Talk:Soviet War Memorial (Tiergarten)

Comment

I hope my additions (which are mostly from memory) are correct, feel free to edit out errors. It would be good if someone could provide a translation of the inscription. Andreas 14:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I am getting it translated. Adam 01:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I am told it means: "Eternal glory to the heroes who fell in battle with the German fascist occupiers for the freedom and independence of the Soviet Union." Adam 02:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - I added that to the description. Andreas 12:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Soviet Guards

The former text reference stated that Soviet guards were routing to and from the memorial "using a side-door of the Brandenburg Gate to get into the western sector at the time of changing of the Guard."

This is incorrect. The memorial stands in Tiergarten district, but Brandenburg Gate stands entirely in the area of Mitte district, which belonged to the Soviet sector. The actual district border which later became first, part the sector border, later, the state border between West-Berlin and the GDR, run about 50 meters westwards from the Gate (in an arched path).

When the sector borders were closed (Berlin Wall), this area was seamlessly closed.The whole building of the Brandenburg Gate was surrounded by the heavily patrolled East German border strip and relatively far (25-50 meters) from the Wall. The Gate, as a grotesque contrast to its name, remained a restricted area and closed, uncrossable in any way, until the fall of the Berlin Wall. After the 13th August, 1961, it was not a crossing point anymore. There was absolutely no crossing, not even for allied military personnel.

There was no point to use any part of the Gate because one would just arrive into the same East German border area, without even approaching the actual border (which lied on the other side of the Wall). There were only a few service/repair "doors" in the Wall (small, slideable concrete panels actually) used by East German border troops to climb out and back (not walk through) to the Western side of the Wall, in order to make repair works. The idea as described by the quoted text is presumably fictional.

The Wall itself stood on East German soil (within the district boundaries of Mitte) and this part of it run totally closed from the river Spree to the next crossing point, Checkpoint Charlie, at the intersection of Zimmerstrasse/Friedrichstrasse.

Soviet military guard units for the memorial used Checkpoint Charlie to enter the Western sectors (American then British), following a strict route, without any stopping, in armored patrol cars. Allied forces could move freely in each others' sectors but they were obliged to check in at allied checkpoints when crossing the sector borders, especially between the Soviet and the Western ones. The area of the memorial was fenced by barbed wire to prevent Soviet guards from defecting.

Therefore, the referred part has been edited out from the article.

Red Army

I believe at the time of the battle the VVS was not an independent arm, it was under control of the Red Army (like the USAAF was at the time). If that is wrong then I will correct the link. I don't think many members of the Soviet navy were involved. :-) Andreas 16:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

"Tomb of the Unknown Rapist"

The monument has often been referred to as the Grabmal des unbekannten Vergewaltigers and varians thereof in reference to the behavior of the Red Army. [1] I'm just wondering whether it would be a good idea to mention this.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 16:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I have heard that quib too. Not sure if it qualifies under Wikipedia guidelines (original research and all that), and I am sure a lot of people would get very upset if it got entered. Andreas 16:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The Telegraph article cited doesn't say which Soviet memorial is called "Tomb of the Unknown Rapist." It may be a reference to the Treptower Park memorial, which is also a cemetery. No-one is buried at the Tiergarten memorial. Adam 00:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've always heard it in reference to the Tiergarten one (as I live in Berlin, I did not learn this from the Telegraph, I merely provided the link as an example). I suppose it doesn't matter that no one is buried there, as the phrase is, after all, a joke. I suppose it's possible that the term may have first arisen with the Treptower Park memorial, but as saying this in East Berlin would land you in prison, but would not in West Berlin, the term might have come to mean the Tiergarten one. The Soviet guards at the memorial and the Soviet processions to it from behind the Wall weren't greeted terribly warmly by West Berliners.  ProhibitOnions  ^(T) 00:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

That is all fair comment, but here, here and here are sources which refer specifically to East Berlin or Treptower Park. I can't find a reference which links specifically to Tiergarten. ("Grabmal des unbekannten Vergewaltigers" gets no Google hits at all). PS what have you got against onions? Adam 01:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I guess both memorials must have gone by that name. By the way, I read that there are soviet soldier graves in the background of the memorial, i.e. not under the statue, but either in the monument behind, or in th park behind that. (My German is a bit rusty, so I'm not quite sure what was meant by background", any idea how many they are?--Stor stark7 ^Talk 19:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

