Value of SS contract of sevice belonging to Hans Weiss

[drmessimer]

I have a question for Paul E and HPL2008: It appears that an issue here is the dates on which Hans Weiss was promoted in that they do not agree with the rank he used in signing this dated document. My question is, what source(s) did you use to establish his promotion record? In my experience, most sources for a man's service record are secondary sources rather than primary. Because he was a member of the NSDAP and the SS, Hans Weiss's Party and service records would be in the records formerly held in the Berlin Document Center, but now in the care of the Bundesarchiv. I have no doubt that you are right with regard to his promotion dates, I just am curious to know the source(s) you used. Dwight

[HPL2008]

My question is, what source(s) did you use to establish his promotion record? In my experience, most sources for a man's service record are secondary sources rather than primary. Because he was a member of the NSDAP and the SS, Hans Weiss's Party and service records would be in the records formerly held in the Berlin Document Center, but now in the care of the Bundesarchiv. I have no doubt that you are right with regard to his promotion dates, I just am curious to know the source(s) you used.

A perfectly fair question.

Of Weiß' 9 Nov. 1936 promotion date to Untersturmführer can be no doubt; it is found in the pre-war SS-Dienstalterslisten (SS officers seniority lists). Here is the entry in the SS-DAL of 1 Dec. 1937:



As for his SS career prior to his commissioning, Vol. 2 of Mark Yerger's German Cross in Gold Holders of the SS and Police series lists him as having joined the Allgemeine SS on 1 Aug. 1932 and transferring to Politische Bereitschaft Württemberg in late June 1933, remaining there throughout the unit's evolution into the "Deutschland" Regiment with promotions to Unterscharführer on 1 January 1934, to Oberscharführer on 23 March 1934 and to Hauptscharführer on 15 March 1935. After attending a platoon leaders' course under Felix Steiner, he was commissioned.
This, of course, is a secondary source, but I have been in close contact with Mark for a decade and know him well enough to know that if he lists such dates, they come from reliable period documentation.

Thanks for the clarification Andreas , is this sort of service contract common to that period ?

Sorry, Paul; I am not a document collector and cannot really comment on the contract itself.

[drmessimer]

HPL2008: Thanks for answering my question. The Dienstalterslisten is certainly a reliable secondary source and your close association with Mark Yerger puts you in a much better position to judge the reliability of his book than most others, including me. I have never seen his book so it would be impossible for me to form an opinion about it. Like you, I am not a document collector, but this thread is enormously interesting and I am looking forward to seeing what develops with regard to the document in question. Dwight

[Killerkatanas]

Here is a closer scan of the wording on top:


So are you trying to say that this is fake by your expertise? This is puzzling because has already been identified as authentic by experts over at the "wehrmacht awards" forum. In addition here are the supporting documents that came with the purchase by another "expert" in the field.

[tempelhof]

It could be helpful to read the contract... so at least we can understand the nature of it. I'm not totally disturbed by the rank issue. Contracts can be voided and re-written. If this were done here, the thing could have been backdated, other pertinent factors changed, but the rank at the time the contract was re-written used. It's a possibility.

- - Updated - -

Sorry! I did not see the new pictures provided. I am on my phone. Small screen!

[tempelhof]

The date in the 50s doesn't bother me at all. It's rare that governments anticipate their own extinction.

- - Updated - -

I don't want to translate this on the phone, but if it hasn't been done when I get back from dinner I will do it if no one else has and I'm in any shape to do it. I can't see a damn thing on this phone.

[Paul D]

I'm not saying the document is fake at all as i said the Weiss sig looks good , the Himmler one i cannot comment on ,but have merely pointed out the difference in ranks when the contract was signed , hopefully someone with better knowledge than myself on this type of document will provide an answer to this , what did the WAF experts say on this matter ??

- - Updated - -

HPL2008: Thanks for answering my question. The Dienstalterslisten is certainly a reliable secondary source and your close association with Mark Yerger puts you in a much better position to judge the reliability of his book than most others, including me. I have never seen his book so it would be impossible for me to form an opinion about it. Like you, I am not a document collector, but this thread is enormously interesting and I am looking forward to seeing what develops with regard to the document in question. Dwight

Same source Dwight and John Moores Fuhrerliste !!

[HPL2008]

I don't want to translate this on the phone, but if it hasn't been done when I get back from dinner I will do it if no one else has and I'm in any shape to do it.

Allow me to add the translation:

"Service Contract

The German Reich, represented by the Reichs Minister of the Interior, who is in turn represented by the Reichsführer-SS, concludes the following service contract with

SS-Untersturmführer Weiss, Hans, SS-No. 47 390,
born on 28/8/1911 at Vöhringen/Iller:

Hans Weiss, SS-Untersturmführer
(Name and rank)

signs on to continously serve as an officer in the SS-Verfügungstruppe up to the completion of the 45th year of his life subject to the laws, decress and regulations valid for the SS-Verfügungstruppe.
Upon completion of the 45th year of life, the service contract is extended year by year, unless it is terminated one quarter of a year before the end of the year. The first year of service as an SS officer counts as a probationary period. During this period, the Reichsführer-SS is entitled to terminate this contract at any time with a cancellation period of one quarter of a year. A justification for this termination is not required; it is legally binding. It is not possible to raise objection against it.

Ellwangen/Jagst, on 1 October 1934.

[signed: Hans Weiß]
(signature of the SS officer)

The Reichsführer-SS
[signed: H. Himmler]

Notation of handing over:

One copy of this service contract has been handed over to me on 3 October 1934.

