, June 17,1919, in ŠÚA, Markovič, carton 2. The president wrote Šrobár personally after receiving another Jewish delegation on June 24 (Masaryk to Šrobár, June 24, 1919, in Archiv Ústavu T. G. Masaryka [hereafter AÚTGM], Masarykův archiv [MA], Slovensko, carton 4, folder 20).

30 Markovič to Šrobár, June 15,1919, in ŠÚA, Markovič, carton 2.

31 Venkov, Prague, July 3, 1919.

32 Telegram of June 27, 1919, in Roky prvých bojov: Dokumenty z robotníckeho hnutia Západoslovenského kraja 1918–1921 (The years of the first struggles: Documents from the workers' movement in the Western Slovak region, 1918–1921) (Bratislava, 1961), 50Google Scholar.

33 The Presidium of the Ministry of the Interior to the Prime Ministry, June 28, 1919, in SÜA, PMR, carton 3196, sign. 712, no. 755/19.

34 Večemi České slovo, Prague, June 13, 1919.

35 Letter of June 11,1919, in VHA, MNO, prezídium, carton 172, sign. 8767/7.

36 Report of a telephone call to České slovo, June 13, 1919, in ibid.

37 Markovič to Šrobár, June 15, 1919, in ŠÚA, Markovič, carton 2.

38 Reports of May 2 and May 18, 1919, in VHA, MNO, hlavní Štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/3/1/1 and 38/3/1/3. Indeed, Jenček's original purpose in expanding into Camp I was to provide such accommodations.

39 Extract from a protocol given by Cpl. Oldřich Beran at the headquarters of the Sixth Division in Košice, June 9, 1919, in ibid., carton 20, sign. 50/26/1.

40 Report of May 31, 1919, in ibid.. carton 14, sign. 35/3/3.

41 Report of June 14, 1919, in VHA, MNO, prezídium, carton 172, sign. 8767/7.

42 Report of June 30,1919, in VHA, MNO, hlavní štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/4/5.

43 Report of July 1, 1919, in ŠÚA, Šrobár, carton 4, inv. no. 20, fol. 3. Pospíšil had stated in his speech that he had intervened with the government, which had set up a commission to investigate, but hecklers interrupted as he was about to explain its jurisdiction (Czechoslovakia, Těsnopisecké zprávy, 2:1753). On July 12, however, the Ministry of National Defense reported to the Ministry of the Interior that the internees were being released from Terezín “on orders from Bratislava” (ŠÚA, minister s plnou mocou pre správu Slovenska, carton 255, fol. 816).

44 Telegram of July 17,1919, in ŠOBA Bratislava, ŽB-I, prezidiálne spisy župana, no. 2448/19. The prefect, Samuel Zoch, complied with their request.

45 Telegram of July 20, 1919, in ibid., no. 2568/19. On July 23 the Slovak parliamentary delegation voted to request the lifting of the military dictatorship and the immediate release of all internees (not just those in Terezín) against whom there was no evidence (ŠÚA, Slovenská národná rada, carton 4, Slovenský klub, korešpondencie odoslané, no. 140/19). Šrobár chose to ignore this request.

46 Reports of Aug. 1 and Aug. 21, 1919, in VHA, MNO, hlavní štáb, carton 17, sign. 38/3/2/3 and 38/3/2/4.

47 See Neue Freie Presse, Vienna, June 26, 1919, and Pester Lloyd, Budapest, June 29, 1919. The left-wing Social Democrat Josef Stivín threatened to take the story to L'Humanité in Paris (Šámal's notes, July 8, 1919, in ANM, Šamal).

48 Speech of June 25, 1919, in Czechoslovakia, Těsnopisecké zprávy, 2:1754.

49 Report of June 20, 1919, in AÚTGM, MA, Slovensko, carton 1, folder 1.

50 Sociální demokrat, Prague, June 20, 1919.

51 See, for example, ŠOBA Bratislava, slúžnovský úrad Dunajská Streda, prezídium, no. 33/19.

52 Steier, Lajos, Ungarns Vergewaltigung (Zurich, 1929), 15–16Google Scholar, purports to reproduce a firsthand account of the camp but provides no information that did not appear in the newspapers. The allegation of camp brutality, in which guards, having wearied of beating the unfortunate internees themselves, forced them to beat one another, clearly derives from newspaper accounts of Pospíšil's speech, some of which neglected to note that this disgraceful incident took place in transit, not at the camp itself.

53 Markovič to Šrobár, June 15, 1919, in ŠÚA, Markovič, carton 2.

54 VHA, MNO, hlavní Štáb, carton 60, sign. 62/2/4/1.