DOCSLIB.ORG

Historikerstreit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historikerstreit History is??? 1. History is the progression of humans 2. History is the past 3. History is a systematic study of the past 4. “History is an effort to reconstruct the past to discover what people thought and did and how their beliefs and actions continue to influence human life.” [McKay, Hill, and Buckler, History of World Societies, 3rd ed., 1992, p. 4] As a systematic study, the students of history, i.e. historians, are finding out, or trying to find out, A. What happened B. Why it happened C. What is the importance of the event(s) that happened a. Impact of the past on the present HISTORY OF GERMANY AND POLITICS OF HISTORY OF GERMANY AND POLITICS OF GUILT a. Dealing with the history of the Third Reich was not an easy task in Germany. b. Both Germanys, East G and West G, renounced Nazism a. In West Germany Nazism was the reason for setting up a democratic step and turn the Germans in to citizens b. In East Germany it was the reason for setting up a socialist system c. In both Germanys the historiography of the Third Reich was related to and influenced by politics East Germany a. Nazism was a form of imperialism b. Imperialism is the last stage of capitalism c. What comes next is communism d. Communism is the “real” democracy e. In real democracy Nazism is not possible West Germany THREE STAGES of accounting for the past, each reflecting major changes in politics and political consciousness I. 1945-1960: Conservative; tended to repudiate but not take responsibility for Nazism; demonize Hitler and the top Nazi leadership; portray Germany as “seduced” by the Nazis; view Nazism as an accidental aberration in German history; pressures of the Cold War also shifted attention from the Nazi past; schools avoided the subject by ending courses with WWI. II. 1960s-1970s: Liberal-left; part of youth rebellion, younger scholars interested history of Nazi Germany, which they saw as repressed by their parents; interested in roles of social and economic groups in Imperial and Weimar Germany that undermined democracy; new interest in social history; emphasized Germany’s deviation for the Western democratic tradition, its sonderweg1; greater political acceptance of responsibility for Nazi crimes; III. 1980s: Neo-conservative revival: conservative politicians advocated casting off Germany’s “burden of guilt;” combat the true enemy: communism. Bitburg ceremony designed to bury the Nazi trauma and demonstrate a united front in the Cold War. President Reagan was to lay a wreath in a military ceremony that contained by the graves of Wehrmacht and Waffen SS soldiers; conservatives argued that Waffen SS draftees were as much victims as concentration camp inmates. Others felt this trivialized the role of the SS and denied the exceptionality of the Holocaust–this controversy anticipated the Historikerstreit. THE HISTORIKERSTREIT A. New conservative interpretations of Nazi Germany and Germany history appeared in the late 70s rejecting the liberal-left trends of the previous decades. a. Michael Stürmer (associated with the CDU) favoured a revival of national pride, a unified and positive national identity, and self-confidence i. denounced the liberal-left’s obsession with guilt. He wrote: “In a land without history, the future is controlled by those who determine the content of memory, coin the concepts and interpret the past.” 1 Sonderweg (“special path”), a theory in German historiography; it asserts that Germany has followed a unique course from aristocracy into democracy, distinct from other European countries. The path was to be a sort of “third way,” between the “vulgar” democracy of the West and the czarist autocracy of the East (Russia) 2 b. Jürgen Habermas set off the Historikerstreit by calling attention to the new conservative revisionism i. he attacked Stürmer and other historians, especially Ernst Nolte, who asserted that Nazi atrocities were no worse than those of Stalin and that Stalin’s atrocities provoked the Nazis’; Nolte denied the uniqueness of Nazism and the Holocaust. B. Debate divided historians along political and historiographical lines: a. the Liberal-left accused conservatives of trying to “normalize” and “relativize” the Nazi past b. conservatives accused their opponents of dwelling on guilt and weakening Germany C. Those debates ended up being about national identity and the ethics of West German politics Peter Baldwin “The Historikerstreit in Context" Reasons for the controversy o deals with the Nazi Regime and the Holocaust o involves "problems of historical methodology" o involves political questions--part of a Left-Right in German politics o debate cross-cuts these issues; hence its complexity Historikerstreit began in summer 1986; Jürgen Habermas challenged theses advanced by Andreas Hillgruber and Ernst Nolte; similar positions from Michael Stürmer, Joachim Fest, Klaus Hildebrand, and Hagen Schulze; Habermas and his allies (Hans-Ulrich Wehler, Jurgen Kocka, Eberhard Jackel, Hans Mommsen, and Wolfgang