What Art Works Did the Berlin Fire Dept Burn

Arson set on in Berlin on 27 February 1933

Reichstag fire

Firefighters struggle to extinguish the fire.
Native proper name	Reichstagsbrand
Date	27 February 1933; 89 years agone  (1933-02-27)
Location	Reichstag edifice, Berlin, Frg
Type	Arson
Participants	Marinus van der Lubbe
Outcome	Reichstag Fire Prescript enacted Van der Lubbe executed Ceremonious liberties suspended Nazi command of authorities entrenched

The Reichstag fire (High german: Reichstagsbrand, listen(help·info) ) was an arson attack on the Reichstag building, home of the German parliament in Berlin, on Mon 27 February 1933, precisely iv weeks later Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was sworn in equally Chancellor of Deutschland. Marinus van der Lubbe, a Dutch "council communist", was the culprit forth with his communist cell, only Hitler saw the fire as part of the wider communist violence. van der Lubbe said he hoped to spark a revolution in Germany, and Hitler argued that communists would seek to overthrow the German government. He induced President Paul von Hindenburg to issue the Reichstag Fire Decree suspending civil liberties and pursued a "ruthless confrontation" with communist groups and rioters.^[1] This made the fire pivotal in the establishment of Nazi Frg.

The first report of the burn came shortly after 9:00p.m., when a Berlin fire station received an alarm telephone call.^[2] By the fourth dimension constabulary and firefighters arrived, the Bedchamber of Deputies (the lower house) was engulfed in flames. The police conducted a thorough search inside the edifice and establish Van der Lubbe, who was arrested.

After the Fire Decree was issued, the Nazi-controlled police made mass arrests of communists, including all of the communist Reichstag delegates. This severely crippled communist participation in the five March elections. Subsequently the iv March elections, the absence of the communists gave the Nazi Party a majority in the Reichstag, profoundly assisting the Nazi seizure of total power.

As role of the try to blame the Burn down on the communists, on 9 March the Prussian state law arrested Bulgarians Georgi Dimitrov, Vasil Tanev, and Blagoy Popov, who were known Comintern operatives (though the police did not know it, Dimitrov was head of all Comintern operations in Western Europe). Ernst Torgler, head of the Communist Party, had surrendered himself to police on 28 February.

They and Van Der Lubbe were the defendants in the Leipzig Trial. All four communists were acquitted. The responsibleness for the Reichstag fire remains a topic of debate and enquiry.^{[3] [four]} The Nazis accused the Comintern of the act. However, some historians believe, based on archive evidence, that the arson had been planned and ordered by the Nazis as a false flag operation.^{[5] [six]} The building remained in its damaged state until it was partially repaired from 1961 to 1964 and completely restored from 1995 to 1999. In 2008, Germany posthumously pardoned Van der Lubbe under a police force introduced in 1998 to elevator unjust verdicts dating from the Nazi era.

Prelude [edit]

Subsequently the Nov 1932 German language federal ballot, the Nazi Political party had a plurality, not a bulk; the communists posted gains.^[7] Adolf Hitler was sworn in every bit Chancellor and head of the coalition government on 30 January 1933.^[8] As chancellor, Hitler asked President Paul von Hindenburg to dissolve the Reichstag and telephone call for a new parliamentary election. The date fix for the elections was five March 1933.^[ix]

Hitler hoped to cancel democracy in a more than or less legal style, past passing the Enabling Act. The Enabling Human action was a special law that gave the Chancellor the power to laissez passer laws by decree, without the interest of the Reichstag. These special powers would remain in effect for four years, afterwards which fourth dimension they were eligible to be renewed. Under the Weimar Constitution, the President could rule by decree in times of emergency using Commodity 48.^[10]

During the election entrada, the Nazis declared that Germany was on the verge of a communist revolution and that the only way to stop the communists was to put the Nazis securely in power. The bulletin of the campaign was unproblematic: increase the number of Nazi seats.^[11]

Fire [edit]