This is the monument that was known as the "Tomb of the Unknown Rapist." There is no "unknown" buried there, but the idea was taken from the US Tomb of the Unknown in Washington. The term, while not as commonly used today, is still known in the city, and during my recent research for a book about Berlin the subject came up more than once. At least twice I heard women old enough to remember speak of it using that term. While I can't speak directly to what Wiki would say about it, the term is historically accurate...and we could cite Douglas Botting In the Ruins of the Reich along with many other sources.

Personally, I would strongly suggest it be included. It is significant historically, and that perception became one of the big influences on the 1946 city election in which the Communists lost badly. It was part of the events that led to the blockade and Luftbrücke in 1948-49. Wood Artist (talk) 06:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

To the conversation above and the recent edit indicating only "some" refer to the monument as such per our Muscovite anon IP friend, the source actually states: "A second memorial, on a slightly smaller scale, is more centrally located in the Tiergarten, incorporating tanks and other heavy weapons, has historically received rather more attention from the local population, attracting the epithet ‘tomb of the unknown rapist’ or ‘tomb of the unknown plunderer’". So, it's not "some", it's simply the locals. The addition of "some" makes it into weaseling. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  14:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

nope, according to the original source it is called so by "ungrateful Berliners" and not locals. WP:WEASEL does not apply here anyway - I suggest reading the example about Middletown, NJ to understand why. Btw, the original source is a travel guide. I am wondering why there are no german language sources - try searching for "unbekannter vergewaltiger", "unbekannten vergewaltigers" and so on. Thus combined with the requirement that exceptional claims require exceptional sources I removed this claim. Pantherskin (talk) 17:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You will note the article, if you have it, includes two citations to Ladd:

• Ladd, B. (1997) The Ghosts of Berlin. Confronting German
  History in the Urban Landscape. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Ladd, B. (2004) The Companion Guide to Berlin. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Companion Guides.

While the latter is a "travel guide", the author, Brian Ladd, is a historian. Per notes at the M.I.T. web site:

About the Speaker

Brian Ladd

Historian and former Fellow of the American Academy in Berlin.

Brian Ladd is an historian and former Fellow of the American Academy in Berlin. He holds a PhD from Yale University, and is the author of The Ghosts of Berlin: Confronting German History in the Urban Landscape (University of Chicago Press, 1998) and Urban Planning and Civic Order in Germany, 1860-1914 (Harvard University Press, 1990), as well as several recent articles on East German urban planning. He is currently completing a documentary film on Berlin.

Link to M.I.T. site here

I trust this addresses your concerns regarding the "original" source, I did check to satisfy myself that the original source cited was reputable in terms of scholarship and not the product of an individual without appropriate credentials. Given this additional background, I'm sure you agree that the passage can be restored. Sources should be verified based on the author, not the writing venue.

   Middletown, NJ? There's obviously a clear connection in your mind to the article here but it's not obvious to me. ?

   Lastly I would just note as an aside that "Denkmal" in my travels is a more common reference for "monument." VЄСRUМВА  ♪  18:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Please address the real issue - the lack of German language sources. Why is it that we have no German language sources for this extraordinary claim? And talk about how scholarly this guy is - the travel guide does not meet scholarly standards due to the lack of references and citations making it clear where Brian Ladd got his information from. It is instructive to compare this case to the case of the television tower in Berlin. Many sources erroneously claim that Berliners call the TV tower "Telespargel", which is factually wrong. So please provide authoritative sources for the claim that this monument is called such by locals (i.e. some locals....you are hopefully not claiming that most or all Berliners call the Ehrenmal the tomb of the unknown rapist or plunderer). Pantherskin (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You indicated the issue was that the original source was a "travel guide," which I had already anticipated and addressed in my response. I fail to understand your basis for disputing Ladd as a historian, as he has been studying Berlin for over a quarter of a century and it is his specialty.