Mommsen) also charged that these conservatives were trying to “normalize” Germany's past; create a new national identity; and re- establish the continuity of German history; in line with the political agenda of the CDU. Hillgruber's Zweierlei Untergang contained two essays, one on the Holocaust, the other on the fate of the Wehrmacht on the Russian front and of the German civilian population in the east; the title suggested an equivalence between the two topics; further, Hillgruber treated the Holocaust in dispassionate terms, while he wrote with empathy of the German fate in the east; in the latter case, he called for imaginative sympathy for the soldier caught between the conflicting demands of patriotism and prolonging the war (and hence the Nazi regime's crimes); in the account of the Wehrmacht, Hillgruber may have blurred the lines between understanding motivation and justifying that motivation. Nolte, given the passage of time since the end of the war, called for the Nazi regime to be undemonized and to be treated as one "normal" historical event amongst many; also the Holocaust could be "normalized" or "relativized" and set in the context of other twentieth- century atrocities; further, that the precedent for the Nazi atrocities were Soviet efforts to exterminate the "bourgeois" kulaks; i.e. the Soviets murdered on the basis of class identity, while the Germans murdered on the basis of racial identity; further, that Hitler so feared Bolshevik terror (which he attributed to Jews) that he undertook the Holocaust as a preventive 3 measure [Baldwin says there is no evidence for such a claim]; further, Hitler could view Jews as an enemy because Chaim Weizmann declared in 1939 that Jews should fight alongside Britain. Two sides in the Historikerstreit 1. 1. Conservatives/CDU: Nazi regime, admittedly repulsive, was not unique when viewed in the context of 20th century history; Nazi Germany should be assimilated into the continuity of German history; the Nazi period should not provide a barrier to the past, distorting national identity, and preventing West Germans from recognizing the positive aspects of Weimar Germany and the Second Reich; problem of historization (=problem of locating the Third Reich in German history; its place in time, with distant origins and present consequences); 2. 2. Liberal/Socialists/SDP: integration and relativization as part of the conservative agenda was to gloss over the particular horrors of the Nazi period; also it glorified the Second Reich, whose peculiarities and weaknesses were passed on to Weimar Germany, and they made it possible for the Nazis to come to power. 4 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Communism That a Few Years Ago Was Unthinkable
    Norbert Frei and Dominik Rigoll, eds., Der Antikommunismus in seiner Epoche. Weltanschauung und Politik in Deutschland, Europa und den USA. Göttingen: Wallstein Verlag, 2017. 267 pages. ISBN 978-3-8353-3007-8 In the last few years, we have observed a growth of historiographic research on anti- communism that a few years ago was unthinkable. Arising from research into transnation- al anticommunist networks, the collection of essays here reviewed documents the results of a symposium held at the Jena Center 20th Century History and the Imre Kertész Kol- leg, which took place in November 2014.1 The fourteen papers, some written in German and some in English, are structured into three parts. They examine the genesis, the impact and the meaning of anticommunism as an ideological worldview in Germany, Europe and the United States. In the preface to the collection, one of its editors, Norbert Frei, says that the focus of the work is to explore how anticommunism became the common political denominator of certain institutions, individuals and political parties. What made anticommunism a popular lens with which to view so many political, social and cultural issues in the twentieth century? What linked and what distinguished the anti-Bolshevism that followed Russia’s 1917 revolution from Cold War anticommunism (p. 8)? The opening paper by Anselm Doering-Manteuffel is separate from the three parts of the book that follow it. The author discusses the stabilizing effect anticommunist mobi- lization had on its adherents, which stemmed from their fear of economic and political revolution. Doering-Manteuffel seeks to integrate the philosophy of anticommunism into the history of ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Heidegger on Humanism 8