Soon later on ninep.m. on 27 February 1933, the Reichstag building was reported as on fire, and firefighters were dispatched. Despite their efforts, most of the building was gutted.^[12] By 11:30 pm, the fire was put out. The firefighters and police inspected the ruins and constitute 20 bundles of flammable material (firelighters) unburned lying about. At the time the burn down was reported, Hitler was having dinner with Joseph Goebbels at Goebbels' apartment in Berlin. When Goebbels received an urgent phone call informing him of the fire, he regarded it every bit a "tall tale" at first and hung up. Only after the second call did he study the news to Hitler.^[xiii] Both left Goebbels' apartment and arrived by car at the Reichstag, just as the fire was being put out. They were met at the site past Hermann Göring, Interior Minister of Prussia, who told Hitler, "This is communist outrage! One of the communist culprits has been arrested." Hitler called the fire a "sign from God" and claimed it was a indicate meant to marker the beginning of a communist defection. The next twenty-four hour period, the Prussian Press Service reported that "this act of incendiarism is the most monstrous act of terrorism carried out by Bolshevism in Germany". The Vossische Zeitung newspaper warned its readers that "the government is of the stance that the situation is such that a danger to the land and nation existed and notwithstanding exists".^[14]

Walter Gempp was head of the Berlin fire department at the time of the Reichstag fire on 27 Feb 1933, personally directing the operations at the incident.^[15] On 25 March he was dismissed for presenting evidence that suggested Nazi involvement in the fire.^[xvi] Gempp asserted that there had been a filibuster in notifying the fire brigade and that he had been forbidden from making total use of the resources at his disposal. In 1937, Gempp was arrested for corruption of office. Despite his appeal, he was imprisoned. Gempp was strangled and killed in prison on 2 May 1939.^[17]

Political consequences [edit]

The day later on the fire, at Hitler's request, President Hindenburg signed the Reichstag Burn down Prescript into law by using Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution. The Reichstag Fire Prescript suspended most civil liberties in Frg, including habeas corpus, liberty of expression, freedom of the press, the right of free association and public associates, and the secrecy of the post and phone.^[18] These rights were not reinstated during Nazi reign. The decree was used by the Nazis to ban publications not considered "friendly" to the Nazi cause. Despite the fact that Marinus van der Lubbe claimed to have acted lone in the Reichstag burn, Hitler, after having obtained his emergency powers, announced that it was the start of a wider communist effort to take over Deutschland. Nazi Party newspapers then published this fabricated "news".^[18] This sent the German population into a panic and isolated the communists farther among the civilians; additionally, thousands of communists were imprisoned in the days following the fire (including leaders of the Communist Party of Germany) on the accuse that the Party was preparing to stage a putsch. Speaking to Rudolph Diels about communists during the Reichstag fire, Hitler said "These sub-humans do non sympathize how the people stand at our side. In their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come up, of course they hear aught of the cheering of the masses."^[19] With communist electoral participation as well suppressed (the communists previously polled 17% of the vote), the Nazis were able to increment their share of the vote in the 5 March 1933 Reichstag elections from 33% to 44%.^[20] This gave the Nazis and their allies, the German National People's Party (who won viii% of the vote), a majority of 52% in the Reichstag.^[20]

While the Nazis emerged with a majority, they fell short of their goal, which was to win 50–55% of the vote that yr.^[20] The Nazis thought that this would make it difficult to achieve their next goal, passage of the Enabling Act giving Hitler the right to rule past decree, which required a two-thirds majority.^[20] Even so, several important factors weighed in the Nazis' favour, mainly the continued suppression of the Communist Party and the Nazis' power to capitalize on national security concerns. Moreover, some deputies of the Social Democratic Party (the simply party that would vote against the Enabling Act) were prevented from taking their seats in the Reichstag, due to arrests and intimidation by the Nazi SA. Equally a upshot, the Social Autonomous Political party would exist under-represented in the final vote tally. The Enabling Act passed hands on 23 March 1933, with the support of the right-wing German language National People's Political party, the Centre Political party, and several fragmented middle-grade parties. The mensurate went into strength on 24 March, effectively making Hitler dictator of Deutschland.^[21]

The Kroll Opera Business firm, sitting across the Königsplatz from the burned-out Reichstag building, functioned equally the Reichstag'due south venue for the remaining 12 years of the Third Reich's existence.^[22]

Trial [edit]

In July 1933, Marinus van der Lubbe, Ernst Torgler, Georgi Dimitrov, Blagoi Popov, and Vasil Tanev were indicted on charges of setting the Reichstag on fire. From 21 September to 23 Dec 1933, the Leipzig Trial took place and was presided over by judges from the German Supreme Courtroom, the Reichsgericht. This was Federal republic of germany's highest court. The presiding estimate was Judge Dr. Wilhelm Bünger of the Fourth Criminal Court of the Fourth Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court.^[23] The accused were charged with arson and with attempting to overthrow the government.^[24]

