Historisches Institut
Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (445) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (268)
- Review (63)
- Part of Periodical (28)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (27)
- Doctoral Thesis (20)
- Master's Thesis (16)
- Postprint (15)
- Bachelor Thesis (5)
- Other (2)
- Lecture (1)
Language
- German (422)
- English (19)
- French (2)
- Italian (1)
- Multiple languages (1)
Keywords
- regional history (11)
- Franconia (10)
- Franken (10)
- Genisa (10)
- Geniza (10)
- Jewish Studies (10)
- Jüdische Studien (10)
- Landesgeschichte (10)
- Ländliches Judentum (10)
- Militär / Geschichte (10)
Institute
- Historisches Institut (445)
- Arbeitskreis Militär und Gesellschaft in der Frühen Neuzeit e. V. (26)
- Vereinigung für Jüdische Studien e. V. (11)
- Extern (10)
- Institut für Germanistik (3)
- Zentrum für Lehrerbildung und Bildungsforschung (ZeLB) (2)
- Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik (1)
- Institut für Informatik und Computational Science (1)
- Institut für Lebensgestaltung-Ethik-Religionskunde (1)
- Institut für Mathematik (1)
- Institut für Slavistik (1)
- Referat für Presse- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (1)
Nero nuntiis magis et rumoribus quam armis depulsus. Der römische Geschichtsschreiber Tacitus konstatierte in den Historien, Kaiser Nero sei „mehr durch Botschaften und Gerüchte gestürzt worden als durch Waffengewalt“ (hist. 1,89,2). Laut der antiken Quellen redete die plebs urbana tatsächlich mit unbändigem Interesse über den princeps und diskutierte Gerüchte, die Neros Verfehlungen als Schutzherr Roms thematisierten oder ihn gar der Brandstiftung bezichtigten – das Bild des verrückten Kaisers, der Leier spielend seine Freude über das brennende Rom ausdrückt, dient weithin als anschauliches Beispiel eines Tyrannen.
Diese Arbeit überprüft die genannte taciteische These auf Schlüssigkeit. Dazu muss die komplexe Konstellation der Herrschaft Neros sowie seines Untergangs, in Hinblick auf die Wirkungsweise der Gerüchte, dargelegt und analysiert werden. Es werden anfangs elementare Fragen der geschichtswissenschaftlichen Forschung zu Nero und zum frühen Prinzipat behandelt: Über welches Ansehen und Handlungspotential verfügte die plebs urbana? Wodurch wurde die Herrschaft des Kaisers legitimiert und auf welche Gruppen zielte Neros Herrschaftspropaganda ab?
Im Anschluss erläutert und analysiert der Verfasser die Funktionen des Gerüchts als Mittel der politischen Meinungsbildung für die Aristokratie und die hauptstädtische plebs. Der Einfluss der üblen Nachrede auf die Herrschaft Neros wird durch die Schilderung dreier kennzeichnender Gerüchtekomplexe analysiert und führt schließlich zu der Frage, ob tatsächlich die fama zum Sturz des Kaisers führte oder vielmehr die vernachlässigte Heeresklientel an den Reichsgrenzen die entscheidenden Entwicklungen vorantrieb.
Zwischen Schah und Khomeini
(2015)
1978/79 fegte eine Revolution das Regime von Schah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi im Iran hinweg - eine islamische Revolution, an deren Ende ein Gottesstaat unter Führung der Geistlichkeit stand, mit Ayatollah Khomeini an der Spitze. Die Bundesregierung unter Kanzler Helmut Schmidt und Außenminister Hans-Dietrich Genscher befand sich in einer Zwickmühle: Einerseits war der Iran ein wichtiger Erdöllieferant und Handelspartner, andererseits verstörte die Gewalt gegen politische Gegner und Vertreter der westlichen Staatengemeinschaft, die in der Besetzung der amerikanischen Botschaft in Teheran gipfelte. Frank Bösch zeigt auf der Basis neuer Quellen, wie die Bundesregierung auf die islamische Revolution reagierte, zwischen interessengeleitetem Pragmatismus und außenpolitisch gebotener Bündnistreue zu den USA lavierte und so hinter den Kulissen als Vermittler zwischen Teheran und Washington fungieren konnte.
