STATE SECRETARY FOR THE REAL PROTECTOR IN THING AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 298, sig. 109-4/40

Page 19

English Translation

2/9 Prague = Wizhrad . . . 36,4 % Prague = Bubentsch . . , . . 31,0 % (partial counting) Prague = Werschowitz . . It becomes even more clear at Sheidung of the graves of one and deselben Fried= hofes even in wealth categories. An attempt to determine the levels of prosperity of the wearers individually, whereby also the status of the deceased can find consideration, would allow the finest Alnter differences to be found, and in that the already mentioned grosser "objective" methods to be superimposed=. I applied the "subjective" determination to the cemetery in Tabor, of course only in addition to certain objective features (wall graves). The result is the following: the "pretentious" group of graves shows 37.6 o/o, the lower group 16.7 °, the average is 23.8% German families=names. The objection to this procedure is obvious: it is difficult to verify whether a certain deviation in the classification did not consciously or unconsciously predominate in the sense of expectation, or — almost more likely — an over= great fear of deciding in cases of doubt in the meaning of expectation in order not to influence the result in the way of expectation. For this reason, in all other cases, an objective method has been preferred. Depending on the random strength of the alternability of levels of prosperity within the framework of objective characteristics, the results are more or less clear, a b e r a lle point in the same direction of deviations of the welfare levels from the average in the sense of theoretical expectations. The following can be added to the cases mentioned earlier (loc. cit. 1942, p. 492) from recent censuses: Cemetery: Wealth level: I II Birkenberg (Brězové hory) . . . 21 % 13,5 % Blans (Blansko) new cemetery . . 19 0/ 16 % Bene[chau (Benešov) . 20 %/ 11 %/ . . Blans(Blarsko) old cemetery . 21 0/0 17 %/0 Owl (Jílové u Prahy) . 0/0/ 00 16 % Gitschin (Jičin) . 28.6 °% 30.7 °% Holeschau (Holešov) . 24 % 150% Holitz (Holice) . . . 12 0/0 10 0/ 0 Hor,chowiz (Hořovice) . 31 % 0 0/02 Moravian=Budwit (Mor. Budějovice) . 24 % 14 0/0/0 Melnik (Mělnik) • 36.4% 0/00'60 Postupíß (Postupice). . .