The Leipzig Trial was widely publicized and was broadcast on the radio. It was expected that the court would find the communists guilty on all counts. The trial began at viii:45 on the morning of 21 September, with Van der Lubbe testifying. Van der Lubbe's testimony was very difficult to follow as he spoke of losing his sight in one heart and wandering around Europe as a out-of-stater and that he had been a member of the Dutch Communist Party, which he quit in 1931, merely nonetheless considered himself a communist. Georgi Dimitrov began his testimony on the third day of the trial. He gave up his right to a court-appointed lawyer and defended himself successfully. When warned by Judge Bünger to carry himself in court, Dimitrov stated: "Herr President, if you were a man equally innocent every bit myself and you had passed vii months in prison, five of them in chains night and day, yous would sympathize it if one perhaps becomes a trivial strained." During the course of his defence, Dimitrov claimed that the organizers of the burn down were senior members of the Nazi Party and frequently verbally clashed with Göring at the trial. The high betoken of the trial occurred on 4 November 1933, when Göring took the stand and was cross-examined by Dimitrov.^[25] The following exchange took place:

Dimitrov: Herr Prime Minister Göring stated on February 28 that, when arrested, the "Dutch Communist Van der Lubbe had on his person his passport and a membership card of the Communist Party". From whom was this information taken?

Göring: The police search all common criminals, and report the result to me.

Dimitrov: The 3 officials who arrested and examined Van der Lubbe all agreed that no membership carte of the Communist Political party was institute on him. I should similar to know where the report that such a carte had been found came from.

Göring: I was told past an official. Things which were reported to me on the night of the fire...could not exist tested or proven. The report was fabricated to me past a responsible official, and was accepted every bit a fact, and as it could non exist tested immediately it was announced as a fact. When I issued the first study to the printing on the morning afterward the burn down the interrogation of Van der Lubbe had non been concluded. In any instance I do not see that anyone has whatever right to complain because information technology seems proved in this trial that Van der Lubbe had no such bill of fare on him.

Dimitrov: I would like to ask the Government minister of the Interior what steps he took to make sure that Van der Lubbe'due south road to Hennigsdorf, his stay and his meetings with other people there were investigated past the police force to assist them in tracking down Van der Lubbe's accomplices?

Göring: As I am not an official myself, but a responsible Minister it was not of import that I should trouble myself with such piddling, small matters. It was my chore to betrayal the Political party, and the mentality, which was responsible for the offense.

Dimitrov: Is the Reichsminister aware of the fact that those that possess this declared criminal mentality today control the destiny of a sixth part of the world – the Soviet Union?

Göring: I don't care what happens in Russia! I know that the Russians pay with bills, and I should prefer to know that their bills are paid! I care near the Communist Political party here in Germany and about Communist crooks who come here to gear up the Reichstag on burn!

Dimitrov: This criminal mentality rules the Soviet Union, the greatest and best country in the earth. Is Herr Prime number Minister aware of that?

Göring: I shall tell y'all what the German people already know. They know that you are behaving in a disgraceful way! They know that y'all are a Communist crook who came to Federal republic of germany to set the Reichstag on fire! In my eyes yous are nothing, but a scoundrel, a crook who belongs on the gallows!".^[26]

In his verdict, Judge Bünger was conscientious to underline his belief that there had in fact been a communist conspiracy to burn down the Reichstag, but declared, with the exception of Van der Lubbe, there was bereft evidence to connect the accused to the burn down or the alleged conspiracy. The Bulgarians were acquitted and were expelled to the Soviet Matrimony.^[24] Only Van der Lubbe was establish guilty and sentenced to decease.^[27] Torgler was also acquitted and survived the war.^[24]

The outcome of this trial acquired Hitler to remove treason trials from the regular courts. He decreed that henceforth treason—among many other offenses—would only be tried by a newly established People'due south Court (Volksgerichtshof).^[24] The People'southward Court later became associated with the number of death sentences it handed down, including those following the 1944 attempt to assassinate Hitler, which were presided over by and then Judge-President Roland Freisler.^[28]

Execution of Van der Lubbe [edit]