Arthur Ewert (1890-1959)
(2015)
Arthur Ewert (1890-1959) war in den zwanziger und frühen dreißiger Jahren ein wichtiger Funktionär der Kommunistischen Partei Deutschlands und der Kommunistischen Internationale.
Er wurde in der Familie eines armen Bauern in Ostpreußen geboren. Nach dem Abschluß der Schule ging er nach Berlin, um hier eine Lehre als Sattler zu absolvieren. Über die Berliner Arbeiterjugendbewegung fand er Kontakt zur Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands, deren Mitglied er 1908 wurde.
Im Mai 1914 emigrierte er gemeinsam mit seiner langjährigen Lebensgefährtin und späteren Ehefrau Elise Saborowski (1886-1939) nach Nordamerika, wo er sich sofort der sozialistischen Bewegung anschloß. Anfang 1919 gehörte er zu den Mitbegründern der ersten Kommunistischen Partei Kanadas.
Im Sommer 1919 kehrte er nach Deutschland zurück und wurde Mitglied der wenige Monate zuvor gegründeten KPD.
Auf dem Leipziger Parteitag der KPD im Februar 1923 wurde er in die zwanzigköpfige Zentrale seiner Partei gewählt und stieg damit in den engeren Führungszirkel auf.
Nach der gescheiterten »Deutschen Oktoberrevolution« im Herbst 1923 kämpfte er gemeinsam mit Ernst Meyer, Hugo Eberlein, Wilhelm Pieck und anderen um das Überleben der KPD, doch gelang es seiner Gruppe nicht, den Sieg der Linken und Ultralinken im parteiinternen Machtkampf zu verhindern. Ewert wurde politisch »kaltgestellt« und schied für mehr als ein Jahr aus der Parteiführung aus.
In dieser Zeit erfüllte er verschiedene Aufgaben für die Kommunistische Internationale. Bereits im Juni 1923 war er Berichterstatter zur Lage in der Norwegischen Arbeiterpartei gewesen, ab Ende 1924 war er Abgesandter bei der KP Großbritanniens. Im Sommer und Frühherbst 1927 hielt er sich mehrere Monate in den USA auf.
Im Sommer 1925 wurde er auf Veranlassung der Kommunistischen Internationale in die Führung der KPD zurückgeholt. Er trug wesentlich dazu bei, die Parteiführung unter Ernst Thälmann zu stabilisieren und sie – zumindest zeitweise – auf einen realpolitischen Kurs zu orientieren.
Mit dem erneuten »Links«-Schwenk der KPD ab Anfang 1928 wurde er als »Versöhnler« stigmatisiert und zunehmend zur Zielscheibe innerparteilicher Attacken. Der Versuch eines »Befreiungsschlages« unter Ausnutzung der sogenannten Wittorf-Affäre im Herbst 1928 scheiterte, bis zum Sommer 1929 wurde Arthur Ewert auf Drängen Stalins und mit ausdrücklicher Zustimmung Thälmanns aus allen Funktionen in der KPD entfernt.
Nach der Auflösung des Reichstags und dem damit verbundenen Verlust seines Reichstagsmandats im Juli 1930 schied Ewert endgültig aus der deutschen Parteiarbeit aus.
Ende 1930 wurde er zum Leiter des Südamerikanischen Büros der Kommunistischen Internationale in Montevideo, der Hauptstadt Uruguays, ernannt. Er trug damit Verantwortung für die unmittelbare Anleitung der Kommunistischen Parteien im sogenannten Südkegel Südamerikas. In diese Zeit fielen seine ersten Kontakte zu Luiz Carlos Prestes, dem legendären »Ritter der Hoffnung«, mit dem er ab Anfang 1935 in Brasilien zusammenarbeitete.
Von 1932 bis 1934 leitete Arthur Ewert das Büro der Kommunistischen Internationale in Shanghai und spielte dabei eine entscheidende Rolle zugunsten Mao Tse-tungs, dessen politisches Überleben er in einem innerparteilichen Machtkampf der KP Chinas sicherte.
