Geschichtswissenschaften
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Review (40)
- Article (30)
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
- Report (3)
- Working Paper (3)
- Book (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (83) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (83)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (83)
Keywords
- Indonesia (3)
- Deutschland (2)
- Eastern Europe (2)
- Europa (2)
- Europe and Neighbourhoods (2)
- Geschichte (2)
- Harvard University Press (2)
- History (2)
- History book reviews (2)
- Islam (2)
Institute
- Geschichtswissenschaften (83)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (8)
- Zentrum für Nordamerika-Forschung (ZENAF) (3)
- Cornelia Goethe Centrum für Frauenstudien und die Erforschung der Geschlechterverhältnisse (CGC) (1)
- Informatik (1)
- Katholische Theologie (1)
- Präsidium (1)
- Sonderforschungsbereiche / Forschungskollegs (1)
- Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften (1)
"Shades" of postmortem personal identity : ψυχή καὶ εἴδωλον in the dream passage (Il. 23.103-104)
(2013)
Mike Rapport is one of the few scholars who write European history not as the history of a few select countries, but of the entire continent. Rapport is at home in the history of the Balkans as well as France, Italy, Germany, Russia, and Scandinavia, and well versed in the historiography published in English, French, and Italian. Rapport's well-rounded viewpoint is one excellent argument for anyone suffering from "1848 fatigue" after the sesquicentennial celebrations and their aftermath in conference volumes and historiographical reviews to put aside any skepticism regarding the possibility of anyone presenting a novel perspective; the book itself is another. In it, Rapport offers a narrative history of the events of 1848 in those European countries and regions affected directly by the revolution--France, Italy, the German states, Denmark, and Rumania--with some remarks on areas where the impact was more indirect (Britain, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and Scandinavia). This book is less obviously an academic textbook than Jonathan Sperber's excellent survey of the revolutions of 1848, and less encyclopedic than the survey of national events and overarching themes edited by Dieter Dowe and others for the 1998 anniversary. ...
Andreas Fahrmeir’s history of the first half of the "long nineteenth century" begins with a disdainful Arthur Young travelling through France at the beginning of 1790 and ends with London’s Great Exhibition of 1851. The contrasting fortunes of France and Great Britain exemplify the contrasting concepts of the title. While the former experienced at least eleven contested regime changes – 1789, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1799, 1814, 1815 (twice), 1830, 1848 and 1850 – the British political system endured, albeit modified by reforms. Moreover, revolutionary-Napoleonic France was responsible for numerous revolutions from above elsewhere, uprooting old regimes and creating satellite states right across the continent, from the Batavian Republic to the Grand Duchy of Warsaw. Old Europe was not restored in 1815. With the Holy Roman Empire gone for good, the Low Countries combined in a single kingdom, Poland expunged from the map once again and the Habsburg Empire much more of an Italian and Balkan power than in the past, quite a new order had emerged. The shallow roots of the new creations ensured their future fragility. ...
As Bernhard Jussen correctly stresses in his introduction to this essay collection, we do not need to rediscover kingship. Kings and queens have always been favorite subjects for historians--at least, one might add, as far as medieval and early modern history are concerned. But even for the premodern period, kingship has rarely been studied in long-term perspective. This lacuna is all the more striking as kingship, existent in one form or another since ancient times, seems ideally suited to such a study. A history of kingship--prescinding from specific rulers--would bring to light the very characteristics of this form of rule. Moreover, as kingship was a highly visible and politically relevant phenomenon, and thus comparatively well represented in the sources, such an approach would also allow insights into general social, political, and cultural developments. Jussen's essay collection, in filling the gap, strives for both goals. It does so in a form that, at least in the German context, is innovative. The book combines the characteristics of a single-author volume and essay collection in the sense that each chapter follows clear rules and--with some exceptions--the same structure, though written by different authors. In addition, the strict chronological order, with each of the twenty-six chapters focusing on one particular date and source, and the respective headlines in the form of general questions (for example, "How to Depose a King"), point beyond the scope of the chapter and at the same time make the process of historical analysis visible to the reader. ...