    Alon Segev Thinking and Killing Alon Segev Thinking and Killing Philosophical Discourse in the Shadow of the Third Reich ISBN 978-1-61451-128-1 e-ISBN 978-1-61451-101-4 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the internet http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2013 Walter de Gruyter, Inc., Boston/Berlin Typesetting: Frank Benno Junghanns, Berlin Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com Foreword The motivation for writing this book began with my, one might say, naïve belief that critical thinking could have avoided the rise of the Third Reich and the Shoah in World War II. The main culprits were put on trial in Nuremberg, and then came the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem and the Auschwitz trials in Germany. Later on, the compliancy of Heidegger, Gadamer, and others with the Nazi regime was exposed by prominent scholars.1 Thus, the personal and public reputations of Heidegger, Jünger, Schmitt, Gadamer and others were destroyed and then partly rehabilitated. Their teaching, which was essential in consolidating and promulgating the Nazi world-view and in creating and designing the atmosphere of support for the Nazi movement, has, however, mostly remained untouched and continues to be uncritically studied and referred to. As Alain Finkielkraut writes: As Jankélévitch has rightly noted, the extermination of the Jews “was doctrinally founded, philosophically explained, methodically prepared by the most pedantic doctri- narians ever to have existed.” The Nazis were not, in effect, brutes, but theorists.
    [Show full text]
  • A Historiography of Fascism
    History in the Making Volume 6 Article 5 2013 A Historiography of Fascism Glenn-Iain Steinback CSUSB Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making Part of the Political History Commons Recommended Citation Steinback, Glenn-Iain (2013) "A Historiography of Fascism," History in the Making: Vol. 6 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/history-in-the-making/vol6/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in History in the Making by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Articles History Department’s 2013 Faculty Choice Award A Historiography of Fascism By Glenn-Iain Steinback Abstract: A long-standing historical debate revolves around the definition, fundamental nature and historical constraints of the concept of fascism. A wide array of scholarly questions about the political and ideological nature of fascism, the minimum or necessary traits of a fascist movement, arguments over the classification of semi-fascist groups and the concept of generic fascism characterize this debate. The result is a substantial body of scholarly research replete with competing theories for the evolution and origin of fascism as a concept, of individual fascist movements and even over the geographic and temporal application of the term itself within history. This paper is a historiography of fascist studies that illuminates the development of the scholarly narrative and understanding of fascism. Beginning with the historically contemporary Marxist perceptive of fascism, this paper examines competing and complimentary understandings of the phenomenon across the twentieth century, including various theories for the evolution of fascism in Europe, the relationship to and placement of fascism in the broader political spectrum, and the debate over fascism as a form of political religion.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction After Totalitarianism – Stalinism and Nazism Compared
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-89796-9 - Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared Michael Geyer and Sheila Fitzpatrick Excerpt More information 1 Introduction After Totalitarianism – Stalinism and Nazism Compared Michael Geyer with assistance from Sheila Fitzpatrick The idea of comparing Nazi Germany with the Soviet Union under Stalin is not a novel one. Notwithstanding some impressive efforts of late, however, the endeavor has achieved only limited success.1 Where comparisons have been made, the two histories seem to pass each other like trains in the night. That is, while there is some sense that they cross paths and, hence, share a time and place – if, indeed, it is not argued that they mimic each other in a deleterious war2 – little else seems to fit. And this is quite apart from those approaches which, on principle, deny any similarity because they consider Nazism and Stalinism to be at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Yet, despite the very real difficulties inherent in comparing the two regimes and an irreducible political resistance against such comparison, attempts to establish their commonalities have never ceased – not least as a result of the inclination to place both regimes in opposition to Western, “liberal” traditions. More often than not, comparison of Stalinism and Nazism worked by way of implicating a third party – the United States.3 Whatever the differences between them, they appeared small in comparison with the chasm that separated them from liberal-constitutional states and free societies. Since a three-way comparison 1 Alan Bullock, Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives (London: HarperCollins, 1991); Ian Kershaw and Moshe Lewin, eds., Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977); Henry Rousso, ed., Stalinisme et nazisme: Histoire et memoire´ comparees´ (Paris: Editions´ Complexe, 1999); English translation by Lucy Golvan et al., Stalinism and Nazism (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2004); Richard J.
