Talk:Ranks and insignia of the Schutzstaffel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] post 42 ranks

One friend noted that this page is lacking of mention of the post 43 ranks such as "Panzerobergrenadier" and the like. Perhaps this should be noted somewhere, as from 1943 on a Schutz would be not called as such in most Waffen SS services.

[edit] Page open for business

I hope everyone is enjoying this page. Comments and suggestions (as well as edits) will be appreciated. Husnock 6 Nov 2004

The page is great -- most certainly a Wikipedia article to be proud of, as regards width and quality of information. I only have a couple of gripes:

1) I absolutely think the article should be renamed (moved) to "Ranks and insignia of the SS", since that designation of the Schutzstaffel are what most people (=readers) are familiar with (many wouldn't even know that the spelled-out name was the full name of the SS). Yes, we should educate readers, but that goal is no doubt achieved when they are lead to the articles on the SS.

2) Would it be possible to move the sections following the tables below the tables? Or, as an alternative, to get some space between the final table and the text on the right?

Hmmm, that should be enough nitpicking for one day. :-) --Wernher 22:34, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Tables, merge messages, title

Great points you made up above. If you can figure out to make the charts look nicer, please share the knowledge. My knowledge of tables is very limited and the format is copied over from other articles.

It seems we are both equally proficient with tables, then. :-) I'll see if I can get some help among the table-wise to fix this. --Wernher 18:29, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I also removed the merge messages, since the SS unit insignia page I plan to expand into a very large article. What you see there is merely a starter page. I tried playing with it, and having such info on this article, but ran into spacing problems. I take my experiance from Fleet Admiral which was at first a very large combined article but was broken down into several, more extensive, separate entities.

Ah, it suddenly dawned on me that SS unit insignia is another thing altogether than SS rank insignia. Oh well, my mistake (a so-called "braino", I'm afraid...). No problem at all, then. --Wernher

As far as renaming, SS rank is already redirected to this page. I would not rename this page, since there isn't really anything wrong with the title. There would be no harm in redirecting from the article title you mentioned.

I won't dispute this for the time being, but my opinion is still the same. Note, for example, that the general article on the SS is called just that -- due to the facts that 1) the use of the acronym "SS" to mean the Nazi German SS is very much more well-known than all other uses (e.g. the US Secret Service); and 2) as I mentioned above, "SS" is the more known designation of the Schutzstaffel (at least in English-speaking contries and in Scandinavia). --Wernher

Those are my thoughts...Thanks for the input! Husnock 6 Nov 04

You're welcome! --Wernher

[edit] SS Unit Insignia Update

Major updates underway on the SS unit insignia article. -Husnock 20Nov04

[edit] Rank articles complete

Every primary rank now has an associated article. Still working on SS Officer Candidate ranks and the older title ranks (Staffelfuhrer, Stabsscharfuhrer, etc). A noteworthy day in thie history of the this article -Husnock 30Jan05

[edit] !!ARTICLE FINISHED!!

Break out the fireworks! This article is completely finished! All tables are complete, all SS ranks and equivalents have associated articles, and all pictures have been uploaded. THE ARTICLE IS FINISHED. But then, on Wikipedia, is any article ever really finished. I hope everyone enjoys reading this article as much as I have enjoyed working on it. Thanks as well for all those who helped with information, pictures, and table formats. Hats off to us all. -Husnock 7Feb05

Hmm, we really should have the ranks' official abbreviations as well... Anybody feel the calling to do the work of reseaching and including them? :-) I found a list in this article: "Belzec Perpetrators -- An overview of the German and Austrian SS and Police Staff" (www.deathcamps.org/belzec/perpetrators.html) . I'd say that a good place to put the abbreviations would be right below each rank in the tables. If nobody else does it, I guess I'll do it myself. --Wernher 6 July 2005 04:08 (UTC)

[edit] Ranks of S.S.-Sturmbannführer and S.S.-Obersturmbannführer

According to an article on the Flags of the World (FOTW) website ([1]), a Sturmbann was a battalion in the S.A. Hence, given that the vast majority of S.A. rank titles were used in the S.S., perhaps it would be more appropriate to translate the names of these ranks into English as "Battalion Leader" and "Senior Battalion Leader". (I have posted a similar comment in the appropriate article for the ranks of the Sturmabteilung.) -Christopher Crossley, 22 August 2005 12:14 (UTC)

The literal translation of the rank is "Storm Unit Leader" Sturm=Storm, Bann=Unit, Fuhrer=Leader. The German word for Battalion is pronounced ba'ta'ion. Sturmbannführers did command battalions, but that is not the literal trnaslation of the word. -Husnock 15:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reichsführer-SS

It's somewhat strange how Reichsführer-SS is the equivalent of Generalfeldmarschall, as their was only one Reichsführer-SS but many Fieldmarshalls, and Himmler was certainly considered superior to almost everyone in the Third Reich. Is it sort of like the military police, when an MP with the rank of Corporal can in some instances tell a Lieutenant what to do. I imagine regular German Army Officers would have been fearful of even a low ranking member of the Gestapo.