Zeitgeschichte in Germany has now been focusing for some time on the 1970s and 1980s, and has produced a substantial number of studies on the period "after the boom" (Lutz Raphael/Anselm DoeringManteuffel). By contrast, the history of the (West) German historical profession is still lagging behind and remains by and large confined to the first two postwar decades. What makes this gap even more problematic is the fact that most of the existing historiographical texts have been written by historians at the very center of the new developments during the 1970s, most notably Hans-Ulrich Wehler and Jürgen Kocka, or by sympathetic observers such as Georg Iggers. Thus the critical evaluation of these decades remains a historiographical desideratum. The present volume, a Gedenkschrift for the late Wolfgang J. Mommsen, constitutes a step in the right direction. ...
In the last thirty years, the study of the Late Roman period has intensified and has spawned a whole new branch of study commonly known now as Late Antiquity. Within this field there are now research journals dedicated exclusively to the theme, regular congresses now convene on the same and scholarly articles and books are produced at a rate annually that makes it a herculean task to keep up with it all. Within such a historiographical framework is the Germanic invasion and settlement in Western Europe by a wide variety of tribes. Discussions on the nature and impact continue without abatement, as an example the recent works by Heather, Ward-Perkins, Goffart and others demonstrate that considerable divergence of interpretation still abound and will so for a long time. ...
Douglas G. Morris's excellent book poses a broad question: what happened to the rule of law in Germany after 1919? How severe was the collapse of judicial impartiality and competence? Can one doubt whether the Weimar Republic ever qualified as a republic, "if a necessary part of a republic is a judiciary committed to democratic ideals and impartial justice" (p. 1)? That there was a collapse in judicial impartiality is hardly in doubt. As early as 1922, Emil Julius Gumbel provided statistical proof: between late 1918 and summer 1922, a total of 354 political murders committed by perpetrators affiliated with the political right had been punished with one life sentence plus 90 years and 2 months imprisonment; in 326 cases, there had been no punishment at all. By contrast, the 22 murders committed by left-wing sympathizers in the same period had been punished with 10 death sentences, 3 life sentences and 248 years and 9 months imprisonment; only 4 perpetrators escaped (p. 1). To be sure, this statistic may indicate more about the political leanings of police officials and prosecutors investigating cases than of judges who rule on the evidence put before them, but the divergence in sentencing remains remarkable. Morris reformulates this insight to ask how Germany's judges, trained to apply the law in an impartial and technically correct manner, could become raving political partisans willing to twist the law in favor of a particular political position. He does not seek to provide a comprehensive answer, but focuses on cases which involved Max Hirschberg, a Jewish attorney who practiced in Munich from 1911 to 1934, when he escaped to Italy. Hirschberg moved on to the United States in 1939, where he died in 1964. Hirschberg was not only involved in the major political trials of the day in 1920s and early 1930s Munich, but also developed a systematic interest in judicial error, which culminated in a major work on Das Fehlurteil im Strafprozeß, published in 1960. Morris is interested primarily in how trials were conducted. This in-depth analysis is divided into three blocks: political trials in 1922 and 1925, when Germany's war guilt and the causes of defeat were treated in libel suits and criminal prosecutions; non-political cases in which Hirschberg succeeded in having judicial errors reversed; finally, political cases linked with the rise of the Nazi party from 1926. In each case, Morris offers a clear exposition of the facts and substantial as well as legal issues in the case, a step-by-step analysis of trials and appeals processes, and an evaluation of the outcome. The main lines of argument which emerge from these analyses are, first, that some problems were peculiar to Bavaria. The main issue was the existence of people's courts, introduced during Bavaria's brief socialist phase to provide swift justice. The people's courts did not just increase judges' freedom of action by abolishing procedural safeguards, but also protected judges from professional scrutiny and criticism because there were to be no appeals. One of Hirschberg's major victories in the cases of the early 1920s was successful lobbying for their reintroduction. Second, Munich's judges may have been particularly traumatized by the brief revolutionary episode (and by the political preferences of Bavaria's ministries, which were systematically anti-Republican); moreover, they were called upon to decide a stream of political trials, some of which--notably libel trials--effectively sought the impossible, namely a definitive judicial ruling on the validity of a certain interpretation of history