Als Vertreter der Kommunistischen Internationale war Arthur Ewert im Verlaufe des Jahres 1935 an den Versuchen beteiligt, in Brasilien – gestützt auf ein breites Bündnis, die »Nationale Befreiungsallianz« - einen politischen Machtwechsel herbeizuführen. Nach dem Scheitern des von Prestes geführten Aufstandsversuches wurde er Ende 1935 verhaftet. Arthur Ewert verlor in Folge der barbarischen Folterungen in brasilianischer Haft den Verstand.
Er kam im Mai 1945 im Ergebnis einer Amnestie frei. 1947 gelang es seiner Schwester, ihn in die sowjetische Besatzungszone zurückzuholen. Die Ärzte dort konnten nur noch feststellen, daß eine Heilung unmöglich war. Arthur Ewert verbrachte den Rest seines Lebens in einem Pflegeheim in Eberswalde, wo er 1959 starb.
Die Debatte geht weiter: Gab es 1930/31 ernst zu nehmende Kreditangebote der französischen Regierung an das Deutsche Reich? Versäumte es die Reichsregierung unter Kanzler Heinrich Brüning aus politisch- revisionistischem Kalkül heraus bewusst, diese Angebote auszuloten? War die eiserne Sparpolitik der ersten beiden Präsidialkabinette also nicht die alternativlose Konsequenz ökonomischer Zwänge, sondern die logische Folge davon unabhängiger außen- und gesellschaftspolitischer Prämissen? Paul Köppen, der diese Debatte im Juli 2014 in den Vierteljahrsheften für Zeitgeschichte eröffnet hat, antwortet seinen Kritikern, präzisiert seine Argumentation und stellt seine Thesen in den weiteren Kontext der aktuellen Diskussion um die Chancen und Belastungen der Zeit zwischen den Weltkriegen.
Although claiming the authority of an eye-witness account, frater Simon’s letter is almost certainly a ficticious description of the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. This presumed lack of authenticity has obviously prompted modern scholarship for a long time to be oblivious to this contemporary and exclusive source on the events, preferring well-known and reliable sources such as Leonard of Chios and Isidore of Kiev. However, since frater Simon’s letter has survived in two different versions and ten manuscripts from the 15th century, it is clearly more than a marginal note. Rather is it a remarkable contribution to the literary treatment of the Turkish threat and timeless moral instruction.With his portrayal of the pagan Mehmed II as a just ruler, the recurring moral instructions and the lack of a call to arms. Simon’s text stands out against themyriad of more or less contemporary depictions. In preparation for a critical edition the paper gives an analysis of the text and an overview of the extant manuscripts.
Einleitung zu Georg Lukács
(2015)
Two short typescripts by G. Lukacs from the archive, dating from 1941/42, shed light on his appraisal of the cultural ‘inner reserves’ of Germany and the ‘moral reserves’ of the democracies involved in the Second World War, as well as on Lukacs’s political philosophy at that time. The conception of an intrinsic interrelation of a humanist philosophical anthropology and rationalist epistemology elucidates his egalitarian and democratic account. Both texts are located within the intellectual development of the author in an introduction by the editor, which sketches the historical background and indicates relevant contemporaneous theoretical and political debates, such as the controversies over realism and humanism and also a dispute with K. Jaspers on German collective guilt.
Au centre de cette étude se trouvent les patients de la clinique psychiatrique et neurologique de la Charité (Berlin-Est, RDA), durant la période des années 1960. Tout en prenant en compte l'interprétation qui en est faite par le discours médical, ce travail vise à reconstituer les expériences et les trajectoires de ces individus, en les inscrivant dans le contexte de la société socialiste. À partir des dossiers de patients – qui constituent le principal matériau archivistique de cette étude –, il s'agit de saisir certaines des tensions qui traversent la société est-allemande, en relation avec le contexte politique et idéologique. Comme en attestent ces sources, dans le cadre de l'échange thérapeutique, les patients peuvent prendre la parole selon des règles qui diffèrent de celles habituellement en vigueur au sein de la société socialiste. Parce qu'ils peuvent contenir les traces d'une parole ordinairement mise sous silence, du fait de la censure ou de l'auto-censure, de son caractère indicible, inavouable ou délirant, les dossiers de patients apparaissent comme une source précieuse pour l'historien. Des tensions conjugales provoquées par des dissensions idéologiques aux conflits intérieurs d'une « fervente marxiste », de la douleur suscitée par la radiation du parti à celle née de la construction du Mur, des « délires réunificateurs » à ceux faisant de l'Ouest une source de menaces, les expériences individuelles et singulières des patients permettent de reconstituer, selon une approche micro- historique, certaines tensions inhérentes au fonctionnement de la société socialiste.
