Talk:SS-Totenkopfverbände

Translation

"Totenkopf" simply translates to "skull" (rather than "Death's Head") - AFAIK there were skull symbols on the uniforms

Not really. Schädel is skull, totenkopf means literally death's head - toten = death, kopf = head. Deleuze 03:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, no! “Schädel” and “Totenkopf” are the same thing, except that a “Schädel” does not necessarily belong to a dead person. And “Totenkopf” does not, and never did, mean “death’s head.” It means “head of a dead person,” ie. a skull! --Tom S. Fox (talk) 08:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

See the past discussion below, "Death's head - what?". Kierzek (talk) 14:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

"Death's head" means skull. Not uncommon. See Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice, Act I, sc. 2 line 43. — Preceding unsigned comment added by METRANGOLO1 (talk • contribs) 12:01, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

General article problems

1. Most of it is unverified. Where are the citations?
2. It's too long. Parts of it read like a: how to for the Holocaust
3. Opinion and original research. Due to the unverified nature of this article, much of it has dubious veracity (unless references can be added)
4. I note that there are several editors who seems to continually tinker with this page - BUT NEVER ADD REFERENCES. This makes me somewhat suspicious of their intentions, and whether the "lady doth protest too much". i.e. their work on this WP article has neo-nazi overtones/sympathies.

Either way, this article sucks. It reads like a high-school essay paper and suffers from a lack of referenced critical analysis.

Hence I have added the tags... -unsigned anon ip address 86.166.69.169 2009-10-23

Having written the most recent expansion, I agree we do need citations. I was actually looking around for the more better texts to use and just havent had much time. As for "neo-nazis" overtone and accusing editors of such, see Wikipedia:AGF. I myself hold a WWII history degree, was once a teaching assistant for a History of the Holocaust course, and serve a an officer in the United States Navy. Last time, I checked...I wasn't a Nazi. -OberRanks (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Like many articles it could use cites but, it is very fact based. If one knows the subject that much is clear. I have made some additions and corrections, as needed. However, the real problem is time. I agree with you on that, OberRanks. One can't sit on the computer and Wiki, all the live long day. Kierzek (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I found three very good texts last night but had no internet access. I plan to add further cites over the next few weeks. I have also removed the OR tag as it was clearly placed in bad faith, given the violation of both WP:CIV and WP:NPA that we see above by calling other editors Neo-nazis and saying "the article sucks". I would even remove the "citation needed" tag, but that actually does have some merit even though it, too, was placed in bad faith. -OberRanks (talk) 14:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Very good, OberRanks. Since they overlap, maybe you can put some cites as to the same subjects in the Theodor Eicke article. "Kill two birds with one stone". It needs them as well as some clean up. Kierzek (talk) 15:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I have added relevant images of what actually happened in the camps run by this organisation . The article was in danger of being an apologia for deeply criminal activities (like some other articles on the Nazis). Peterlewis (talk) 21:27, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I actually think there are now too many images in this article and they tend to clutter up the text. A clean-up tag may be needed. -OberRanks (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

This is a factual historical article that can use improvement, including cites, I agree. I further agree OberRanks that too many photos can "clutter" and squeeze text too much at times; further there is no need for redundant photos for example of points. Kierzek (talk) 17:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Family History