• You did not answer my question on your Middletown NJ comparison.
• Now you bring up another comparison which is not relevant to Ladd's scholarship.

I have been called to task for using non-English sources not easily verifiable in an English-language encyclopedia. And here. where I have provided an English language source that is verifiable as reputable, you contend "it's not clear where Ladd got his information from."

   Please provide a more concrete basis for contending Ladd as a historian and author fails WP:RS. Thanks in advance. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  20:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. If Ladd does indeed use the phrase "ungrateful Berliners" and is not characterizing someone else's statement regarding said Berliners, that can certainly be substituted for "locals" if you could kindly provide the entire sentence/paragraph to check context, as you apparently have Ladd's book. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  20:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

We are not here to blindly follow sources, even if they are written by an historian. As the example with the television tower illustrates that what one source says is not necessarily true (and at least here the "urban legend" that it is called by Berliners Telespargel is at least well documented). Please address the real issue - why is this monument not called Grab des unbekannten Vergewaltigers in German-language sources? Googling for Grabmal or Denkmal des unbekannten Vergewaltiger(s)/Plünderer(s) gives zero hits (ignoring the similar memorial in Vienna). The fact that the German Wikipedia article does not mention this epithet, and there is not even a discussion about it on the talk page strongly suggest that even if this epithet is used by some Berliners it is not widely used and known. Please present other sources, because if not all we can say is that "The Brian Ladd claims that the memorial is called by ungrateful Berliners such and such". Not the rather extraordinary claim that "The memorial is called such and such by locals". A passing mention in a travel guide without inline citations and references is not enough. PS: See google books for the travel guide http://books.google.ge/books?id=9byCO6ZSW0wC&pg=PA84&dq=%22ungrateful+berliners%22#v=onepage&q=%22ungrateful%20berliners%22&f=false Pantherskin (talk) 12:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Widespread German sources (not blogs) are simply not available in general on this topic as there is still a stigma attached to any scholarship regarding any wrongdoing by the Red Army against the Germans/ Nazi Germany. That stigma is only beginning to lift. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  20:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

A case of perfect self-censoring then, not only in scholarly sources but also on blogs or forums. Seems that Germans widely call the memorial "tomb of the unknown rapist", except on the internet. Pantherskin (talk) 20:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually there is a reference of this monument being called the tomb of the unknown rapist or plunderer in a peer-reviewed article. Thus this "nickname" cannot be ignored.

Cochrane, Allan (2006). Making up meanings in a capital city: power, memory and monuments in Berlin. European Urban and Regional Studies, 13(1), pp. 5–24.

http://oro.open.ac.uk/2879/1/Berlinmeaningsfinal.pdf

Citation: “One condition of the departure of Soviet troops from Berlin was that the Soviet war memorials would be maintained, and the Soviet War Memorial in Treptower Park, with its massive Stalinist structures it remains there inviolate, visited by the occasional tourist. A second memorial, on a slightly smaller scale, is more centrally located in the Tiergarten, incorporating tanks and other heavy weapons, has historically received rather more attention from the local population, attracting the epithet ‘tomb of the unknown rapist’ or ‘tomb of the unknown plunderer’.

Tikru8 11:39, 17 October 2011 (EET)

how is it still standing?

The article does not explain one thing. How is it possible that this statue is still standing? It is a symbol of enemy and oppressor that forced half of the country under dictatorship for decades. Red army also raped, robbed and killed civilians like berserk barbarians while they destroyed this city. After nazis were defeated many nazi symbols were destroyed, which was good. Now communism is gone but there are still this kinds of monuments hailing to communist dictatorship and crimes - which is extremely weird because Germany is declared democratic country. They could just demolish this temple of horror, like liberated people usually does in such circumstances, but they do not. Tell me why and also add that to the article. 193.167.40.108 15:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