Ellwangen/Jagst, on 3 October 1934

[signed: Hans Weiß]
(signature)

Obligation for service expires on 28/8/1956."

So are you trying to say that this is fake by your expertise? This is puzzling because has already been identified as authentic by experts over at the "wehrmacht awards" forum. In addition here are the supporting documents that came with the purchase by another "expert" in the field.

"Expertise" is not a term Paul or I used. Not to put too fine a point on it, I specifically stated that I am not a document collector and am unable to comment on the document itself. We merely pointed out that there is an inconsistency between the rank stated on the document and the rank held by Weiß at the time. I, personally, would be troubled by that, although Tempelhof's theory that it is all backdated may be worth considering.

[drmessimer]

I do not think that anyone here has denied the authenticity of the signatures. The question is the apparent contradiction between Weiss's enlisted rank and the officer's rank implied in the document, and that is the puzzle.
So, here is what we have:

1. Hans Weiss signed the contract on 1 October 1934 as an Untersturmführer with the provision that his first year as an SS officer was probational. It is unlikely that he would have done so had he not actually held the rank

2. HPL800, whom we know to be knowledgeable, says that the rank of Untersturmführer did not exist until two weeks later, and that at the time Weiss signed the contract, the correct rank would have been Sturmführer.

3. Kellerkayanas has provided documents attesting to the authenticity of the document and signatures. If the document's authenticity is real, then Weiss's status as an SS officer is also fact

4. Citing a book by Mark Yeger, German Cross in Gold Holders of the SS and Police (series) HPL800 says that Hans Weiss was promoted to the enlisted rank of Hauptscharführer on 23 March 1934, which is the rank that Hans Weiss would have held on the date he signed the contract. The source cited is a secondary source and such sources are generally treated with care and are subject to question. But HPL800 vouches for the source as being reliable, and HPL800 is himself reliable.

5. HPL also provides a page from a prewar edition of the Dienstalterlisten that shows Weiss's date of rank as Unterscharführer being 9 November 1936--two years after he signed the contract. The source is considered to be absolutely reliable.

This is the way I think it shakes out. This is not a back-dating issue, but rather one of internal SS administration with regard to hand-picked appointments. I do not doubt the document's authenticity and I think that when Weiss signed the contract he had been told that he was going to be appointed to the rank of Untersturmführer and was directed to sign in that capacity. It is quite possible that the proposed change from Sturmführer to Untersturmführer was already in the works and Weiss was simply directed to use the soon-to-be activated new rank. Whether or not he actually assumed the rank I can't say, but the evidence indicates that despite the language in the contract he was in fact still a Hauptscharführer, and he probably remained at that rank until actually promoted on 9 November 1936. This is of course, speculative, but consistent with examples of similar delayed promotions in the US Army and, I suspect, in other armies as well.

What are you views? Dwight

[Paul D]

I do not think that anyone here has denied the authenticity of the signatures. The question is the apparent contradiction between Weiss's enlisted rank and the officer's rank implied in the document, and that is the puzzle.
So, here is what we have:

1. Hans Weiss signed the contract on 1 October 1934 as an Untersturmführer with the provision that his first year as an SS officer was probational. It is unlikely that he would have done so had he not actually held the rank

2. HPL800, whom we know to be knowledgeable, says that the rank of Untersturmführer did not exist until two weeks later, and that at the time Weiss signed the contract, the correct rank would have been Sturmführer.

3. Kellerkayanas has provided documents attesting to the authenticity of the document and signatures. If the document's authenticity is real, then Weiss's status as an SS officer is also fact

4. Citing a book by Mark Yeger, German Cross in Gold Holders of the SS and Police (series) HPL800 says that Hans Weiss was promoted to the enlisted rank of Hauptscharführer on 23 March 1934, which is the rank that Hans Weiss would have held on the date he signed the contract. The source cited is a secondary source and such sources are generally treated with care and are subject to question. But HPL800 vouches for the source as being reliable, and HPL800 is himself reliable.

5. HPL also provides a page from a prewar edition of the Dienstalterlisten that shows Weiss's date of rank as Unterscharführer being 9 November 1936--two years after he signed the contract. The source is considered to be absolutely reliable.

This is the way I think it shakes out. This is not a back-dating issue, but rather one of internal SS administration with regard to hand-picked appointments. I do not doubt the document's authenticity and I think that when Weiss signed the contract he had been told that he was going to be appointed to the rank of Untersturmführer and was directed to sign in that capacity. It is quite possible that the proposed change from Sturmführer to Untersturmführer was already in the works and Weiss was simply directed to use the soon-to-be activated new rank. Whether or not he actually assumed the rank I can't say, but the evidence indicates that despite the language in the contract he was in fact still a Hauptscharführer, and he probably remained at that rank until actually promoted on 9 November 1936. This is of course, speculative, but consistent with examples of similar delayed promotions in the US Army and, I suspect, in other armies as well.

What are you views? Dwight

Just to clarify Dwight , Weiss was promoted to SS Hauptscharfuhrer on 15/3/1935 but when the document was signed he held the rank of SS Oberscharfuhrer ( as of 23/3/1934 ) . I can see your reasoning behind the fact that Weiss was told he was being considered as Officer material and was for some reason was ordered to sign the document in the rank of an Officer , but as that promotion did not actually occur until almost 2 years later following the completion of a Zugfuhrers course , the gap between signing of the service contract and the actual promotion seems to be rather a long time , i could understand it more if the promotion to officer took place shortly after the document signing !

Hopefully Killerkatanas can provide us with info from the experts to explain this as i'm sure this must have been considered in any previous evaluation of the document.