    [Show full text]
  • Jürgen Habermas and the Third Reich Max Schiller Claremont Mckenna College
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CMC Senior Theses CMC Student Scholarship 2012 Jürgen Habermas and the Third Reich Max Schiller Claremont McKenna College Recommended Citation Schiller, Max, "Jürgen Habermas and the Third Reich" (2012). CMC Senior Theses. Paper 358. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/358 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you by Scholarship@Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in this collection by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Introduction The formation and subsequent actions of the Nazi government left a devastating and indelible impact on Europe and the world. In the midst of general technological and social progress that has occurred in Europe since the Enlightenment, the Nazis represent one of the greatest social regressions that has occurred in the modern world. Despite the development of a generally more humanitarian and socially progressive conditions in the western world over the past several hundred years, the Nazis instigated one of the most diabolic and genocidal programs known to man. And they did so using modern technologies in an expression of what historian Jeffrey Herf calls “reactionary modernism.” The idea, according to Herf is that, “Before and after the Nazi seizure of power, an important current within conservative and subsequently Nazi ideology was a reconciliation between the antimodernist, romantic, and irrantionalist ideas present in German nationalism and the most obvious manifestation of means ...modern technology.” 1 Nazi crimes were so extreme and barbaric precisely because they incorporated modern technologies into a process that violated modern ethical standards. Nazi crimes in the context of contemporary notions of ethics are almost inconceivable.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Look at Max Weber and His Anglo-German Family Connections1
    P1: JLS International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society [ijps] PH231-474840-07 October 28, 2003 17:46 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999 International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, Vol. 17, No. 2, Winter 2003 (C 2003) II. Review Essay How Well Do We Know Max Weber After All? A New Look at Max Weber and His Anglo-German Family Connections1 Lutz Kaelber2 Guenther Roth’s study places Max Weber in an intricate network of ties among members of his lineage. This paper presents core findings of Roth’s analysis of Weber’s family relations, discusses the validity of Roth’s core theses and some of the implications of his analysis for Weber as a person and scholar, and addresses how Roth’s book may influence future approaches to Weber’s sociology. KEY WORDS: Max Weber; history of sociology; classical sociology; German history; Guenther Roth. “How well do we know Max Weber?”—When the late Friedrich H. Tenbruck (1975) raised this question almost thirty years ago, he had Weber’s scholarship in mind. The analysis of Weber’s oeuvre and the debate over it, fueled by a steady trickle of contributions of the Max Weber Gesamtaus- gabe, has not abated since. Thanks to the Gesamtausgabe’s superbly edited volumes, we now know more about Weber the scholar than ever before, even though the edition’s combination of exorbitant pricing and limitation to German-language editions has slowed its international reception. Tenbruck’s question might be applied to Weber’s biography as well. Here, too, the Gesamtausgabe, particularly with the edition of his personal letters, has been a valuable tool for research.1 Yet the fact remains that what we know about Weber the person derives to a significant extent from 1Review essay of Guenther Roth, Max Webers deutsch-englische Familiengeschichte, 1800–1950.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 the ISSUE of the HOLOCAUST AS a UNIQUE
    Chapter 3 THE ISSUE OF THE HOLOCAUST AS A UNIQUE EVENT by Alan Rosenberg and Evelyn Silverman The question of the "uniqueness" of the Holocaust If the Holocaust was a truly unique event, then it has itself become a unique question. When we approach lies beyond our comprehension. If it was not the Holocaust, we are at once confronted with a truly unique, then there is no unique lesson to be dilemma: if the Holocaust is the truly unique and learned from it. Viewed solely from the unprecedented historical event that it is often held to perspective of its uniqueness, the Holocaust must be, then it must exceed the possibility of human be considered either incomprehensible or trivial. comprehension, for it lies beyond the reach of our A contexualist analysis, on the other hand, finds customary historical and sociological means of inquiry that it was neither "extra historical" nor just and understanding. But if it is not a historically unique another atrocity. It is possible to view the event, if it is simply one more incident in the long Holocaust as unprecedented in many respects history of man's inhumanity to man, there is no special and as an event of critical and transformational point in trying to understand it, no unique lesson to importance in the history of our world. Using be learned. Yehuda Bauer states the problem from a this method, we can determine the ways in which somewhat different perspective: the uniqueness question both helps and hinders our quest for understanding of the Holocaust. If what happened to the Jews was unique, then it took place outside of history, it becomes a mysterious event, an upside-down miracle, so to speak, an event of religious significance in the sense that it is not man-made as that term is normally under­ stood.