At his trial, Van der Lubbe was constitute guilty and sentenced to death. He was beheaded by guillotine (the customary form of execution in Saxony at the time) on ten January 1934, 3 days earlier his 25th birthday. The Nazis alleged that Van der Lubbe was part of a communist conspiracy to burn down downwards the Reichstag and seize power, while the communists alleged that Van der Lubbe was part of the Nazi conspiracy to arraign the crime on them. Van der Lubbe, for his part, maintained that he acted alone to protest the condition of the German working form.^[29]

In 1967, a court in West Berlin overturned the 1933 verdict, and posthumously changed Van der Lubbe'due south sentence to eight years in prison. In 1980, another court overturned the verdict, just was overruled. In 1981, a West German court posthumously overturned Van der Lubbe's 1933 confidence and found him not guilty by reason of insanity. This ruling was subsequently overturned. However, in Jan 2008, he was pardoned nether a 1998 law for the crime on the grounds that anyone convicted under Nazi Germany is officially non guilty. The law allows pardons for people bedevilled of crimes under the Nazis, based on the idea that the laws of Nazi Germany "went confronting the basic ideas of justice".^[27]

Dispute well-nigh Van der Lubbe's role [edit]

According to historian Ian Kershaw, by 1998, nearly all historians agreed that Van der Lubbe had set the Reichstag on burn down, that he had acted alone, and that the incident was merely a stroke of good luck for the Nazis.^[30] However, in the days post-obit the incident, major newspapers in the Us and London were immediately sceptical of the good fortune of the Nazis in finding a communist scapegoat.^{[31] [32]}

It has been declared that the thought that Van der Lubbe was a "one-half-wit" or "mentally disturbed" was propaganda spread by the Dutch Communist Party, to distance itself from an insurrectionist antifascist, who had once been a member.^[33] John Gunther, who covered the trial, described Van der Lubbe as "an obvious victim of manic-depressive psychosis" and said that the Nazis would not take chosen "an agent and then inept and witless". Citing a letter that was allegedly written by Karl Ernst earlier his death during the Night of Long Knives, Gunther believed that Nazis, who heard Van der Lubbe boast of planning to attack the Reichstag, started a 2nd simultaneous fire they blamed on him.^[34] Hans Mommsen concluded that the Nazi leadership was in a state of panic on the night of the Reichstag fire, and seemed to regard the fire as confirmation that a communist revolution was as imminent every bit they had claimed.^[35]

The British reporter, Sefton Delmer, criticised for being a Nazi sympathiser at the time, witnessed that night's events. He reported Hitler arriving at the Reichstag, appearing uncertain how information technology began, and concerned that a communist coup was virtually to exist launched. Delmer viewed Van der Lubbe as being solely responsible, but that the Nazis sought to make information technology appear to be a "communist gang" that set the fire. On the other mitt, the communists sought to brand it announced that Van der Lubbe was working for the Nazis, so each side constructed a conspiracy theory in which the other was the villain.^[36]

In private, Hitler said of the chairman of the Communist Party, Ernst Torgler: "I'm convinced he was responsible for the burning of the Reichstag, merely I tin can't prove information technology".^[37]

In 1960, Fritz Tobias, a West German SPD public servant and part-time historian, published a serial of articles in Der Spiegel, subsequently turned into a book, in which he argued that Vаn der Lubbe had acted alone.^{[38] [39]} Tobias showed that Van der Lubbe was a pyromaniac, with a long history of burning down buildings or attempting to burn them downward. Tobias established that Van der Lubbe had committed a number of arson attacks on buildings in the days prior to 27 February.

In March 1973, the Swiss historian Walter Hofer organized a conference intended to rebut the claims fabricated past Tobias. At the conference, Hofer claimed to have plant evidence that some of the detectives who investigated the fire had been Nazis. Mommsen commented on Hofer's claims by stating: "Professor Hofer's rather helpless statement that the accomplices of Van der Lubbe 'could only take been Nazis' is tacit admission that the committee did not really obtain any positive show in regard to the alleged accomplices' identity". Mommsen likewise had a theory supporting Hofer, which was suppressed for political reasons, an act that he admitted was a serious breach of ethics.^[xl]

In 2014, Richard J. Evans summarized: "the bulk of the historical profession [agrees] that Tobias was correct, and that the sole author of the Reichstag fire was Marinus van der Lubbe".^[39]