Oh boy. Here we/I go. My grandfather, still alive at age 92, was in this unit (SSTV/SSTK- Oberbayern - Dachau) from 1937, but after a grievous battle wound received just meters West of Opotchka, Russia during late July 1941(Operation Barbarossa), he was reassigned to SS cloth supplies out of Berlin, where he remained until he fled the Russian advance in April of '45. He did have "forced labor" working under him at the supply depot. I think there DOES need to be clarification. First, not every soldier that was in this unit was a "death camp" operator. They may have unwittingly guarded the grounds of the Divisional Camp located outside of Dachau which also contained the concentration camps, but were not involved in the actual killing, direct detainment or torment & torture of concentration camp internees. A view of ANY historical map of the divisional grounds will show the concentration camp occupied only a portion of the entire complex footprint. My grandfather was posted to, first; athletics and second, where he spent the lions-share of his time; monument guard duty (Feldherrenhalle and Putch Museum, etc.) When he dies, I'll be publicly posting photos of him involved in this activity. Along with hours of documentary film we (my brother and I) recently took of him discussing this period in history, during Christmas 2009. The number, by the way, on the collar tab was a soldier-in-training number the cadets would wear before they were officially done with training. The number represented the group they were in while training. I have a photo of my grandfather wearing collar tabs with the number "1" under the Death's Head icon. My opinion of this article is that it, like the book Soldiers of Destruction (where I think the author of this article is getting most of his information from) only tells a small part of the story of the SSTV. The mere fact that my grandfather was wounded hundreds of miles away from ANY concentration camp alone is enough to stand this article on it's ear...so to speak. Outside of helping out with the number under the TK in the image, I'm not changing anything. I'm just bringing up more..."un-foot-notable" ;-) facts.--74.166.134.114 (talk) 08:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

An important distinction is to differentiate between the SS-TV (camp service) and the actual Totenkopf division of the Waffen-SS. There are separate articles for both. Thanks for sharing such personal information. I've met a lot of WWII vets and Holocaust survivors in my time, but have never had the privilege (from an academic sense) of meeting a former member of the SS. -OberRanks (talk) 16:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I was a only a tiny bit surprised when you first reverted my edit on the number under the TK on the collar tab, but you're right. The number for now does indeed show the unit. It's says the "Standarte" which is really a division, but I'd be more apt to call it a "Kampfgrupe" or Battalion. I'm in a "whatever" frame of mind about it. Considering the volumes of misinformation on the SS, this is hardly something to get upset over. As to having a former SSTV/TK as a grandfather, even as his grandchildren, talking to him about this period in history can be like, to over use a cliche, making love to a porcupine. I've come to terms with the fact that I probably have one of the angriest grandfathers there is to have. After being promised the world and having the ignominious post-war life he's lived, I'm sure we could all probably understand why he is that way. But then again, as a young man he was rewarded for his hate, so that helps explains things too.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 17:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

If your grandfather was in the Oberbayern regiment, then by Barbarossa he was in the Totenkopf Division of the Waffen-SS, which was indeed a combat formation. Solicitr (talk) 02:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I see. I guess there was also a time when the SSTK Oberbayern was then turned into the 3rd Panzer? He was out of combat ops by then. Does this then mean that the SSTV then remained the SSTV until 1945 and stayed behind at the concentration camps? I was under the impression that the TV was turned into the TK and the TV ceased to exist around the beginning of the war ('39). But now I see I thought that way since, he just stops mentioning the name Totenkopfverband at that period in history because he was no longer in it. I see that fortunately he was moved out into the field instead of remaining in the TV then. Yeah, his wounds saved him not only from the Demyansk Pocket, but also from having to stay at Dachau to do death-camp work. His right elbow was immobilized at a 90 degree angle. The joint was shattered by a shrapnel strike. Anyway. Hoping to enrich and learn as well. Don't mean to congest the discussion board. --74.166.134.114 (talk) 10:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Right after the Polish Campaign, the three senior regiments of the TKVB were combined to form the Totenkopf division. After the French Campaign in 1940, all the TK combat formations (as opposed to the camp guard units) were transferred to the newly-formed Waffen-SS. Solicitr (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Death's head - what?

