Help


[permalink] [id link]
+
Page "Hans Mommsen" ¶ 15
from Wikipedia
Edit
Promote Demote Fragment Fix

Some Related Sentences

Mommsen and wrote
The leading figure of this committee was Theodor Mommsen ( who wrote several of the volumes covering Italy ).
The German historian Hans Mommsen wrote that Goerdeler's anti-Semitism was typical of the German right, where Jews were widely considered to be part of an alien body living in Germany.
" It is high time for such a work ", Mommsen wrote to an associate in Roman studies, " it is more than ever necessary to present to a wider audience the results of our researches.
In October 1986, Hans Mommsen wrote that Stürmer's assertion that he who controls the past also controls the future, his work as a co-editor with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper which had been publishing articles by Ernst Nolte and Joachim Fest denying the singularity ” of the Holocaust, and his work as an advisor to Chancellor Kohl should cause " concern " among historians.
Mommsen wrote about Andreas Hillgruber's demands that historians identified with the justified ” German defence of the Eastern Front that :“ Andreas Hillgruber recently attempted to accord a relative historical justification to the Wehrmacht campaign in the East and the desperate resistance of the army in the East after the summer of 1944.
Mommsen wrote that Hitler was the " ideological and political originator " of the Holocaust, a " utopian objective " that came to life " only in the uncertain light of the Dictator's fanatical propaganda utterances, eagerly seized upon as orders for action by men wishing to prove their diligence, the efficiency of their machinery and their political indispensability ".
Mommsen was the first to call Hitler a " weak dictator " when he wrote in a 1966 essay that Hitler was " in all questions which needed the adoption of a fundamental and definitive position, a weak dictator ".
Mommsen wrote: " Hitler's role as a driving force, which with the same inner compulsion drove on to self-destruction, should not be underestimated.
Mommsen wrote: "... it is questionable, too, whether National Socialist foreign policy can be considered as an unchanging pursuit of established priorities.
In a Primat der Innenpolitik (" primacy of domestic politics ") argument, Mommsen wrote that the foreign policy of the Third Reich " was its form domestic policy projected outwards, which was able to conceal the increasing loss of reality only by maintaining political dynamism through incessant action.
The Swiss historian Walter Hofer accused Mommsen of " not seeing because he does not want to see " what Hofer saw as the obvious connection between what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf and his later actions.
The Israeli historian Omer Bartov wrote in 2003 about Mommsen ’ s functionalist understanding of the Third Reich that :" In this reading, ideology is recognized and then dismissed as irrelevant ; the suffering of the victims is readily acknowledged and then omitted as having nothing to tell us about the mechanics of genocide ; and individual perpetrators from Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler and Reinhard Heyrdrich to the lowliest SS man are shoved out of the historical picture as contemptible, but ultimately unimportant pawns in the larger scheme of a polycratic state ” whose predilection for cumulative radicalization ” was a function of its structure rather the product of intentional planning or self-proclaimed will ”
Mommsen wrote that the two museums in Berlin and Bonn proposed by the government of Helmut Kohl were meant to revival traditional German authoritarianism.
Mommsen wrote that Michael Stürmer's attempts to create a national consensus on a version of German history that all Germans could take pride in was a reflection that the German rightists could not stomach modern German history, and was now looking to create a version of the German past that German rightists could enjoy.
Mommsen wrote about Nolte's claims of a " causal nexus " between the Gulag Archipelago and the Nazi death camps :" In light of these questions, which thinking people encountered repeatedly, it seems superficial and insincere to narrow the discussion to the question brought up by Ernst Nolte about the extent of the similarities between the National-Socialist mass murder and the Gulag Archipelago ”.
Mommsen wrote that Joachim Fest was trying to advance the agenda of the German right through his attacks on Habermas for his criticism of Nolte.
Mommsen wrote in his opinion that Nolte's use of the Nazi era phrase " Asiatic hordes " to describe Red Army soldiers, and his use of the word " Asia " as a byword for all that is horrible and cruel in the world reflected anti-Asian racism.
Mommsen wrote :" In contrast to these irrefutable conditioning factors, Nolte ’ s derivation based on personalities and the history of ideas seems artificial, even for the explanation of Hitler ’ s anti-semitism … If one emphasizes the indisputably important connection in isolation, one should not then force a connection with Hitler's weltanschauung, which was in no ways original itself, in order to deprive from it the existence of Auschwitz.
In another essay entitled " Reappraisal and Repression The Third Reich In West German Historical Consciousness ", Mommsen wrote :" Nolte's superficial approach which associates things that do not belong together, substitutes analogies for casual arguments, and-thanks to his taste for exaggeration-produces a long outdated interpretation of the Third Reich as the result of a single factor.
Mommsen's friend, the British historian Sir Ian Kershaw wrote he thought that Mommsen had " destroyed " Goldhagen during their debates over Goldhagen's book Hitler's Willing Executioners.
Hans Mommsen wrote that the " ground-laying works of Andreas Hillgruber ... suggested the view for the continuities of German policy from the late Wilhelminian period up to the capitulation ".
Hildebrand is pleased that Nolte denies the singularity of the Nazi atrocities ” Hans Mommsen defended Habermas against Hildebrand by writing :“ Hildebrand ’ s partisan shots can be easily deflected ; that Habermas is accused of a loss of reality and Manichaeanism ”, and that his honesty is denied is witness to the self-consciousness of a self-nominated historian elite, which has set itself the task of tracing the outlines of the seeming badly needed image of history ” Writing of Hildebrand's support for Nolte, Mommsen declared that: Hildebrand ’ s polemic clearly suggests that he barely considered the consequences of making Nolte ’ s constructs the centrepiece of a modern German conservatism that is very anxious to relativize the National Socialist experience and to find the way back to a putative historically normal situation ” In another essay, Mommsen wrote that Hildebrand was gulity of hypocrisy because Hildebrand had until 1986 always claimed that generic fascism was invalid concept because of the " singularity " of the Holocaust Mommsen wrote that " Klaus Hildebrand explicitly took sides with Nolte's view when he gave his previously stubbornly claimed singularity of National Socialism ( failing to appreciate that was, as is well known, the standard criticism of the comparative fascism theory )" Martin Broszat observed that when Hildebrand organized a conference of right-wing German historians under the auspices of the Schleyer Foundation in West Berlin in September 1986, he did not invite Nolte, whom Broszat observed lived in Berlin.