Historian Benjamin Carter Hett laments that "Today the overwhelming consensus among historians who specialize in Nazi Frg remains that Marinus van der Lubbe burned the Reichstag all past himself.^[41] Hett argues that Tobias' analysis is fundamentally flawed. Tobias' undertook his study when tasked to defend Westward German police force officials who had investigated the initial fire as SS members. In doing so, Tobias disregarded whatever data from persons who had been targeted past the Nazi regime every bit biased while accepting the testimony of former SS members as objective, even though their post-war testimony is clearly contradicted past records from 1933. Furthermore, Hett shows that Tobias used his access to hugger-mugger archives to coerce historians with opposing views by threatening to reveal compromising personal information. Hett argues that the most recent testify makes articulate that the fire could not have been the work of an private and Hett feels at that place is far more bear witness of Nazi collaboration than there is of a communist plot.^[42]

1955 testimony of SA member Hans-Martin Lennings [edit]

In July 2019, more than 80 years afterwards the event, Germany's Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung and the RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland published a 1955 affirmation, uncovered in some papers of Fritz Tobias, which were constitute in the archives of the Amtsgericht (courtroom) in Hannover. The affidavit past Hans-Martin Lennings (1904–1962), a former member of the Nazis' paramilitary SA unit, stated that on the night of the fire, he and his SA group collection Van der Lubbe from an infirmary to the Reichstag, where they noticed "a strange scent of burning and in that location were clouds of smoke billowing through the rooms". The statement suggests the fire had already started when they arrived and that the SA played a role in the arson.^[43]

Lennings, who died in 1962, further stated in his business relationship that he and other members of his squad had protested the arrest of Van der Lubbe, "because we were convinced that Van der Lubbe could not possibly have been the arsonist, because according to our observation, the Reichstag had already been burning when we dropped him off there". He claimed he and the other witnesses were detained and forced to sign a paper that denied any knowledge of the incident. Later, virtually all of those with knowledge of the Reichstag fire were executed. Lennings said that he had been warned and escaped to Czechoslovakia.^[44]

Lennings had asked that his account exist certified in 1955, in the event the Reichstag fire case ever returned to trial.^{[45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53]}

The uncovering of Lennings'due south affidavit led to the speculation that Tobias had ignored it to protect his unmarried perpetrator theory on the arson, and to protect the post-war career of quondam Nazis.^[54] It also led to more sober speculation almost whether unknown or forgotten documents might still be subconscious in German language archives, and which might exist valuable and revealing historical sources, especially on the Nazi authorities.^[55]

[edit]

In The Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich, William L. Shirer wrote that at the Nuremberg Trials, General Franz Halder stated in an affidavit that Hermann Göring had boasted about setting the fire: "On the occasion of a lunch on the Führer's birthday in 1943, the people around the Führer turned the conversation to the Reichstag building and its artistic value. I heard with my own ears how Göring bankrupt into the conversation and shouted: 'The just i who really knows nigh the Reichstag building is I, for I set fire to it.' And saying this he slapped his thigh".^[56] Under cross-examination at the Nuremberg trial in 1945 and 1946, Halder's affidavit was read to Göring, who denied any interest in the fire.^{[57] : 433}

"Countertrial" organised past the German Communist Party [edit]

During the summer of 1933, a mock countertrial was organised in London by a grouping of lawyers, democrats and other anti-Nazis under the aegis of High german communist émigrés. The chairman of the mock trial was British Labour Party barrister D. Northward. Pritt, and the main organiser was the KPD propaganda chief Willi Münzenberg. The other "judges" were Piet Vermeylen of Belgium, George Branting of Sweden, Vincent de Moro-Giafferi and Gaston Bergery of France, Betsy Bakker-Nort, a lawyer and member of parliament of holland for the progressive liberal party Gratis-thinking Autonomous League, Vald Hvidt of Denmark, and Arthur Garfield Hays of the United States.^[58]

