Historisches Institut
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (136)
- Review (36)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (20)
- Part of a Book (15)
- Part of Periodical (9)
- Other (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (3)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Master's Thesis (2)
- Journal/Publication series (2)
Language
- English (233) (remove)
Keywords
- Tolkien (7)
- Second World War (5)
- Cold War (4)
- East Germany (4)
- Classical Reception (3)
- GDR (3)
- Germany (3)
- Italy (3)
- Wehrmacht (3)
- classical reception (3)
Institute
- Historisches Institut (233)
- Arbeitskreis Militär und Gesellschaft in der Frühen Neuzeit e. V. (1)
- Institut für Jüdische Studien und Religionswissenschaft (1)
- Institut für Philosophie (1)
- Moses Mendelssohn Zentrum für europäisch-jüdische Studien e. V. (1)
- Sozialwissenschaften (1)
- Vereinigung für Jüdische Studien e. V. (1)
Captive Red Army soldiers made up the majority of victims of Nazi Germany’s starvation policy against Soviet civilians and other non-combatants and thus constituted the largest single victim group of the German war of annihilation against the Soviet Union. Indeed, Soviet prisoners of war were the largest victim group of all National Socialist annihilation policies after the European Jews. Before the launch of Operation Barbarossa, it was clear to the Wehrmacht planning departments on exactly what scale they could expect to capture Soviet troops. Yet, they neglected to make the necessary preparations for feeding and sheltering the captured soldiers, who were viewed by the economic staffs and the military leadership alike as direct competitors of German troops and the German home front for precious food supplies. The number of extra mouths to feed was incompatible with German war aims. The obvious limitations on their freedom of movement and the relative ease with which large numbers could be segregated and their rations controlled were crucial factors in the death of over 3 million Soviet POWs, the vast majority directly or indirectly as a result of deliberate policies of neglect, undernourishment, and starvation while in the ‘care’ of the Wehrmacht. The most reliable figures for the mortality of Soviet POWs in German captivity reveal that up to 3.3 million died from a total of just over 5.7 million captured between June 1941 and February 1945 — a proportion of almost 58 percent. Of these, 2 million were already dead by the beginning of February 1942. In English, there is still neither a single monograph nor a single edited volume dedicated to the subject. This article now provides the first detailed stand-alone synthesis in that language addressing the whole period from 1941 to 1945.
"Writing with my professors”
(2023)
Kollaboratives Forschen quer zu hegemonialen Wissensordnungen gilt als wichtiger Baustein dekolonialer Wissenspraxis. Gemeinsame Schreibprozesse von Wissenschaftler*innen und ihren nicht-wissenschaftlichen Forschungspartner*innen sind allerdings selten und eine methodologische und forschungspraktische Reflexion fehlt. Die Beiträger*innen widmen sich diesen Lücken, indem sie erfolgreiche, aber auch gescheiterte Projekte kollaborativer Textproduktion zwischen Universität und Feld vorstellen und auf ihr Potenzial als transformative und dekoloniale Wissenspraxis befragen. So entsteht eine praktische Orientierungshilfe, die gleichzeitig die interdisziplinäre Diskussion anregt.
This open access book is about Mozambicans and Angolans who migrated in state-sponsored schemes to East Germany in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s. They went to work and to be trained as a vanguard labor force for the intended African industrial revolutions. While they were there, they contributed their labor power to the East German economy.
This book draws on more than 260 life history interviews and uncovers complex and contradictory experiences and transnational encounters. What emerges is a series of dualities that exist side by side in the memories of the former migrants: the state and the individual, work and consumption, integration and exclusion, loss and gain, and the past in the past and the past in the present and future. By uncovering these dualities, the book explores the lives of African migrants moving between the Third and Second worlds.
Devoted to the memories of worker-trainees, this transnational study comes at a time when historians are uncovering the many varied, complicated, and important connections within the global socialist world.
Never again?
(2023)
The Holocaust was the most terrible atrocity of the 20th century. In many ways, it was also unprecedented in the history of atrocities: for its comprehensiveness and systematic nature; for the fanaticism with which its perpetrators scoured an entire continent in their pursuit of Jews; for the awful potency of the Nazis’ insinuation that the victims represented a pernicious and existential threat. Collectively, we have spent decades—and published millions of words—trying to understand what happened and why.
The holocaust in the USSR
(2021)
This paper sketches the current status of international scholarship on the subject of the Holocaust in the USSR and its place in the wider military conflict of the Second World War. Research on this topic over the last 20 to 30 years has been truly international and the findings of this research cannot be sketched here without pointing to the contributions made by German, American, Russian, Israeli, British and Australian historians. Historians from these countries have made important contributions to our understanding of key questions relating to this subject. These questions address, among other things, pre-invasion orders issued to German units; the radicalisation of German policy, culminating in the root-and-branch extermination of Soviet Jewry; the network of ghettos set up on Soviet territory; the nature of the killing and the methods used to murder these victims; the total death toll of the Holocaust in the USSR; and the relationship between war and extermination, in which genocide can be regarded as an actual strategy of warfare pursued by the German Reich.
In the Shadow of Ukraine
(2022)
In 2022, India captured global attention over its response to the war in Ukraine. While calling for both parties' return to diplomacy, India abstained from several United Nations resolutions condemning Russian aggression. For a country that ostensibly subscribes to the values of democracy and territorial integrity, its response appeared frustrating and contradictory, but it is broadly consistent with its long-standing policy of non-alignment. Although India's relationship with China is increasingly contentious, New Delhi is not yet fully convinced that it is in India's interest to swing westwards. The country's relations with Russia and China are deep, complex and substantive. In addition to the military and economic benefits it derives from its connection with Russia, New Delhi and Moscow share an avowed preference for a more equal, multipolar world. India will eventually have to reflect on the extent to which it can sustain its balancing act.
Spring Issue
(2024)