It's been clarified that Totenkopf means "Death's head" -- but no definition is provided for the German name of the organization and this page. So what does Totenkopfverbände mean? -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

My cheap came-with-the-computer multi-language dictionary translates verbände as 'federation'. probably a better translation of Totenkopfverbände would be something like 'Death's Head Union' or 'Death's Head Command', since it seemed to operate as a distinct group from military, police and intelligence organizations in the Nazi germany. --Ludwigs2 23:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, then: mine gives the singular verband in the military context as "formation, unit" – so that would be playing it safe though possibly not idiomatic. -- Deborahjay (talk) 23:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Second Deborahjay. Verbände is plural for Verband, which in this context means "unit" or "formation". Gabbe (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Oy, German lessons: Why is the plural Verbände instead of Verbanden? Also, does anyone know the etymology of the various pieces? English "death" and German "Toten" don't seem to be from the same root. "Kopf" obviously means "head" - does it come from the Latin "capus", or from something else? What does the "Ver" prefix indicate in German words? At last "band" is fairly obvious. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I saw this page on German verb prefixes - http://german.about.com/library/verbs/blverb_pre01.htm. if you look at the last row of the entry for 'ver-' (labeled ???) I think you can get the sense of it - 'ver-' in that context seems to be a binding/bonding element, similar to English/Latinate 'co-' ('commiserate'='suffer together', 'cooperate'='work with'). Verband then would imply a tight-knit, organized group (something that would be high ideal in fascist ideology). This page on pluralization - http://german.about.com/library/blplural01.htm - shows 12 different forms of pluralization (!!!), of which this is #10. It doesn't explain what the grammatical rule is, however. --Ludwigs2 04:16, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. By the way, I've taken the liberty of defining the word, in the first line, as "Death's-Head Units". Feel free to amend as needed. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

There is no need to change the common used definition as stated by English historians and writers. Wachverbände means "guard units". Totenkopf "Death's head" as you say, so Totenkopfverbände "Death's Head guard units". Kierzek (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Not quite. The "Wach" part means "guard" (as in its English cognates "wake" and "watch", which are related) the "Verbände" part simply means "units". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

You're right. I should have wrote the above as "Death's Head (guard) units" as some historians write and refer to them as just "Death's Head Units" (which I prefer) and others write "Death's Head guard units". Kierzek (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Without questioning the claim that historical literature might use "Death's Head" as a translation for "Totenkopf" - it actually translates to "Dead's Head", "Toten" being the genitive form of "Toter/Tote" (the dead sg/pl respectively). Even native Germans sometimes misspell "Tod" (Death) as "tot" (adj. dead). "Verband" btw has nothing to do with Nazi ideology, it's just a military term for any military unit consisting of other units; with a company being the smallest unit in German understanding a battalion is the smallest "Verband". Just out of curiosity and the intensive use of dictionaries, who's a German native? Cheers, Lowkyalur (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

You may be commingling Totenkopfverbände with Totenkopfwachsturmbanne "Death's-head guard battalions," the actual camp-guard units. Solicitr (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Did all of them have a badge with the number 13 on it? Or what does that number mean? I think the title under the picture should contain this info. Somethin like: "Totenkopf insignia of the 13th SS-Totenkopfverbände" or something like that. 84.2.129.28 (talk) 18:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Second Holocaust Nav box

Hoops, why are you adding a second Holocaust Nav box to this article and to Concentration Camps Inspectorate when there is already a Holocaust Nav box included at the bottom of each article? If they are not exactly the same (although overall I believe they seem to be so, but for the former Nav box at the bottom of the page being a little more detailed) then why not change one of the Nav boxes to be all inclusive and just have one box? Do we really need two? Kierzek (talk) 12:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Since you did not reply and they are redundant and especially the second one being added without discussion and without consensus, I am reverting them back to the single nav boxes. Kierzek (talk) 16:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

• Agree: The second navbox is redundant. Marrante (talk) 07:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Chelmno Gas Van.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Chelmno Gas Van.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: Death's head) collar insignia, 13th Standarte of the SS-Totenkopfverbände

This begs the question as to whether or not there was a 1 thru 12 Standarte??? And maybe a 14 thru xx Standarte???? Or to ask a different way, why was "13" specified if no other insignias indicated a numeric heirarchy???? i.e. and e.g. does the 9th Stadarte have the same skulls head insignia with a "9" under it???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.217.124.4 (talk) 01:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Aufseherin article (Female guards in Nazi concentration camps)