The mock trial began 21 September 1933. Information technology lasted one calendar week and concluded with the conclusion that the defendants were innocent and the true initiators of the burn were to exist constitute amid the leading Nazi Political party elite. The countertrial received much media attending, and Sir Stafford Cripps delivered the opening speech. Göring was found guilty at the mock trial, which served as a workshop that tested all possible scenarios, and all speeches of the defendants had been prepared. Well-nigh of the "judges", such as Hays and Moro-Giafferi, complained that the atmosphere at the "countertrial" was more similar a evidence trial, with Münzenberg constantly applying force per unit area backside the scenes on the "judges" to deliver the "right" verdict, without any regard for the truth. One of the "witnesses", a supposed SA man, appeared in court wearing a mask and claimed that information technology was the SA that had really set the fire. In fact, the "SA man" was Albert Norden, the editor of the German communist newspaper Rote Fahne. Some other masked witness, whom Hays described equally "not very reliable", claimed that Van der Lubbe was a drug aficionado and a homosexual, who was the lover of Ernst Röhm and a Nazi dupe. When the lawyer for Ernst Torgler asked the mock trial organisers to plough over the "show" that exonerated his client, Münzenberg refused the asking because he lacked any "evidence" to exonerate or to convict anyone of the crime.^[59]

The countertrial was an enormously successful publicity stunt for the German language communists. Münzenberg followed the triumph with another by writing, under his name, the bestselling The Brown Volume of the Reichstag Fire and Hitler Terror, an exposé of what Münzenberg alleged to be the Nazi conspiracy to burn the Reichstag and to arraign the act on the communists. (As with all of Münzenberg'south other books, the real author was one of his aides: in this case, the Czechoslovak communist Otto Katz.^[60]) The success of The Brown Book was followed by another, published in 1934, dealing with the trial.^[61]

Encounter also [edit]

• A Lesson in History
• List of attacks on legislatures

References [edit]

Notes [edit]

