One of the challenges faced by archive and library professionals is the use of sensitive terminology in catalogues. This language often reflects outdated, inaccurate, offensive or harmful views and terms that were widely accepted in the past, now carry negative connotations. Collections with records pertaining to ethnic, racial or religious minorities usually require particular care and attention.

Dr Gabor Kadar is director of  Yerusha, a pan-European catalogue uniting Jewish material in archives across Europe. He also heads up the Endangered Jewish Community Archives initiative for the Rothschild Foundation Hanadiv Europe. 

Ludwig Neumann shortly after his release from Dachau • Wiener Holocaust Library

In our September workshop, Dr Kadar spoke about one particular aspect of sensitive terminology relevant to cataloguing Jewish and Jewish-related documents, that of Holocaust-related materials.  He gave specific examples of ‘perpetrator language’ and the terms that can replace them when undertaking reparative cataloguing or reviewing descriptions of Holocaust related material… 

What is perpetrator language?

Academic research and public discourse of the Holocaust has, for many decades, been centred on the perpetrators e.g. the Nazis and their accomplices. Therefore, the terminology has relied heavily on the language used by the Nazis, which was created with a specific meaning and purpose. Institutions using this terminology aren’t endorsing the perpetrator’s view but there is a case for moving towards language more sympathetic to the victims.  

What are some examples of problematic terms?

1. Extermination  

• refers to the Nazi plan and campaign to murder every Jew regardless of gender, age, nationality 
• a translation of German words ‘Vernichtung’ or ‘Ausrottung’  
• occasionally used by the Nazis but they were careful to use euphemistic language to cover up their crimes 

This is problematic because:  

• ‘extermination’ evokes a sense of killing more commonly associated with animals or pests rather than human beings  
• Nazi-inspired term conveys the notion that Jews were akin to vermin or pests.  
• may reinforce the Nazi dehumanization of Jews, especially as the Nazis often framed the genocide as a kind of pest control 

Suggested alternative:  

• ‘mass murder’ or ‘complete destruction’ of the victim groups if you want to emphasise the comprehensive nature of the genocidal campaign 

2. Extermination camps 

• these were different to concentration camps 
• sites identified as ‘extermination camps’ were specially dedicated and almost exclusively used for mass murder  

This is problematic because:  

• for historical accuracy, you have to differentiate between sites where murdering people was the exclusive aim (‘extermination camp’) and sites which had other functions as well like concentration camps (incarceration, slave labour, etc.).   
• raises an important discussion about what’s more important: historical accuracy or not using Nazi-inspired terminology 

Suggested alternative:  

• ‘killing centre’ has been adopted and used by many scholars and institutions
• a distinct term used to describe specialised mass murder sites but without using perpetrator language

3. Final solution 

• from the German phrase ‘Endlösung der Judenfrage’ or ‘Final Solution of the Jewish Question’ 
• a euphemism used by Nazis to attempt to cover up their crimes 

This is problematic because:  

• suggests there’s a problem which needs to be solved and mass murder is the solution  
• Nazis often used euphemistic language to cover up their crimes even in their own documents e.g. ‘Special treatment’ (Sonderbehandlung) was the code for execution, murder 

Suggested alternative:  

• use quotation marks when referring to “Final solution” 
• enables you to use the term when it’s necessary for context but creates a distance between your point of the view and that of the Nazis

4. Aryanisation  

• historical term coined and used by the Nazis (Arisierung)  
• in historical literature it carries a specific meaning: the systematic state organised seizure, and plunder of Jewish property by Nazi or other antisemitic authorities and the transfer of these properties to non-Jews. 
• role of the authorities is essential in the definition 

This is problematic because:  

• due to the term’s specific meaning it can be complicated to find an alternative if you want to be historically accurate  
• raises the issue of historical accuracy vs. avoiding using Nazi-inspired language  

Suggested alternative:  

• use quotation marks when using “Aryanisation”  
• if it’s not possible to use quotation marks, make the specific meaning clear e.g. robbery of Jewish property

Juden Raus! board game • The Wiener Holocaust Library

5. Anti-Semitism  

• not a word created by the Nazis but widely used 
• demonstrates shift in thinking about certain terms which have evolved over time 
• traditional way of writing it is hyphenated: anti-Semitism 
• this suggests “Semitism” is a coherent entity or category that can be “anti-ed”  

This is problematic because:  

• it implies there is something called “Semitism” which aligns with the pseudo-science of Nazi worldview  
• “Semitism” was used by the Nazis to indicate what they thought was a group of Jewish racial traits 
• “Semitic” was an adjective referring to what they saw the “inferior Jewish race” 

Suggested alternative:  

• scholars and activists have increasingly come to prefer the one-word spelling: ‘antisemitism’ 
• dropping the hyphen helps distance modern discourse from this pseudo-scientific racial connotation 

A few other thoughts:  

• these recommendations only refer to the content you are creating e.g. catalogue descriptions, key-words, etc.  
• if the original title of a record or in some cases the collection includes a questionable term, those should not be changed as it would compromise the integrity of the record and would be ahistorical 

Refugee children rescued by Rabbi Schonfeld and the CRREC on board the ship bringing them to the UK from Poland, 1946 • Southampton Anglo-Jewish Archives [MS183/1006/1]

Key Points:  

• try to stay away from the direct and non-contextualised use of terminology that was coined, used or inspired by the Nazis 
• when historical accuracy and context require their use, either try to find a viable alternative (killing centre instead of extermination camp) or use quotation marks 
• a note attached to your catalogue and/or thesaurus is always a helpful tool, a reference material that sums up your thinking, policy and practice regarding Holocaust-related terminology 
• finally, it’s always useful to follow acknowledged and respected institutions. So for example in the case of our last example, antisemitism – this is how the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Yad Vashem uses the term and a recommendation was also issued by the International Holocaust Research Alliance. 
• Take a look at reference papers about how you use terms
• Be aware of changes in societal views e.g. Ukrainian spellings following Russian invasion 

The Jewish material found in archives, libraries and museums across the UK present unique challenges to those working with them. The following list of resources is a good place to start if you’re looking for information… 

• USHMM 
• Yad Vashem 
• IHRA – Reflections on Terminology for Holocaust Comparison 

Hidden Treasures online workshops provide professionals working in archives, libraries and museums, the skills and knowledge to understand and care for the Jewish items and material in their collections. You can find more information here.