    [Show full text]
  • DISCUSSION the Goldhagen Controversy
    DISCUSSION The Goldhagen Controversy: Agonizing Problems, Scholarly Failure and the Downloaded from Political Dimension’ Hans-Ulrich Wehler (BieZefeZd) http://gh.oxfordjournals.org/ When a contentious book with a provoca1.ive message has aroused lively, not to say passionate, controversy, it is desirable that any new contribution to the debate should strive to provide as sober and clear a cost-benefit analysis as possible. It is best, moreover, to attend first to the book’s merits and achieve- ments, before giving an equal airing to its faults and limitations. In the case of Daniel Goldhagen’s Hiller’s Willing Executioners such a procedure is parti- cularly advisable, since the response in the American and German media to at Serials Department on February 18, 2015 this six-hundred-page study of ‘ordinary Germans and the Holocaust’ has not only been rather speedier than that of the academic world-though scholarly authorities have also, uncharacteristically, been quick off the mark-but has impaired the debate by promptly giving respectability to a number of stereo- types and misconceptions. The enthusiastic welcome that the book has received from journalists and opinion-formers in America is a problem in its own right, and we shall return to it later. But here in Germany there is no cause for complacency either, since the reaction in the public media has been far from satisfactory. With dismaying rapidity, and with a spectacular self-confidence that has frequently masked an ignorance of the facts, a counter-consensus has emerged. The book, we are repeatedly told, contains no new empirical data, since everything of significance on the subject has long been known; nor does it raise any stimulating new questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Consensus, Political Conflict: the Problem of Unity Among German Intellectuals During World War I
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2006 Cultural Consensus, Political Conflict: The Problem of Unity among German Intellectuals during World War I Benjamin Taylor Shannon University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Shannon, Benjamin Taylor, "Cultural Consensus, Political Conflict: The Problem of Unity among German Intellectuals during World War I. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2006. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4498 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Benjamin Taylor Shannon entitled "Cultural Consensus, Political Conflict: The Problem of Unity among German Intellectuals during World War I." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in History. Vejas Liulevicius, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: A. Denise Phillips, John Bohstedt Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Benjamin Taylor Shannon entitled "Cultural Consensus, Political Conflict: The Problem of Unity among German Intellectuals during World War I." I have examined the finalpaper copy of this thesis for formand content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in History.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy
    Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy How do democracies form and what makes them die? Daniel Ziblatt revisits this timely and classic question in a wide-ranging historical narrative that traces the evolution of modern political democracy in Europe from its modest beginnings in 1830s Britain to Adolf Hitler’s 1933 seizure of power in Weimar Germany. Based on rich historical and quantitative evidence, the book offers a major reinterpretation of European history and the question of how stable political democracy is achieved. The barriers to inclusive political rule, Ziblatt finds, were not inevitably overcome by unstoppable tides of socioeconomic change, a simple triumph of a growing middle class, or even by working class collective action. Instead, political democracy’s fate surprisingly hinged on how conservative political parties – the historical defenders of power, wealth, and privilege – recast themselves and coped with the rise of their own radical right. With striking modern parallels, the book has vital implications for today’s new and old democracies under siege. Daniel Ziblatt is Professor of Government at Harvard University where he is also a resident fellow of the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies. He is also currently Fernand Braudel Senior Fellow at the European University Institute. His first book, Structuring the State: The Formation of Italy and Germany and the Puzzle of Federalism (2006) received several prizes from the American Political Science Association. He has written extensively on the emergence of democracy in European political history, publishing in journals such as American Political Science Review, Journal of Economic History, and World Politics.