1. ^ Holborn, Hajo (1972). Republic to Reich: The Making of the Nazi Revolution; 10 Essays. Pantheon Books. p. 182. ISBN978-0-394-47122-8.
2. ^ Tobias, The Reichstag Fire, p. 26–28.
3. ^ "The Reichstag Burn down". Holocaust Encyclopedia. United states Holocaust Memorial Museum. Archived from the original on 31 July 2018. Retrieved 12 Baronial 2013.
4. ^ DW Staff (27 February 2008). "75 Years Ago, Reichstag Fire Sped Hitler's Power Grab". Deutsche Welle. Archived from the original on 5 May 2015. Retrieved 12 Baronial 2013.
5. ^ Paterson, Tony (fifteen April 2001). "Historians find 'proof' that Nazis burnt Reichstag". The Sunday Telegraph. Archived from the original on nine March 2018. Retrieved 5 April 2018.
6. ^ Shirer, William (2011). The Rising and Fall of the Third Reich. Simon and Schuster. p. 192. There is enough prove to establish beyond a reasonable dubiousness that it was the Nazis who planned the arson and carried it out for their own political ends.
7. ^ Evans, p. 299.
8. ^ Evans, p. 307.
9. ^ Evans, p. 321.
10. ^ Botwinick, Rita (2004). A History of The Holocaust: From Credo to Annihilation . New Jersey: Peason. pp. ninety–92.
11. ^ Evans, p. 321–327.
12. ^ Zenter, Christian; Bedurftig, Friedemann, eds. (1997). "Reichstag fire". The Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Translated by Hackett, Amy. New York: Da Capo Press. p. 786. ISBN0-306-80793-ix.
13. ^ Schirer, William L. (1991). The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. London: Mandarin. pp. 191–192. ISBN0-7493-0697-1.
14. ^ Snyder (1976), pp. 286–287.
15. ^ Pinkney, David H. (1964). A Festschrift for Frederick B. Artz . Duke University Press. pp. 194.
16. ^ Delp, Alfred (2006). Advent of the heart: seasonal sermons and prison writings, 1941–1944. Ignatius Press. p. 177.
17. ^ Lentz, Harris M. (1988). Assassinations and executions: an encyclopedia of political violence, 1865–1986 . McFarland. pp. 74.
18. ^ ^{a b} Koonz (2003), p. 33.
19. ^ Gellately, Robert (2001). Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany . Oxford University Press. p. 18. ISBN978-0-xix-160452-2.
20. ^ ^{a b c d} Koonz (2003), p. 36.
21. ^ Zenter, Christian; Bedurftig, Friedemann, eds. (1997). "Enabling Law". The Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. Translated by Hackett, Amy. New York: Da Capo Press. p. 237. ISBN0-306-80793-nine.
22. ^ Zenter, Christian; Bedurftig, Friedemann, eds. (1997). "Reichstag". The Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. Translated by Hackett, Amy. New York: Da Capo Printing. p. 785. ISBN0-306-80793-9.
23. ^ Snyder (1976), p. 288.
24. ^ ^{a b c d} Evans, Richard J. (2005). The Third Reich in Ability. New York: Penguin. pp. 67–69. ISBN1-59420-074-two.
25. ^ Snyder (1976), pp. 288–289.
26. ^ Snyder (1976), p. 289.
27. ^ ^{a b} Connolly, Kate (12 January 2008). "75 years on, executed Reichstag arsonist finally wins pardon". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved 1 May 2008.
28. ^ Zenter, Christian; Bedurftig, Friedemann, eds. (1997). "Volk Court". The Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Translated past Hackett, Amy. New York: Da Capo Printing. pp. 999=1000. ISBN0-306-80793-9.
29. ^ biography past Martin Schouten "Rinus van der Lubbe 1909–1934" (1989)
30. ^ Kershaw (1998), pp. 456–458, 731–732.
31. ^ "Caesar or Fretfulness". The New York Times. 2 March 1933.
32. ^ "LONDON TIMES FEARS MORE TERROR IN BERLIN; Stresses That General Massacre of Nazis' Political Opponents Is Expected in Germany". timesmachine.nytimes.com.
33. ^ "Dutch Council Communism and Van der Lubbe". Archived from the original on 11 Jan 2021. Retrieved 24 February 2007.
34. ^ Gunther, John (1940). Inside Europe. New York: Harper & Brothers. pp. 48–49.
35. ^ Mommsen (1972), p. 144.
36. ^ "Sefton Delmer's account of the Reichstag fire". Archived from the original on 5 Dec 2006.
37. ^ Hitler, Adolf (2008). Hitler'due south Table Talk, 1941–1944. His Private Conversations. New York: Enigma Books. p. 121.
38. ^ "The Arsonist; THE REICHSTAG Burn down. By Fritz Tobias. Translated by Arnold J. Pomerans from the German, "Der Reichstagsbrand." Introduction by A. J. P. Taylor. Illustrated. 348 pp. riew York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. $v.95. (Published 1964)". The New York Times. 1 March 1964. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
39. ^ ^{a b} Evans, Richard J. (7 May 2014). "The Conspiracists". London Review of Books. Vol. 36, no. nine. ISSN 0260-9592. Retrieved 26 January 2021.
40. ^ Snyder (1976), pp. 287–288.
41. ^ Hett, Benjamin Carter (2014). Burning the Reichstag: An Investigation into the Third Reich's Enduring Mystery. p. 315.
42. ^ Hett, "This Story Is well-nigh Something Cardinal": Nazi Criminals, History, Memory, and the Reichstag Fire, Central European History, Vol. No. two., pp. 199-214.
43. ^ "Dokument in Hannover belegt: SA-Isle of man will beim Reichstagsbrand 1933 geholfen haben". Haz.de. 26 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved ane September 2019.
44. ^ "Dokument Aufgetaucht – SA-Mann will an Reichstagsbrand beteiligt gewesen sein" (in High german). Frankfurter Rundschau. 26 July 2019. Archived from the original on xi Jan 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
45. ^ Conrad von Meding (26 July 2019). "Neues zum Reichstagsbrand – Die "Legende" vom Einzeltäter wackelt erheblich". Deutschlandfunkkultur.de. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
46. ^ Kellerhoff, Sven Felix (26 July 2019). "Was die neue Eidesstattliche Erklärung eines SA-Manns bedeutet". Die Welt. Welt.de. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
47. ^ Soukup, Uwe (27 July 2019). "Neue Indizien Aufgetaucht: Haben die Nazis den Reichstag abgefackelt?". Faz.net. Archived from the original on eleven Jan 2021. Retrieved ane September 2019.
48. ^ "Neues Dokument zum Reichstagbrand 1933 – Waren dice Nazis doch die Brandstifter? – Ein neues Dokument deutet auf eine Beteiligung der Nazis am Reichstagsbrand 1933 hin – und entlastet den zum Tode verurteilten Kommunisten van der Lubbe" (in German). Tagesspiegel.de. 27 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
49. ^ Frederike Müller (27 July 2019). "Ex-Nazi testimony sparks fresh mystery over 1933 Reichstag burn down". Dw.com. Archived from the original on eleven January 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
50. ^ "Statement Appeals Marinus van der Lubbe Free". Vaaju.com. 26 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved one September 2019.
51. ^ "New Witness Account of 1933 Reichstag Fire Reignites Doubt Over Nazi Narrative – Nazi SA member recounted that Dutch communist Marinus van der Lubbe actually arrived at the Reichstag only later on the blaze started". Haaretz.com. 26 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
52. ^ "Newly uncovered testimony casts incertitude on Nazi Reichstag fire claims". The Times of State of israel. AFP. 27 July 2019. Archived from the original on 28 July 2019. Retrieved 28 July 2019.
53. ^ Winston, Alex (28 July 2019). "Newly constitute business relationship of 1933 Reichstag fire casts doubt on Nazi narrative". The Jerusalem Postal service. Archived from the original on xi January 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2019.
54. ^ "Reichstagsbrand – der Erklärung von SA-Mann legt NS-Beteiligung nahe" (in German language). Ksta.de. 26 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 Jan 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2019.
55. ^ "Wie konnte dice Akte zum Reichstagsbrand vergessen werden?". Haz.de. 27 July 2019. Archived from the original on 11 January 2021. Retrieved ane September 2019.
56. ^ Shirer, William (1959). The Rise and Autumn of the Third Reich. New York: Touchstone. p. 193.
57. ^ "Nuremberg Trial Proceedings". 18 March 1946. Volume nine. Archived from the original on 15 April 2012. Retrieved 4 May 2011.
58. ^ Tobias, The Reichstag Fire, p. 120.
59. ^ Tobias, The Reichstag Fire, p. 122–126.
60. ^ Costello, John (1988). Mask of Treachery . London: William Collins & Sons. p. 296.
61. ^ Zenter, Christian; Bedurftig, Friedemann, eds. (1997). "Dark-brown Book". The Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Translated past Hackett, Amy. New York: Da Capo Printing. p. 116. ISBN0-306-80793-nine.