or a personal political position. Third, in spite of significant personal variations in style and substance, even after the reintroduction of appeals judges tended to use their freedom of maneuver in an anti-left-wing (which implicitly meant pro-National Socialist) sense. However, until 1933, this state of affairs did not challenge the ties which bound the profession. The Bavarian ministry of justice failed in its attempts to have Hirschberg disbarred in the early 1920s. Even when Hirschberg was released from so-called protective custody in 1934, most of his colleagues rallied round the decorated war veteran, allowing him to retain an access to the court building that was denied most Jewish attorneys. Finally, the problems of the justice system affected non-political cases as well, which may have deepened distrust of Republican institutions. The meticulously researched book benefits immensely from its author's experience as a practicing attorney familiar with courtroom drama and legal technicalities, which are vividly recreated and succinctly explained. The focus on Hirschberg illustrates both the immense obstacles a defense attorney faced and the victories an exceptionally gifted attorney could still win. Even though the courtroom perspective disregards some of the motivations which have their roots outside court--be it the social structure of and career perspectives in Munich's legal profession or political pressures on judges--these are not the main focus of Morris's research. Finally, one could argue about the optimist portrayal of pre-1918 German justice in politically sensitive cases. The clear focus on Weimar trials ensures that the book is no biography. Although Morris includes brief chapters on Hirschberg's youth and his years in exile, not much information is offered on Hirschberg's private life, the economics of his legal practice or his time in exile. But this decision does not diminish Morris's achievement in providing a fascinating insight into the workings of Weimar justice.
The volume consists of eight essays with a precise focus: the study of the "dynamics of social exclusion" as reflected in data available for 1994 to 1996, when a detailed survey of a sample of households in EU countries, the "European Community Households Panel," was conducted. On the basis of these data, the authors document the extent and prevalence of poverty generally and specifically in regard to particular risk groups defined in terms of age, health and personal circumstances (young adults, lone parents, people with sickness or disability and retirees).[1] The analysis was carried out for five countries: Austria, Germany, Greece, Portugal and the United Kingdom, which were taken to be representative of the extremes of EU membership: north and south; wealthy and poor; large and small. The essays discuss income poverty (measured as incomes at 40, 50 or 60 percent of median incomes) as well as housing problems, access to basic necessities like food and utilities, access to consumer durables and social interactions. The essays document not only that the extent of poverty varies between countries--a well-known fact--but also that its causes and effects continue to differ even in an increasingly united western Europe. Austria had the lowest proportion of the population in poor households (17 percent--compared to 18 percent in Germany, 21 percent in the United Kingdom and Greece, and 24 percent in Portugal). While sickness and disability were likely to impoverish individuals in all the countries studied, this was particularly true of Austria, Germany and the United Kingdom (that is, northern Europe); retirement was more likely to result in income poverty in the south. The north-south divide was less relevant for parents; single income households with children were particularly likely to suffer from income poverty in the United Kingdom, Germany and Portugal. Poverty was more likely to be persistent than merely a brief phase in the life cycle. Persistence rates of income poverty were around 80 percent in Greece and Britain, above 70 percent in Portugal and above 60 percent in Germany and Austria. But the effects were rather different. In the United Kingdom, high persistence rates of income poverty coincided with low persistence rates (34 percent) of amenities deprivation, whereas the persistence of necessities deprivation was relatively low in Greece at 39 percent. The volume was conceived as a contribution to policy decision-making in the aftermath of the 2000 Lisbon Declaration, which focused (among other things) on poverty and encouraged member states to set more concrete targets for dealing with social exclusion. Some member states did so; Britain, for example--a country where income poverty was particularly likely to result in deprivation of basic necessities--vowed to abolish "poverty" by 2020. The volume is a treasure-trove of data and empirical analysis; it makes essential, though at times rather trying, reading for anyone interested in the extent of social exclusion, and the likelihood of falling into or escaping from it. It also provides ample proof--if any were needed--that governments seeking to combat social exclusion have to set different priorities, because they are not attacking the same phenomenon. Unfortunately, the empirical as well as the more conceptual contributions reveal some of the approach's and the book's shortcomings.