Im Rahmen eines interdisziplinären studentischen Projekts wurde ein Framework für mobile pervasive Lernspiele entwickelt. Am Beispiel des historischen Lernortes Park Sanssouci wurde auf dieser Grundlage ein Lernspiel für Schülerinnen und Schüler implementiert. Die geplante Evaluation soll die Lernwirksamkeit von geobasierten mobilen Lernspielen messen. Dazu wird die Intensität des Flow-Erlebens mit einer ortsgebundenen alternativen Umsetzung verglichen.
What is a radical? Somebody who goes against mainstream opinions? An agitator who suggests transforming society at the risk of endangering its harmony? In the political context of the British Isles at the end of the eighteenth century, the word radical had a negative connotation. It referred to the Levellers and the English Civil War, it brought back a period of history which was felt as a traumatic experience. Its stigmas were still vivid in the mind of the political leaders of these times. The reign of Cromwell was certainly the main reason for the general aversion of any form of virulent contestation of the power, especially when it contained political claims.
In the English political context, radicalism can be understood as the different campaigns for parliamentary reforms establishing universal suffrage. However, it became evident that not all those who were supporting such a reform originated from the same social class or shared the same ideals. As a matter of fact, the reformist associations and their leaders often disagreed with each other. Edward Royle and Hames Walvin claimed that radicalism could not be analyzed historically as a concept, because it was not a homogeneous movement, nor it had common leaders and a clear ideology. For them, radicalism was merely a loose concept, « a state of mind rather than a plan of action. »
At the beginning of the nineteenth-century, the newspaper The Northern Star used the word radical in a positive way to designate a person or a group of people whose ideas were conform to those of the newspaper. However, an opponent of parliamentary reform will use the same word in a negative way, in this case the word radical will convey a notion of menace. From the very beginning, the term radical covered a large spectrum of ideas and conceptions. In fact, the plurality of what the word conveys is the main characteristic of what a radical is. As a consequence, because the radicals tended to differentiate themselves with their plurality and their differences rather than with common features, it seems impossible to define what radicalism (whose suffix in –ism implies that it designate a doctrine, an ideology) is. Nevertheless, today it is accepted by all historians. From the mid-twentieth century, we could say that it was taken from granted to consider radicalism as a movement that fitted with the democratic precepts (universal suffrage, freedom of speech) of our modern world.
Let us first look at radicalism as a convenient way to designate the different popular movements appealing to universal suffrage during the time period 1792-1848. We could easily observe through the successions of men and associations, a long lasting radical state of mind: Cartwright, Horne Tooke, Thomas Hardy, Francis Burdett, William Cobbett, Henry Hunt, William Lovett, Bronterre O’Brien, Feargus O’Connor, The London Society for Constitutional information (SCI), The London Corresponding Society (LCS), The Hampden Clubs, The Chartists, etc. These organizations and people acknowledged having many things in common and being inspired by one another in carrying out their activities. These influences can be seen in the language and the political ideology that British historians name as "Constitutionalist", but also, in the political organization of extra-parliamentary societies. Most of the radicals were eager to redress injustices and, in practice, they were inspired by a plan of actions drawn on from the pamphlets of the True Whigs of the eighteenth-century. We contest the argument that the radicals lacked coherence and imagination or that they did not know how to put into practice their ambitions. In fact, their innovative forms of protest left a mark on history and found many successors in the twentieth century. Radicals’ prevarications were the result of prohibitive legislation that regulated the life of associations and the refusal of the authorities to cooperate with them.
As mentioned above, the term radical was greatly used and the contemporaries of the period starting from the French Revolution to Chartism never had to quarrel about the notions the word radical covered. However, this does not imply that all radicals were the same or that they belong to the same entity. Equally to Horne Tooke, the Reverend and ultra-Tory Stephens was considered as a radical, it went also with the shoemaker Thomas Hardy and the extravagant aristocrat Francis Burdett. Whether one belonged to the Aristocracy, the middle-class, the lower class or the Church, nothing could prevent him from being a radical. Surely, anybody could be a radical in its own way. Radicalism was wide enough to embrace everybody, from revolutionary reformers to paternalistic Tories.