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Sense of German History
    08 Pulzer 121 1132 30/10/03 3:10 pm Page 213 ELIE KEDOURIE MEMORIAL LECTURE Special Paths or Main Roads? Making Sense of German History PETER PULZER All Souls College, Oxford IT IS AN HONOUR AND A PRIVILEGE to have been asked to give this lecture in commemoration of an original and influential thinker and a man of great integrity. I first came across Elie Kedourie’s writings in the early 1960s and felt instinctively drawn to the tone of rational scepticism in which he expressed himself—a tone more suited to an eighteenth-century philosophe than to a child of the era of tyrannies. I did not, however, get to know him personally until he came to Oxford in the late 1980s as a Visiting Fellow of All Souls College. He was not, as those who knew him better than I will confirm, a highly extrovert person, but he was courteous and engaging, happy to listen and to respond in an invariably learned and reasoned way. I hope that the topic I have chosen and the way I have decided to approach it would have appealed to him. *** ‘The Third Reich formed the climax of the German special development (“Sonderentwicklung”) as it was directed against the West. The “German spirit”, transformed into a shallow ideology, had reached its lowest point. From now on German special consciousness (“Sonderbewußtsein”) lost all its justification. There is no plausible reason for attempting its revival Read at the Academy 22 May 2002. Proceedings of the British Academy, 121, 213–234. © The British Academy 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucien Febvre, Marc Bloch E As Ciências Históricas Alemãs (1928-1944) [Manuscrito] / Sabrina Magalhães Rocha - 2010
    UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE OURO PRETO INSTITUTO DE CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS E SOCIAIS SABRINA MAGALHÃES ROCHA LUCIEN FEBVRE, MARC BLOCH E AS CIÊNCIAS HISTÓRICAS ALEMÃS (1928-1944) MARIANA 2010 SABRINA MAGALHÃES ROCHA LUCIEN FEBVRE, MARC BLOCH E AS CIÊNCIAS HISTÓRICAS ALEMÃS (1928-1944) Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós- Graduação em História do Instituto de Ciências Humanas e Sociais da Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, como requisito parcial à obtenção do grau de Mestre em História. Área de Concentração: Estado, Região e Sociedade Linha de Pesquisa: Estado, Identidade e Região Orientador: Prof. Dr. Sérgio Ricardo da Mata MARIANA 2010 R672l Rocha, Sabrina Magalhães. Lucien Febvre, Marc Bloch e as ciências históricas alemãs (1928-1944) [manuscrito] / Sabrina Magalhães Rocha - 2010. 160f. Orientador: Prof. Dr. Sérgio Ricardo da Mata. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. Instituto de Ciências Humanas e Sociais. Departamento de História. Programa de Pós-graduação em História. Área de concentração: Estado, Região e Sociedade 1. Febvre, Lucien Paul Victor, 1878-1956 - Teses. 2. Bloch, Marc Leopold Benjamin, 1886-1944 - Teses. 3. Historiografia - França - Teses. 4. Historiografia - Alemanha - Teses. 5. História - Metodologia - Teses. I. Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto. II. Título. CDU: 930(44)(430) Catalogação: [email protected] Sabrina Magalhães Rocha Lucien Febvre, Marc Bloch e as Ciências Históricas Alemãs (1928-1944) Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em História da Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto como requisito parcial à obtenção do grau de Mestre em História. Aprovada pela Comissão Examinadora abaixo assinada. Prof. Dr. Sérgio Ricardo da Mata Departamento de História, UFOP Prof. Dra. Helena Miranda Mollo Departamento de História, UFOP Prof.
    [Show full text]