I don't really think Himmler was equivalent to a Generalfeldmarschall. He held ministerial rank, so like Göring was probably senior to ordinary field marshals, but it's the closest equivalent, being a unique rank. -- Necrothesp 19:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Himmler certainly would never take orders for Goring and told plenty of Field Marshals what to do. I've changed it to be the equivalent of Reichsmarschall. -Husnock 02:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. The rank of Reichsführer-SS is not the equivalent of Reichsmarschall since the latter rank was specifically given to Georing by Hitler (June 1940) in order to establish a clear line of succession from Hitler to Georing in the event of Hitler's untimely death. Further, before the establishment of the SS rank Oberstgruppenführer (in 1942, and after Georing's appointment to the rank of Reichsmarschall back in 1940), the rank of Reichsführer-SS was much more likely the eqivalent to Generaloberst rather than Generalfeldmarschall. The Wehrmacht was quite jealous of their place and position in German society and considered the SS (and much more so the SA) to be inferior organizations to itself. These factors, individually and combined, do not support the idea that the rank of Reichsführer-SS was ever equivalent to Reichsmarschall. I agree that Himmler (and the rank of Reichsführer-SS) were ministerial, but people like Albert Speer (and others) were also ministerial and they did not hold equivalent ranks of Reichsmarschall. Coldwarrior 05:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The SS was originally a part of the SA and thus used much the same ranks and insignias as the SA. Even in those early days, Himmler created the position of Reichsführer-SS for himself. This was not a rank but a title he used to distinguish himself as the commander in chief of the SS. This is also the reason why all other ranks within the organization has the prefix "SS-" (like SS-Standartenführer) while Reichsführer has it as a suffix (-SS). While the SS was a part of SA, Himmler was wearing a SS-Obergruppenführer collar and he was also junior to the SA-leader Ernst Röhm. Röhm wore the same kind of collar that Himmler later used when the SS became an independent organization.

Himmler was not the only official person in Germany to hold the title of "Reichsführer" although he was the most famous one. The leader of the Hitlerjugend was appointed Reichsführer by Hitler, a title that later was changed to Reichsjugendführer. The same situation was for the Reichsarbeitsdienst, a title initially referred to as Reichsführer der Reichsarbeitsdienst, but later changed to Reichsarbeitsführer.

In the early days of 1930's Germany, Himmler was junior to Göring. Göring created the Gestapo and in his capacity as deputy führer he did indeed issued many orders to the SS. One example is the Wannsee-conferense, where the "final solution" was decided. The conferense was a direct result of Göring's order to Himmler's deputy, Heydrich, to solve the "jewish-problem" once and for all. Later, as Göring fell from Hitler's grace, Himmler stepped in and became the second most powerful man within Germany.

Regarding Himmler's rank compared to the military, it all depends on the timeperiod in question. During the early years when SS was a part of the SA, Himmler was "only" an Obergruppenführer or General. Later, especially after Hitler's appointment of Himmler to grand minister of the interior, Himmler would outrank any military person except Göring. For a long time, Himmler and Göring "competed" for the position as the no 2 in Germany. The armed forces of Germany, especially the Army (Wermacht), never recognized Himmler as a general no matter what kind of pressure Hitler used trying to change this. Of the two, only Göring was accepted as a real general (and later marshal). During 1944, Hitler appointed Himmler commander in chief of the home army. This career did not last long though, as the general-staff of Wermacht refused to take orders from Himmler. Hitler had no choice but to replace Himmler with Göring, although Hitler was very suspicious of Göring.

