Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (12) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Jewish Studies (3)
- Jüdische Studien (3)
- 19. Jahrhundert (1)
- 19th century (1)
- 20. Jahrhundert (1)
- 20th century (1)
- American history (1)
- Bibel (1)
- Bible (1)
- Central Europe (1)
- European Jewish history (1)
- Familiengeschichte (1)
- Frühe Neuzeit (1)
- Galicia (1)
- Genealogie (1)
- German-Jewish History (1)
- Habsburg Empire (1)
- Habsburg Studies (1)
- Habsburgisches Reich (1)
- Habsburgstudien (1)
- Hebrew (1)
- Hebräisch (1)
- Intersections (1)
- Jiddisch (1)
- Migration (1)
- Modern Jewish history (1)
- Moderne Jüdische Geschichte (1)
- Translations (1)
- USA (1)
- Yiddish (1)
- Zentraleuropa (1)
- book history (1)
- cultural history (1)
- cultural pluralism (1)
- deutsch-jüdische Geschichte (1)
- early modern history (1)
- education (1)
- family history (1)
- genealogy (1)
- historiography (1)
- history and memory (1)
- interfaith dialogue (1)
- migration (1)
- modern Jewish history (1)
- modern Judaism (1)
- moderne jüdische Geschichte (1)
- publishing history (1)
- rabbinical seminaries (1)
- transnational history (1)
- transnationale Studien (1)
- Überschneidungen (1)
- Übersetzungen (1)
In the aftermath of the Shoah and the ostensible triumph of nationalism, it became common in historiography to relegate Jews to the position of the “eternal other” in a series of binaries: Christian/Jewish, Gentile/Jewish, European/Jewish, non-Jewish/Jewish, and so forth. For the longest time, these binaries remained characteristic of Jewish historiography, including in the Central European context. Assuming instead, as the more recent approaches in Habsburg studies do, that pluriculturalism was the basis of common experience in formerly Habsburg Central Europe, and accepting that no single “majority culture” existed, but rather hegemonies were imposed in certain contexts, then the often used binaries are misleading and conceal the complex and sometimes even paradoxical conditions that shaped Jewish life in the region before the Shoah.
The very complexity of Habsburg Central Europe both in synchronic and diachronic perspective precludes any singular historical narrative of “Habsburg Jewry,” and it is not the intention of this volume to offer an overview of “Habsburg Jewish history.” The selected articles in this volume illustrate instead how important it is to reevaluate categories, deconstruct historical narratives, and reconceptualize implemented approaches in specific geographic, temporal, and cultural contexts in order to gain a better understanding of the complex and pluricultural history of the Habsburg Empire and the region as a whole.
The field of American Jewish studies has recently trained its focus on the transnational dimensions of its subject, reflecting in more sustained ways than before about the theories and methods of this approach. Yet, much of the insight to be gained from seeing American Jewry as constitutively entangled in many ways with other Jewries has not yet been realized. Transnational American Jewish studies are still in their infancy.
This issue of PaRDeS presents current research on the multiple entanglements of American with Central European, especially German-speaking Jewries in the 19th and 20th centuries. The articles reflect the wide range of topics that can benefit from a transnational understanding of the American Jewish experience as shaped by its foreign entanglements.
PaRDeS, the journal of the German Association for Jewish Studies, aims at exploring the fruitful and multifarious cultures of Judaism as well as their relations to their environment within diverse areas of research. In addition, the journal promotes Jewish Studies within academic discourse and reflects on its historic and social responsibilities.
PaRDeS. Zeitschrift der Vereinigung für Jüdische Studien e.V., möchte die fruchtbare und facettenreiche Kultur des Judentums sowie seine Berührungspunkte zur Umwelt in den unterschiedlichen Bereichen dokumentieren. Daneben dient die Zeitschrift als Forum zur Positionierung der Fächer Jüdische Studien und Judaistik innerhalb des wissenschaftlichen Diskurses sowie zur Diskussion ihrer historischen und gesellschaftlichen Verantwortung.
In 1924, the Berlin ophthalmologist Arthur Czellitzer (1871–1943) and like-minded members of the local Jewish community founded the Society for Jewish Family Research. A year later, the Society launched the journal Jüdische Familienforschung (Jewish Family Research), edited by Czellitzer. The Society was an outstanding platform of professional academic and amateur researchers and promoted a type of Jewish genealogy and family history that was shaped by the historical-medical discourse of the time. The concepts and methods of both the biological sciences and Wissenschaft des Judentums shaped and defined the academic approach to family research and history in Czellitzer’s and the Society’s work. The Society soon became the leading international association for the academic Jewish genealogical research. Despite of its brutal end in 1938, Arthur Czellitzer’s and the Society’s works, the issues raised, and the methods they created shape Jewish family research and genealogy until today.