Mommsen and :“
Writing of Klaus Hildebrand's attack on Habermas, Mommsen declared :“ Hildebrand ’ s partisan shots can be easily deflected ; that Habermas is accused of a loss of reality and Manichaeanism ”, and that his honesty is denied is witness to the self-consciousness of a self-nominated historian elite, which has set itself the task of tracing the outlines of the seeming badly needed image of history ”.
Mommsen described the Historikerstreit as :“ What is happening now is much like freeing lines of thought that until then had been repressed because they seemed politically questionable.
Mommsen declared that the Holocaust like all historical events were singular ”, and that :“ It is therefore equally justified to interpret National Socialism as a specific form of fascism as it is to compare it with Communist regimes.

Mommsen and nationalistic
Mommsen argued that the growth in pacifist feeling in the Federal Republic as reflected in widespread public opposition to the American raid on Libya in April 1986 made it imperative for the Americans and the West German government to promote a more nationalistic version of German history, and that was what was behind the Historikerstreit.

Mommsen and which
Much more than a " gloomy coda to the ... 1st century " the Roman Empire prospered between 81 and 96, in a reign which Theodor Mommsen described as the sombre but intelligent despotism of Domitian.
For example, according to Israeli journalist Yair Sheleg, in August 2000, German historian Hans Mommsen called it " a most trivial book, which appeals to easily aroused anti-Semitic prejudices.
His papers on epigraphy ( collected in Commentationes epigraphicae, i vols., 1850-54 ) brought him into conflict with Theodor Mommsen in connexion with the preparation of the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, a scheme for which, drawn up by Mommsen, was approved in 1847.
Other subjects which he studied in Berlin included Roman Law, taught by Bruns and Mommsen, medieval and 16th century German Literature, and Socialism.
The apparently needless cruelty of Mummius in Corinth, by no means characteristic of him, is explained by Mommsen as due to the instructions of the senate, prompted by the mercantile party, which was eager to dispel a dangerous commercial rival.
Mommsen argues that the royal cavalry was drawn exclusively from the ranks of the Patricians ( patricii ), the aristocracy of early Rome, which was purely hereditary.
According to Mommsen, the story of the saving of the Capitol was a later invention to justify his cognomen, which may be better explained by his domicile.
( The biography of Marcus Aurelius's colleague Lucius Verus, which Mommsen thought ' secondary ', is however rich in apparently reliable information and has been vindicated by Syme as belonging to the ' primary ' series ) The ' secondary ' lives allowed the author to exercise free invention untrammelled by mere facts, and as the work proceeds these flights of fancy become ever more elaborate, climaxing in such virtuoso feats as the account of the ' Thirty Tyrants ' said to have risen as usurpers under Gallienus.
His cheek cupped in his hand, he reread the works he admired out of duty .” Hans Delbrück appears in the professor ’ s thoughts again while contemplating the meaning of the war as American soldiers overtake Berlin: The Second World War was already down as a great historical tragedy – a quasi-mythological one – which nether Mommsen, Hans Delbrück, Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlin, Oswald Spengler, or Mein Kampf could elucidate entirely …”
The Messapian language is preserved in a scanty group of perhaps fifty inscriptions, of which only a few contain more than proper names, and in a few glosses in ancient writers collected by Mommsen ( Unteritalische Dialekte, p. 70 ).
According to Mommsen, the story of his death, ( for which see Plutarch ) looks like an historical version of the abolition of blood-revenge.
A planned fourth volume covering Roman history under the Empire was delayed pending Mommsen's completion of a then 15-volume work on Roman inscriptions, which required his services as researcher, writer, and editor, occupying Mommsen for many years.
" The rapidity and self-precision with which the plan was executed prove that it had been long meditated thoroughly and all its parts settled in detail ", Mommsen comments.
A quarter of the way into his short " Introduction " to the Provinces Mommsen comments on the decline of Rome, the capital city: " The Roman state of this epoch resembles a mighty tree, the main stem of which, in the course of its decay, is surrounded by vigorous offshoots pushing their way upward.
9, 4 ), since at all periods in the Roman chariot-race only as many chariots competed as there were so-called factions, which were originally only two, the white and the red ( Mommsen, R. H. i. 236, note ).
Mommsen has forcefully contended that the Holocaust cannot be explained as result of Hitler alone, but was instead a product of the fractured decision making process in Nazi Germany which caused the " cumulative radicalization " which led to the Holocaust.
Mommsen has argued that historians should not reduce the study of the Nazi period to " the Hitler phenomenon ", but must take a broader look at the factors in German society which allow the Holocaust to occur.
In the Historikerstreit debate, Mommsen argued that the Holocaust was a uniquely evil event which should not be compared with the other horrors of the 20th century.
In Mommsen ’ s view, conservative historians worked to write: “… the history of the Third Reich was stylized as a fated doom from which there was no escape and from which no concrete political impulses could reach the present.

0.316 seconds.