Treblinka and Dr Larsen
Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2026 4:42 am
Treblinka, death camps and Dr Larsen
The physical and archival evidence surrounding Treblinka II is complex and warrants careful interpretation. Transport records, including FPLO 587, indicate that deportations to Treblinka were not continuous “en masse” movements but made scheduled stops at labor sites and regional rail hubs. This reflects the logistical realities of wartime rail operations rather than a single, uninterrupted transit.
Treblinka comprised both a labor camp (Treblinka I) and an extermination site (Treblinka II). Testimony from local civilians, such as Marian Olszuk from Wólka Okrąglik, confirms that both camps were visible from nearby civilian areas and that interactions between guards, prisoners, and locals were common. Non-invasive archaeological surveys, including ground-penetrating radar led by Caroline Sturdy Colls, have identified subsurface anomalies interpreted as graves or structural features. However, post-war disturbances — including Red Army engineering, bomb craters, and terrain modification — complicate interpretation and introduce uncertainty into survey results.
It is important to note that Dr. Charles Larson, a U.S. forensic pathologist, only had access to camps liberated by Western Allies, such as Dachau and Buchenwald. He did not examine camps in occupied Poland like Treblinka or Auschwitz, which were liberated by the Red Army and lay in Soviet-controlled areas. His findings about disease and starvation therefore cannot be generalized to the extermination camps in the East.
Finally, while Polish and Soviet Extraordinary Commissions produced reports on German war crimes, some of these bodies — for example in Katyn, Kurapaty, and Vilnytsia — operated under political pressure and sometimes misattributed responsibility. Their findings should be cross-referenced with German records, survivor and perpetrator testimony, and independent research to build a reliable historical understanding.
Taken together, these factors highlight the need for careful, methodical investigation using multiple sources to reconcile transport schedules, physical evidence, and archival documentation. This approach maintains historical accuracy while acknowledging logistical and interpretive complexities.
Scope of Larson’s work
Charles Larson conducted autopsies only at Western-liberated camps (Dachau, Buchenwald, Mauthausen).
He literally could not see the camps in occupied Poland (Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek), which were under Soviet control at liberation.
Geopolitical context
It’s worth noting that Dr. Charles Larson, the U.S. forensic pathologist, only conducted autopsies at camps liberated by Western Allies, such as Dachau, Buchenwald, and Mauthausen. He did not visit the extermination camps in occupied Poland — Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, or Majdanek — because these were liberated by the Red Army and lay in Soviet-controlled territory.
This means that Larson’s observations about disease and starvation apply only to the camps he personally examined, and he had no direct access to the sites where systematic gas chamber killings occurred. The fact that the most notorious extermination camps happened to be in Soviet-liberated areas highlights a historical reality: Western investigators could not independently verify those sites immediately after the war.
Noting this is not a denial of events but an acknowledgment of the limits of Larson’s firsthand evidence. It’s an important context when discussing forensic findings versus the broader historical record of the Holocaust.
References
The physical and archival evidence surrounding Treblinka II is complex and warrants careful interpretation. Transport records, including FPLO 587, indicate that deportations to Treblinka were not continuous “en masse” movements but made scheduled stops at labor sites and regional rail hubs. This reflects the logistical realities of wartime rail operations rather than a single, uninterrupted transit.
Treblinka comprised both a labor camp (Treblinka I) and an extermination site (Treblinka II). Testimony from local civilians, such as Marian Olszuk from Wólka Okrąglik, confirms that both camps were visible from nearby civilian areas and that interactions between guards, prisoners, and locals were common. Non-invasive archaeological surveys, including ground-penetrating radar led by Caroline Sturdy Colls, have identified subsurface anomalies interpreted as graves or structural features. However, post-war disturbances — including Red Army engineering, bomb craters, and terrain modification — complicate interpretation and introduce uncertainty into survey results.
It is important to note that Dr. Charles Larson, a U.S. forensic pathologist, only had access to camps liberated by Western Allies, such as Dachau and Buchenwald. He did not examine camps in occupied Poland like Treblinka or Auschwitz, which were liberated by the Red Army and lay in Soviet-controlled areas. His findings about disease and starvation therefore cannot be generalized to the extermination camps in the East.
Finally, while Polish and Soviet Extraordinary Commissions produced reports on German war crimes, some of these bodies — for example in Katyn, Kurapaty, and Vilnytsia — operated under political pressure and sometimes misattributed responsibility. Their findings should be cross-referenced with German records, survivor and perpetrator testimony, and independent research to build a reliable historical understanding.
Taken together, these factors highlight the need for careful, methodical investigation using multiple sources to reconcile transport schedules, physical evidence, and archival documentation. This approach maintains historical accuracy while acknowledging logistical and interpretive complexities.
Scope of Larson’s work
Charles Larson conducted autopsies only at Western-liberated camps (Dachau, Buchenwald, Mauthausen).
He literally could not see the camps in occupied Poland (Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek), which were under Soviet control at liberation.
Geopolitical context
It’s worth noting that Dr. Charles Larson, the U.S. forensic pathologist, only conducted autopsies at camps liberated by Western Allies, such as Dachau, Buchenwald, and Mauthausen. He did not visit the extermination camps in occupied Poland — Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, or Majdanek — because these were liberated by the Red Army and lay in Soviet-controlled territory.
This means that Larson’s observations about disease and starvation apply only to the camps he personally examined, and he had no direct access to the sites where systematic gas chamber killings occurred. The fact that the most notorious extermination camps happened to be in Soviet-liberated areas highlights a historical reality: Western investigators could not independently verify those sites immediately after the war.
Noting this is not a denial of events but an acknowledgment of the limits of Larson’s firsthand evidence. It’s an important context when discussing forensic findings versus the broader historical record of the Holocaust.
References
- Sturdy Colls, Caroline. Holocaust Archaeology: Archaeological Approaches to Landscapes of Nazi Genocide. Routledge, 2015.
- Central Jewish Historical Commission in Poland, 1945 report on Treblinka II. Archival source, Warsaw.
- Olszuk, Marian. Personal testimony on Treblinka II, Wólka Okrąglik, 1942–1943. Archival copy, accessed February 2026.
- Treblinka Memorial. Wikipedia contributors. Treblinka Memorial. Wikimedia Foundation, 2026.
- Treblinka Labour Camp. Wikipedia contributors. Treblinka Labour Camp. Wikimedia Foundation, 2026.
- Jewish Post. “New Technology Points to Missing Holocaust-Era Mass Graves at Treblinka.” AZ Jewish Post, 2012.