The fellow Farwerck investigator who brought me most of the recent new information also ran into some sort of diary combined with some other information sheds a little more light on Farwerck’s removal from the National Socialist Movement. It also shows a bit more about Farwerck’s relationships.
The man we are talking about his Hans Ernst Schneider (1909-1999). He was originally a professor of literature in Germany, but he became a national socialist eventually working for the Ahnenerbe. Between 1940 and 1942 he worked for the SS in Den Haag (The Hague) in the Netherlands. According to Wikipedia: “he was responsible for replacing the staff of universities in German-occupied Netherlands and Belgium with Nazis and collaborators” (1) Apparently he had the same job for the Dutch National Socialist Movement.
The documents that surfaced are some sort of diary of Schneider of his activities between 2 September 1940 and 14 September 1940. Apparently, Farwerck had to report to Schneider if he wanted to publish through ‘his own’ Der Vaderen Erfdeel. Obviously, Schneider has heard of the rumor (or the fact) that Farwerck had been a Freemason.
Farwerck wants to publish two titles, but Schneider wonders if that is a good idea given ‘the circumstances’. He visits Farwerck at home and the two decide to continue with the publication, but without Farwerck’s name.
A few days later Schneider meets “der beste Kenner der Freimaurei in Holland” (‘the best Dutch specialist on the subject of Freemasonry’) to inform about Farwerck. Dahmen von Buchholtz either is not such a big specialist or he didn’t like Farwerck, as the information that Schneider gets is not very accurate to say the least.
Apparently Schneider took Von Buchholz’ word over Farwercks as he starts making plans to sidetrack Farwerck because his position will be a problem on the long run.
The idea is to incorporate Der Vaderen Erfdeel into the newly founded Volksche Werkgemeenschap. Nachenius and his Volksche Wacht can remain independent. In doing this, Farwerck can be lifted from his function in Der Vaderen Erfdeel.
E. Fraenkel-Verkade has an interesting phrase to describe how this went (2):
After Dr. Schneider had apologized to the victim in advance and did not want to exclude personal cooperation with him later, as long as matters were formally settled.
Apparently Schneider had no personal grudge against Farwerck and even seems to have sympathized with him.
Perhaps interesting in this regard is Wolfram Heinrich Friedrich Sievers (1905-1948). Sievers and Schneider worked together and Farwerck was in contact with both.
If you see his photo on the German Wikipedia (4) he would probably be working at some craft beer brewery if he were to live today.
Sievers was quite a bit younger than Farwerck (16 years), but they seem to have been alike in some ways. Both were interested in history and the scientific investigation into the past, especially parts of their own cultures. In other ways the two were much different. Sievers was fiercely anti-Semitic from his university days (which costed him his education), Farwerck, as we saw, had other views on the Jews.
Sievers made it to head of Himmler’s the Externsteine-Stiftung (“Externsteine Foundation”) in 1933 (age 29) and a couple of years later Himmler gave him a high position in the Ahnenerbe after having been the personal secretary of Hermann Wirth (1885-1981). Wirth had helped to found the Ahnenerbe in 1933 (when Sievers was his secretary), but was demoted in 1938 and had to leave in 1939.
Sievers and Farwerck were much interested in the ideas of Wirth, Schneider, in the new Ahnenerbe line, was more than a little critical. Perhaps this was the basis that Farwerck and Sievers corresponded.
According to Martijn Eickhoff (4) Farwerck and Sievers first met in January 1937 in Berlin. Later that year, Farwerck went on a trip to the Externsteine. The trip was organised by the Ahnenerbe were Sievers was secretary, so it seems logical that they met again.
Farwerck and Sievers not only had a working relationship in which they also asked each other advice on things that are not directly related to their functions and they also discussed scientific cooperations, but this was before the war (5). I have not found if Sievers was as friendly towards Farwerck after his unmasking as Schneider.
Fraenkel corroborates what I thought before, Farwerck remained member of the N.S.B. In the words of Fraenkel (6):
He was forbidden to also lay down his membership of the NSB after resigning from his duties, “because the occupying power did not want any spectacular departures”.
That explains why some people have said to have seen Farwerck in N.S.B. suit well after his resignation.
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Schwerte (accessed 6/11/2020)
(2) Correspondentie van Mr. M.M. Rost van Tongeren deel I E. Fraenkel-Verkade p. 141/2
(3) “Nadat Dr. Schneider bij voorbaat zijn excuses tegenover het slachtoffer had gemaakt en ook later persoonlijke samenwerking met hem niet uitsluiten wilde, wanneer formeel de zaken maar zuiver geregeld waren.”
(4) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram_Sievers (accessed 4/11/2020)
(5) De SS en Nederland (‘The SS and the Netherlands’) A. Fraenckel-Verkade p. 212
(6) “Het was hem verboden, met het neerleggen van zijn functies tevens als lid van de N SB te bedanken, ‘daar de bezettende macht geen opzienbarende uittredingen wenste’ ” ibid. p. 142