FYI all- There is a discussion regarding a related article that may be of interest to editors here: Talk:Female_guards_in_Nazi_concentration_camps#Requested_move_28_April_2020. Eric ^talk 03:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 22 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 22:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

---

SS-Totenkopfverbände → Camp SS – see below buidhe 08:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

According to WP:USEENGLISH, we should use the name that is most common in English-language RS. Searching the current title on Google Scholar[1] results are mostly in German. Compare to camp SS, which is used in many high quality English works on the topic, including [2][3][4][5][6][7] SS Death's Head Units is also a possibility, but that is used much less frequently according to Google Scholar results.[8] buidhe 08:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

OPPOSE Being quite familiar with the works cited here, "camp SS" is employed for brevity's sake when discussing the SS-Totenkopfverbände and not as an official name for the unit. We should certainly add "redirects" to "camp SS" that link to this page and mention it in the intro, but not change the unit's name entirely. Let me reiterate, the use of "camp SS" is a literary device for writing ease. What you should note—and what is eminently more significant here—is that there are no book titles about the SS-Totenkopfverbände that simplifies them to Camp SS. --Obenritter (talk) 12:59, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - Yes we should use English whenever possible, but sometimes there are reasons for us not to. "Camp XXXX" is a form used in American English for children's summer camps, i.e. "Camp Sunshine", "Camp Firefox", "Camp Lohikan", or "Camp Gollywog", etc. "Camp SS" has the feel of this, which makes it appear to be satirical, and therefore highly inappropriate to use for article about a deadly serious subject. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - It is a guideline to use English translations when it is reasonable in translation and consensus is obtained. Here, the term proposed is not even close to the English translation of the German name. The term "camp SS" is used at times in passing, but not for translation of the unit name. The term "camp SS" is vague and does not describe the proper name or full function of this SS branch. Kierzek (talk) 03:51, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose First, this wouldn't be the English formulation, as BMK notes above. It would be more along the lines of SS Death's Head Association/Union or Nazi concentration camp administration. Second, a look at the discussion linked in the section immediately above might inform this discussion. Eric ^talk 12:40, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Er, no. The German name is the clear common name. "Translation" for the sake of it? Leave well alone! -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:20, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
• Comment I should qualify my opposition to the proposed move by adding that I can see an argument for moving to a good English title. While I agree as a rule with the spirit of Necro's above comment, I must say that before seeing this article, I'd never encountered the word Totenkopfverband before, despite years of German study and many stays in the country. Possibly useful to note, though based on that notoriously shaky single point of data--my own subjective experience. Eric ^talk 14:52, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Most people would probably just know them as SS concentration camp guards, but those of us who do have knowledge of the field are well aware of the term SS-Totenkopfverbände. I should also point out that I don't actually speak German. I think there is a point when Wikipedia has to draw the line between common name, when that is just a term commonly used by people without knowledge of the field, and name which is commonly known and used by those who know about such things. It would be like renaming the Royal Navy article to British Navy (or even English Navy) because that's probably what a lot of people call it. Even with WP:COMMONNAME we have to preserve some aspects of an actual encyclopaedia and draw the line at "dumbing down" too much. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cap badge

I think the caption "Right collar insignia (second version, 1934–1945)" is wrong. Photo shows a cap badge not an insignia from a collar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DLechnman (talk • contribs) 08:22, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 July 2023

Please remove this flag from the infobox, as per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG. 2400:8500:1801:487:163:44:250:47 (talk) 11:32, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done —Sirdog (talk) 13:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2024

Please remove the errant ref tag here:

• Tessin, Georg (1965). Die Landstreitkräfte 6-14. Verbände und Truppen der deutschen Wehrmacht und Waffen-SS im Zweiten Weltkrieg 1939-1945 (in German). Vol. 3 (1st ed.). Frankfurt/Main: E.S. Mittler & Sohn.</ref>

Thanks 76.14.122.5 (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done Liu1126 (talk) 13:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)