[2] The book's very advantage--providing a precise research agenda--is also a drawback. With its focus on three years, and on the life-cycle rather than more stable factors such as ethnicity, occupation or regional origin, the volume presents a particular image of the risk (and duration) of deprivation, which may be more or less comprehensive for different countries. The narrow temporal focus makes one wonder whether measuring poverty's "persistence" of poverty makes much sense for such a relatively short time. Such doubt is enhanced when considering some of the oddities in the results: how did households that remained poor in the United Kingdom manage to get their hands on consumer durables? (The same question could be asked for the sudden increase in access to necessities in Greek households.) Illustrating the empirical findings with more concrete examples would have been helpful, particularly when they are counterintuitive, for instance the statement that patterns of poverty in eastern and western Germany were converging in spite of the continuing divergence in unemployment patterns. Another question--admittedly suggested by events of the last several years--is whether ethnicity, regional origins or occupations are not more important in determining the extent and duration of social exclusion than life cycle. These factors were not, and partly could not be, measured on the basis of the data used, but have moved to the center of policy debates today. This matter relates to another issue the book does not address: who is to blame for poverty, and what roles have governments and the European Union assumed in determining poverty patterns and trends? Have past policy choices--for instance, cutting benefits; increasing "flexibility" in labor markets; encouraging the emigration of jobs (such things the European Union is frequently accused of doing)--made a difference? Is combating poverty a serious policy agenda, or merely window-dressing to make the "reforms" that were key to the Lisbon agenda for modernizing the EU more palatable? Europe seems to be facing an internal contradiction between the agenda of competition and privatization (which results in higher access costs to essential services for "low value" customers) and the agenda of abolishing poverty. This contradiction is partly sustained by U.K. data. Which element is and should be more important to the European Union or national governments is hotly debated, but of course serious contributions to the debate require a comprehensive review of the present state of affairs through the type of careful studies of which this volume is an excellent example.
The articles in this volume represent anthropological approaches to the study of external and internal boundaries in Europe. The authors raise fascinating methodological and empirical questions by approaching European societies from the perspective of a discipline usually working on the basis of greater cultural distance between scholars and the objects of their research. Moreover, the volume tackles a subject usually understood as a political project and a political problem, E.U. Europe, in an original non-political-science perspective. The volume's case studies are all based on bottom-up views of Europe, with fieldwork the methodology of choice. The first articles focus on institutions. Cris Shore and Daniela Baratieri's article focuses on the ambivalent results of attempts by European schools, which cater mainly to Eurocrats in Brussels and Luxemburg, to replace nationalism with a sense of European identity or nationhood, while Gregory Feldman discusses Estonian programs for the integration of Russian-speakers and Davide Però addresses the position of Italy's left-wing parties and public to the "new immigration." While these essays argue that "Europe" may not be as destructive to national (institutional) boundaries or the nation state as is often supposed, the next block of articles tackles migration across boundaries in a more conventional perspective, focusing on particular immigrant groups. Helen Kopnina discusses Russians in London and Amsterdam, while Christina Moutsou focuses upon immigrants in Brussels and Jacqueline Waldren examines Bosnians in Mallorca. To me, the case study of Turkish migrants in West Berlin by Sabine Mannitz is particularly intriguing, because it uses the peculiar experience of a lesson on Jews' fate in the Holocaust in which the teacher cast immigrants as permanent outsiders in Germany to explore pupils' sense of boundaries, and the East-German West-German divide appeared to loom much larger for immigrants than that between foreigners and Germans. The last section focuses on concrete and contested boundaries in European states and towns: William F. Kelleher, Jr. discusses Northern Ireland, Greek towns are the focus of Venetia Evergeti and Eleftheria Deltsou's article and South Tyrol is examined by Jaro Stacul. The volume makes for diverse and diversifying reading, and can only be highly recommended to anyone interested in innovative perspectives on the fate of the European project.