We were interested to clarify the meaning of the term radical because its inclusive nature was overlooked by historians. That’s why the term radical figures in the original title of our dissertation Les voix/voies radicales (radical voices/ways to radicalism). In the French title, both words voix/voies are homonymous; the first one voix (voice) correspond to people, the second one voies (ways) refers to ideas. By this, we wanted to show that the word radical belongs to the sphere of ideas and common experience but also to the nature of human beings.
Methodoloy
The thesis stresses less on the question of class and its formation than on the circumstances that brought people to change their destiny and those of their fellows or to modernize the whole society. We challenged the work of E.P. Thompson, who in his famous book, The Making of the English Working Class, defined the radical movements in accordance with an idea of class.
How a simple shoe-maker, Thomas Hardy, could become the center of attention during a trial where he was accused of being the mastermind of a modern revolution? What brought William Cobbett, an ultra-Tory, self-taught intellectual, to gradually espouse the cause of universal suffrage at a period where it was unpopular to do so? Why a whole population gathered to hear Henry Hunt, a gentleman farmer whose background did not destine him for becoming the champion of the people? It seemed that the easiest way to answer to these questions and to understand the nature of the popular movements consisted in studying the life of their leaders. We aimed at reconstructing the universe which surrounded the principal actors of the reform movements as if we were a privileged witness of theses times.
This idea to associate the biographies of historical characters for a period of more than fifty years arouse when we realized that key events of the reform movements were echoing each other, such the trial of Thomas Hardy in 1794 and the massacre of Peterloo of 1819. The more we learned about the major events of radicalism and the life of their leaders, the more we were intrigued. Finally, one could ask himself if being a radical was not after all a question of character rather than one of class. The different popular movements in favour of a parliamentary reform were in fact far more inclusive and diversified from what historians traditionally let us to believe. For instance, once he manage to gather a sufficient number of members of the popular classes, Thomas Hardy projected to give the control of his association to an intellectual elite led by Horne Tooke.
Moreover, supporters of the radical reforms followed leaders whose background was completely different as theirs. For example, O’Connor claimed royal descent from the ancient kings of Ireland. William Cobbett, owner of a popular newspaper was proud of his origins as a farmer. William Lovett, close to the liberals and a few members of parliament came from a very poor family of fishermen. We have thus put together the life of these five men, Thomas hardy, William Cobbett, Henry Hunt, William Lovett and Feargus O’Connor in order to compose a sort of a saga of the radicals. This association gives us a better idea of the characteristics of the different movements in which they participated, but also, throw light on the circumstances of their formation and their failures, on the particular atmosphere which prevailed at these times, on the men who influenced these epochs, and finally on the marks they had left. These men were at the heart of a whole network and in contact with other actors of peripheral movements. They gathered around themselves close and loyal fellows with whom they shared many struggles but also quarreled and had strong words.
The original part of our approach is reflected in the choice to not consider studying the fluctuations of the radical movements in a linear fashion where the story follows a strict chronology. We decided to split up the main issue of the thesis through different topics. To do so, we simply have described the life of the people who inspired these movements. Each historical figure covers a chapter, and the general story follows a chronological progression. Sometimes we had to go back through time or discuss the same events in different chapters when the main protagonists lived in the same period of time.
Radical movements were influenced by people of different backgrounds. What united them above all was their wish to obtain a normalization of the political world, to redress injustices and obtain parliamentary reform. We paid particular attention to the moments where the life of these men corresponded to an intense activity of the radical movement or to a transition of its ideas and organization. We were not so much interested in their feelings about secondary topics nor did we about their affective relations. Furthermore, we had little interest in their opinions on things which were not connected to our topic unless it helped us to have a better understanding of their personality. We have purposely reduced the description of our protagonists to their radical sphere. Of course we talked about their background and their intellectual development; people are prone to experience reversals of opinions, the case of Cobbett is the most striking one.