[edit] Non-existent SS ranks

I have been reverting several edits to this article regarding non-existent SS ranks. The first such revert was that an Oberfuhrer in the SS was equal to a Brigadegeneral in the Wehrmacht...there was no such rank in the WWII Wehrmahct. We also have reverts of Bewerber and Anwarter to the early 30s ranks, as these ranks did not exist until the later 30s with Bewerber first created in 1942. Last, but not least, there is no source that I know of which states there was a rank higher than Reichsfuhrer. "Oberster Reichsführer" is now up for deletion. If I am wrong about any of this info or reverts, please advise with sources. I have already talk paged the user who was making these changes. -Husnock 21:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Double Columns on Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS

I have reverted the use of "Wehrmacht Equivalent" and "Waffen-SS equivalent" in the SS-General section since it seems redundent. The Waffen-SS used regular SS ranks, like Untersturmfuhrer, Hauptsturmfuhrer, etc, but Waffen-SS Generals would act a suffix to thier regular SS ranks to form such titles as SS-Obergruppenfuhrer und General der Waffen-SS. This is actually explained in the article. The point is, Waffen-SS Generals didn't have or use Wehrmahct like ranks, they used them as a suffix to thier SS ranks. It is also for this reason that I removed the title Allgemeine-SS from the column listing the SS ranks, since the Waffen-SS used them too. -Husnock 15:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Waffen-SS ranks

Husnock-Stop revert my edits. You write not correct and not exact data! If you do not know Russian and German language-it your problem. The Soviet military ranks of the period of the second world war and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books, especially in Russian. To not trust them at me there is no reason! German ranks SS and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books including in German. According to them-Der Oberster Reichsführer der Schutzstaffel it's a the highest title and a rank in SS. This rank had no special uniform, because had it only Hitler. To challenge them silly! Tt1 18:07, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

To answer your points. 1) There are no Russian ranks listed on this page 2)"Der Oberster Reichsführer der Schutzstaffel" does not appear in any text or source of World War II that I have ever read including original German documents form the SS (and I have studied the SS since 1986) 3)Per Wikipedia policy, disputed edits and unsourced information can be removed. Your use of sockpuppets and edit warring only weakens your position and could lead to article protection. Provide a valid source, photograph, or other such document. Otherwise your insertion of non-existent and non-factual ranks into this article will continue to be reverted. -Husnock 16:16, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

What you wished to tell speakin-There are no Russian ranks listed on this page gof-I have not understood?-Roitr 21:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

That is correct. There is not a column on the page which addresses Russian ranks. This is in response to the statement "The Soviet military ranks of the period of the second world war and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books, especially in Russian". That is not disputed, I only say that there are no Soviet military ranks liste don this page. -Husnock 21:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oberster Reichsführer (Disputed)

I have (once again) removed this rank from the article. I have never seen a source or document which states to its existance. I ask the User (and his many anon IP sockpuppets) who keeps putting this rank into the article to provide a valid source. From my end, its a non-existant rank that is not supported by established WWII texts or even SS documents from the Second World War. -Husnock 16:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I have unprotected this article and added in the data about Hitler's supposed titles. But they should NOT be in the tables since there are no German sources or documents that show they ever existed. Over on Comparative military ranks of World War II, all we have seen are Russian websites and original research for a few veteran groups. I think however the changes in place now will cool some of the fire. I will add verified soruces (textbooks, etc) at a later date. Hopefully, another edit war will not begin. -Husnock 01:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

For Husnock. Heinrich Himmler appointed to himself der oberste SS-Führer in February. See German source CHRONOLOGIE-Der Zusammenbruch: Vom Abkommen von Jalta bis zur Kapitulation-Mittwoch, 14. Februar Chronik 1945. For Oberste SS-Führer see also SS - Umstrukturierungen 1930 - 1945, SS - Organisationsstruktur 34-45, ss-aufnahmekriterien-und-aufnahmeritual, Dokumente zum Nationalsozialismus-Tt1 23:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

That would be fine if that's what they actually say, but they don't. The first article merely says that Himmler was the highest SS leader. It's using the term as a description, not as a rank. It doesn't say he was appointed to that rank at all - it says he organised tough resistance on the Russian Front, nothing about him being appointed to any rank! The other articles don't mention the term at all. What are you trying to prove by quoting articles that don't mention the rank? -- Necrothesp 00:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Necrothesp. The websites above are very interesting, but say nothing about there being a supreme SS rank called "Der Oberste SS-Fuhrer" or "Oberste Reichsfuhrer", etc. In fact, they pretty much deny it. In addition, is Tt1 now saying that Himmler held this rank? I thought the entire point of the argument was that *Hitler* held this supreme SS title.

As stated before, I think the current revisions speak to Hitler's status in the SS. He was, as the Fuhrer, by default supreme commander of every Nazi organization including the SS. As he held SS Membership #1, he was also senior SS member by senority, if not by rank. The SS membership number system is something that a lot of other miltiary historians get confused about, i.e. your memerbship number was sometimes just as important as your rank. A Gruppenfuher with membership number 1155687 was not as well respected as an Oberfuhrer with membership number 415. It had to do with the "Old Guard" concept. -Husnock 14:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unprotection?