If you can find sources in mainstream media or books that discuss that issue then sure, it can be added to the article, but we can't really do original speculation ourselves. I would be curious myself though whether it's been an issue in Germany; it has been an issue in nearby Latvia and Estonia (Estonia, for example relocated one Soviet war memorial amidst some controversy). --Delirium 00:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Germany agreed with the USSR at reunification that it would take care of Soviet war graves and memorials (see Two Plus Four Agreement). Even in cases where this does not apply, many communist-era memorials are still standing and are maintained out of historic interest (such as that of Ernst Thälmann in Prenzlauer Berg). ProhibitOnions ^(T) 15:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It is also a practice in other Central European countries which were fighting against the former Soviet Union. For example, in the Hungarian capitol, Budapest, a Soviet Memorial is still standing in the very heart of the city, just in front of the local U.S. Embassy. Though local rightwing extremists repeatedly suggest its removal, the memorial is maintained wisely according to bilateral agreements with Russia which in exchange maintains Hungarian war memorials and military cemeteries located there. Every coin has two faces. --BorderTourist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.56.93.242 (talk) 13:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Amazing how quickly people forget the great sacrifice the Soviet Union made to ensure freedoms enjoyed around the world. Is this merely a sign of the times or surreptitious moves made by right-wing forces to undermine the Soviet war effort? Shakes head sadly... 81.77.73.24 (talk) 00:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)--81.77.73.24 (talk) 00:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It is true that Germany agreed to maintain the Soviet-era monuments throughout the country, including those in Berlin. It is also correct that the Soviet Union was attacked by Hitler's Germany and the Eastern Front was a case of defending their own territory. The war in the East was an ugly affair, not that any war is very nice. When the battle lines reached the original German boundaries, the Soviet troops were reminded they should repay what Germany had done to the motherland. They did so, and Berlin was the lair of the beast so it got some special attention. Many of the Soviet troops had fought from Stalingrad all the way to Berlin, and it was clearly time for payback in their eyes. Stalin said "a bucket of blood for a drop..." and his commissars encouraged the excesses.

Although the monument is very heavy-handed, it was deliberately "in your face" to remind the Germans that they had lost and that the Soviet Union would never allow them to rise again. Probably the only "odd" part is that it was placed in the British occupation zone, although that might well have been intentional too. Stalin fully expected to take over the entire city by pushing the western allies out...which he nearly did. However, it is also true that the Tiergarten was the largest open space where something like this could be easily built, and the red granite used for it came from Hitler's Chancellery, not far away. Seen in the context of the times, it made sense, at least to Stalin. Wood Artist (talk) 06:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The Soviet Union defended itself out of pure self intrest, and what's this about the Soviet Union fighting for freedom? Every single nation within their occupation zone was repressed for 50 years and made to suffer under dicatorship. Why should Germany of all countries, honour and respect an enemy that indiscrimately raped and murdered Poles and Germans. Yes the Germans performed their own war crimes during their stint in Russia, but that does not excuse Russia, as the soldiers themselves believed. If i were German, especially if I was Prussian, I would be completely offended that this statue still exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.153.104 (talk) 03:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Coming from a country outside the west and eastern blocks, I was horrified by the location of this monument! I've seen plenty of similar when traveling in ex-USSR but this seems so "in-your-face". A little digging into the past shows that it was a controversial monument especially during the cold war, thus I added a "Controversy" section to the article. Unfortunately, for Germans, this topic is still somewhat ignored, buried away or tabu. Tikru8 (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2009 (EET)

Resolution to the edit warring

---

---

Locally it is, or has until recent times been, known as: "tomb of the unknown rapist" or "tomb of the unknown plunderer".

---

---

User:Beatle Fab Four, please state your concerns[2], preferably after reviewing the discussion at Talk:Soviet War Memorial (Treptower Park) --Stor stark7 ^Speak 22:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a game, Stor stark7. It's very serious. And you know why I and other editors corrected the article. Once again, see discussion on the Treptower Park. Beatle Fab Four (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The other editor simply pointed to your edit in an unresolved conflict. He triggered way to quick, and his edit was unfounded. As far as I can see my reply is the last thing that's written there (Treptower Park). If you or other editors have any arguments for why the alternative name should not be included in this (Tiergarten) article, then please present them here in an orderly fashion, thank you.--Stor stark7 ^Speak 05:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

References