Bibliography [edit]

• Bahar, Alexander & Kugel, Wilfried (2001). Der Reichstagbrand (in High german) (q ed.).
• Evans, Richard J. (2004). The Coming of the Tertiary Reich. New York: Penguin. ISBNi-59420-004-one.
• Hett, Benjamin Carter (2014). Called-for the Reichstag: An Investigation into the Third Reich's Enduring Mystery. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-932232-9.
• Hett, Benjamin Carter (2015). "This Story Is about Something Fundamental: Nazi Criminals, History, Memory, and the Reichstag Fire". Cardinal European History. 48 (2): 199–224. doi:10.1017/S0008938915000345. JSTOR 43965146. S2CID 146728286.
• Kershaw, Ian (1998). Hitler, 1889–1936: Hubris. London: Allen Lane.
• Koonz, Claudia (2003). The Nazi Censor . Belknap Press. p. 33. ISBN0-674-01172-4.
• Mommsen, Hans (1972). "The Reichstag Burn down and Its Political Consequences". In Holborn, Hajo (ed.). Republic to Reich The Making of the Nazi Revolution. New York: Pantheon Books. pp. 129–222. Originally published as: Mommsen, Hans (1964). "Der Reichstagsbrand und seine politischen Folgen" [The Reichstag fire and its political consequences]. Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte (in German). 12 (4): 351–413. JSTOR 30197002.
• Nathans, Eli (2017). "The Reichstag Burn and the Politics of History". Histoire sociale/Social history. 50 (101): 171–176. doi:10.1353/his.2017.0009. S2CID 149123363.
• Snyder, Louis (1976). Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Taylor, A. J. P. (August 1960). "Who Burned the Reichstag?: The Story of a Legend". History Today. 10 (8): 515–522.
• Tobias, Fritz (1964). The Reichstag Fire. New York: Putnam.

External links [edit]

• Review of Bahar and Kugel volume
• Van der Lubbe exonerated by German courts Archived xiii October 2009 at the Wayback Automobile
• German court overturns Lubbe decision
• Documentary about Reichstag burn and Marinus van der Lubbe
• Newsreel footage from UK about the fire
• The Conspiracists at London Review of Books
• Review of Hett book
• The Brown Book of the Hitler Terror and the Burning of the Reichstag A HathiTrust full text of the US edition held by the University of Michigan: Alfred A Knopf Inc, NY, 1933.

morganmilloon.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

Share this post