Is this article ready for unprotection yet? It's been fully protected for six days now. howch e ng {chat} 17:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I unprotected a while ago it per the comments above. -Husnock 17:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

OK. It was still listed on Wikipedia:Protected page (I removed it) so I was just following up on it. howch e ng {chat} 17:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oberführer

As far as i know there was NO Wehrmacht equivaltent for this rank. "Since Brigadeführer was rated equal to a Generalmajor, and Standartenführer to an Oberst, Oberführer had no military equivalent and became regarded as a senior Colonel rank." (See: Oberführer.) So as you see Oberst can't be an equivalent to Oberführer.
--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35 16:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes there was indeed an exact Wehrmacht equivalent for "SS-Oberführer": "Oberst". This can be seen e.g. from the Waffen-SS shoulder boards, which show the same pattern as a Oberst. When it came to e.g. orders in combat, a Waffen-SS Oberführer had the same seniority as a Wehrmacht Colonel, inside the Waffen-SS however a Oberführer would obviously take precedence over a Standartenführer. So we could roughly say that the SS split the rank of Colonel into upper half and lower half for internal purposes, but to the outside they still were both "Oberst". Also, a Oberführer was not considered a General Officer Rank, the lowest SS General officer rank was "SS-Brigadeführer [und Generalmajor der Waffen-SS]". I recommend to change the article accordingly...

Thufiruk 18:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning of "Haupt"

There are several meanings for "Haupt" so I ain't sure if "head" is the right translation.

Some of the meanings are for example: head, main, chief, primary, principal, general, central, leading.

So a Hauptsturmführer could maybe be a Main Storm Leader, a Primary Storm Leader or something else.

My english ain't that good, that's why i don't want to change the article, 'cause I don't know what's right. But I hope that you can manage it.
--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35 16:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Luftwaffe & Kriegsmarine ranks

I also have some equivaltent ranks of the other two military units. You can put 'em into the article if you like.
--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35

Your table shouldnt really be on a talk page. See Comparative military ranks of World War II -Husnock 16:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem, but there were one or two SS-ranks that aren't mentioned in the article. And it showed that the Reichsmarschall was even higher than the Reichsführer-SS. So I hoped it could be a little help.

--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35 16:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translation Changes

I have reverted the recent changes to the translation column. The present translations are based on sources from World War II texts that are referenced in the article. Chief among the problems is that "Oberst" does not mean "Chief" in German. It translates as either "Colonel" or "Supreme". There were also other changes to the article such as introducing a translation spelled "Casndidate" and stating that Sturmhauptfuhrer meant the same thing as Hauptsturmfuhrer when the words are clearly shifted. This article has been too carefully worked to allow such slipshot translations into the text. Thats how I feel. -Husnock 23:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Husnock, but "slipshod" (note the correct spelling) is not the appropriate term here. Your German is simply not good enough to make such an assertion. "Oberst" is a military rank and is a derivative of the word "oberster" (corresponding noun: der Oberste"), meaning "uppermost" or "highest" or "chief". Turning to "Haupt", as a noun it means "head", but as a prefix to another noun it means "main" or "chief". Your alleged translations of these respective ranks are simplistic and do not reflect the correct meaning of the German words used to concoct them. You would not translate "Hauptstadt" (meaning: capital) into "head city", would you? Or "Oberstdorf" (a famous wintersport resort in the Alps whose name means "uppermost village" or "highest located village" into "colonel village", would you? But maybe you would. Sincerly, Cosal 14:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

This isn't "my German" that is not good enough, I am not the source of this translation. It's the acceptable translation of the ranks out of the sources for this article. Every text book and reference I hav eon SS ranks says the translation of Oberst is Colonel and that the translation of Head is Haupt. If it were Chief, I believe the translation would be "Chef". Reverted once again. Please provide a source for your trnaslation if you want to change this well established article. -Husnock 05:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