The life of these personalities coincided with particular moments of the radical movement, such as the first popular political associations, the first open-air mass meetings, the first popular newspapers, etc. We wanted to emphasize the personalities of those who addressed speeches and who were present in the radical associations. One could argue that the inconvenience of focusing on a particular person presents a high risk of overlooking events and people who were not part of his world. However, it was essential to differ from an analysis or a chronicle which had prevailed in the studies of the radical movements, as we aimed at offering a point of view that completed the precedents works written on that topic. In order to do so, we have deliberately put the humane character of the radical movement at the center of our work and used the techniques of biography as a narrative thread.
Conclusion
The life of each historical figure that we have portrayed corresponded to a particular epoch of the radical movement. Comparing the speeches of the radical leaders over a long period of time, we noticed that the radical ideology evolved. The principles of the Rights of Men faded away and gave place to more concrete reasoning, such as the right to benefit from one’s own labour. This transition is characterized by the Chartist period of Feargus O’Connor. This does not mean that collective memory and radical tradition ceased to play an important part. The popular classes were always appealed to Constitutional rhetoric and popular myths. Indeed, thanks to them they identified themselves and justified their claims to universal suffrage.
We focused on the life of a few influent leaders of radicalism in order to understand its evolution and its nature. The description of their lives constituted our narrative thread and it enabled us to maintain consistency in our thesis. If the chapters are independent the one from the other, events and speeches are in correspondences. Sometimes we could believe that we were witnessing a repetition of facts and events as if history was repeating itself endlessly. However, like technical progress, the spirit of time, Zeitgeist, experiences changes and mutations. These features are fundamental elements to comprehend historical phenomena; the latter cannot be simplified to philosophical, sociological, or historical concept. History is a science which has this particularity that the physical reality of phenomena has a human dimension. As a consequence, it is essential not to lose touch with the human aspect of history when one pursues studies and intellectual activities on a historical phenomenon.
We decided to take a route opposite to the one taken by many historians. We have first identified influential people from different epochs before entering into concepts analysis. Thanks to this compilation of radical leaders, a new and fresh look to the understanding of radicalism was possible. Of course, we were not the first one to have studied them, but we ordered them following a chronology, like Plutarch enjoyed juxtaposing Greeks and Romans historical figures. Thanks to this technique we wanted to highlight the features of the radical leaders’ speeches, personalities and epochs, but also their differences. At last, we tried to draw the outlines and the heart of different radical movements in order to follow the ways that led to radicalism. We do not pretend to have offered an original and exclusive definition of radicalism, we mainly wanted to understand the nature of what defines somebody as a radical and explain the reasons why thousands of people decided to believe in this man. Moreover, we wanted to distance ourselves from the ideological debate of the Cold War which permeated also the interpretation of past events. Too often, the history of radicalism was either narrated with a form of revolutionary nostalgia or in order to praise the merits of liberalism.
If the great mass meetings ends in the mid-nineteenth-century with the fall of Chartism, this practice spread out in the whole world in the twentieth-century. Incidentally, the Arab Spring of the beginning of the twenty-first-century demonstrated that a popular platform was the best way for the people to claim their rights and destabilize a political system which they found too authoritative. Through protest the people express an essential quality of revolt, which is an expression of emancipation from fear. From then on, a despotic regime loses this psychological terror which helped it to maintain itself into power. The balance of power between the government and its people would also take a new turn. The radicals won this psychological victory more than 150 years ago and yet universal suffrage was obtained only a century later. From the acceptance of the principles of liberties to their cultural practice, a long route has to be taken to change people’s mind. It is a wearisome struggle for the most vulnerable people. In the light of western history, fundamental liberties must be constantly defended. Paradoxically, revolt is an essential and constitutive element of the maintenance of democracy.
Die Arbeit beleuchtet die Beziehungen zwischen der DDR und der Volksrepublik China in den Jahren 1978 bis 1990. Dabei werden sowohl die innen-, wie auch die außenpolitischen Bedingungen dieser Beziehungen in der DDR und China beleuchtet. Besonderes Augenmerk wird auch auf die Sowjetunion gelegt. Die Beziehungen Moskaus gegenüber Beijing und Ostberlin werden dargestellt und mit den daraus resultierenden Folgen für die DDR-Führung in Bezug gesetzt.