As I thought I had made obvious before, these are not necessarily "acceptable" translations. A proper translation needs to translate a word within its context and take account of its meaning in the original language. That is why it makes no sense to continue to insist that "Oberst" means "Colonel" and nothing but "Colonel". Yes, as an army rank "Oberst" is the equivalent of "Colonel". But when "Oberst" is a prefix to a compound noun it means "supreme", and it is correctly translated in this manner in other military contexts, such as "Oberste Heeresleitung". Likewise, "head" can be "Haupt" and vice versa, but "head" also means "Kopf". Conversely, "Haupt" as a prefix to a compound noun does 'not mean "head" unless it specifically refers to the German meaning of "Kopf" such as in "Haupthaar" (meaning scalp hair). In all other cases it means "main" or "chief" or "uppermost". "Hauptgipfel" is the "main summit" of a mountain, not the "colonel summit", "Hauptstrasse" is "main street", not "colonel street", "Hauptstadt" is "capital city", not "colonel city". The article may be well established, and I do not dispute that. But some of the translations shown are very poor and the article deserves having better ones. The fact that someone in the past came up with these inadequate translations is not sufficient reason to insist on their immutable right to remain in this article or for your claim to infallibility on this issue. Cosal 17:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Source for presenting the Totenkopf as “coat of arms”

What is the source for presenting the Totenkopf as the “coat of arms” of the SS? I didn’t even know the SS had a coat of arms, but if it did I would assume it was the SS runes. Please provide the source; if there is none, and this is merely someone’s assumption, then the flag/coat of arms gallery should go. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 11:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

User:OberRanks argues that there’s nothing wrong with the presentation of SS symbols in an article on SS ranks and insignia; I do not disagree, but those symbols should be presented appropriately and in context, with attributed explanations about their usage and meanings. The SS flag and death’s head that have been removed, are not presented in such context; moreover, I (for one) doubt their authenticity: the flag’s proportions are off, for one thing; and the death head was used in two instances: on SS service hats and collar (right) insignia for members of the Totenkopfverbände. Steps also need to be taken to ensure that the death's head presented is that of the SS, and not that of Hussar regiments or the Panzertruppen of the Wehrmacht. In haste, Jim_Lockhart 14:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Its a minor point and not worth fighting about. The original edits looked like someone who just didnt like the SS, since the caption was "removed inappropriate symbols". As stated, nothing wrong with having SS symbols in an article about the SS. But, yes, they should be accurately explained. -OberRanks 21:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deeper explanation of reason for creation of new titles?

The article begins:

"The ranks and insignia of the Schutzstaffel were a paramilitary rank system used by the SS to differentiate that organization from the regular German armed forces, the German state, and the Nazi Party..."

Does anyone know of a more specific reasoning than this? I read one time that creating new ranks was done in an effort to combat the hierarchicalism that was thought to be implicit in the use of traditional titles like "sergeant", "general", and so on...but also that maybe it was part of the larger National Socialist effort to Germanize the language, since traditional military ranks come from French (they originated during the Napoleonic era).

Anyone else have the answer? Critic9328 02:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Getting those insignia pictures back in this article

I would like to open the floor to a discussion regarding restoring the six to seven insignia images which were deleted out of these article. The raze about these being stolen appears to have past over and most of the people who had major problems with this article seem to no longer be active on Wikipedia. For my own part, I never stole any of those pictures and most of them came off a CD from College Park which is where the SS records are kept and which is where I did my graduate level work (i.e. how I came into possession of the CD). I do however agree that some of the images on that CD also showed up on other people's webpages but as they are simple designs (pips on black background, etc) I see no copyright problems. I can create such images in Windows Paint and re-post them (I actually did this for a different website) but I do not want a problem to again occur. If we do re-upload what tag should be used? Opinions are most welcome. -OberRanks (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I would certainly like to see those insignia graphics back, but I do not know the legalities as others seem to know (if they indeed do know something about that at all). Why are the existing insignia graphics supposedly fine but the ones that were removed not? My own view is that they were all fine (no copyright infringement) but again, I don't really understand the original motivation (legal details) for removing them in the first place. -L.Smithfield (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The debate at Commons about deletion is here. Kelly ^hi! 00:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Butseriouslyfolks meant well (I guess) but was the driving force behind a massive purges of all the images I had uploaded under my old account User:Husnock. These deletions were made without much discussion on BF's own authority as an administrator. I don't personally agree that this should have gone down that way but what's done is done. The Commons discussion also opened up with the statement "copyvio not NARA" even though I had explained (many times) that I got these from a CD in College Park. I don't blame anyone for deleting these though since I think now that the people in College Park probably collected them from other websites so maybe this was all for the best. I do have an idea, that is to get a single picture from College Park of all SS insignia which will be so general and not so graphic intense that it can not be said it was stolen from any other webpage of source. I can then back it up with an e-mail from a nara.gov account that will state they were the authors. I think that should solve the problem. -OberRanks (talk) 01:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)