Current Issues in Historical Perspective
Lecture 1: Introduction. Methods and Questions. (Contemporary history)
What is contemporary history and how to study it?
Tensions of approaching the past from the present (our own position)
• Stefan Zweig: “It remains an irrefragable law of history that contemporaries are denied a
recognition of the early beginnings of the great movements which determine their
times.”
• C.V. Wedgwood: “History is lived forwards but it is written in retrospect. We know the
end before we consider the beginning and we can never wholly recapture what it was to
know the beginning only.”
• Eric Hobsbawm: “Retrospectiveness is the secret weapon of the historian.”
• Benedetto Croce: “All history is contemporary history”
• Pierre Bourdieu: “You do not become a good historian if you obliterate the present time
from your brain – rather the contrary.”
• Faulkner: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”
Contemporary history
• The idea of contemporary history is a recent one (post WWII), as an epoch on its own
and the first historian who defined it was Hans Rothfels
o “WWII was such a deep caesura that it has an effect on how we structure history”
• The most recent history – but how to define ‘recent’?
o The history of the present generation (Hans Rothfels, 1953)
o The impact of deep ruptures (revolutions, wars (for Rothfels: 1917 as starting point))
§ 1917 because of the Russian Revolution (left WWI), the US joined WWI, it
defined the later Cold War
o Specific method of contemporary history: not only accept one’s own position but
render it fruitful
§ Contemporary history “moves” because it is dependent on one’s position
• Evolution of contemporary history
o ‘Short 20th Century’ (Eric Hobsbawm): 1917 – 1989/91 (‘Age of Extremes’)
§ Fight of ideologies which ask allegiance, you had to have a position on it
§ In the 90s historians were very sure of the importance of the fall of the USSR
o Tony Judt’s Postwar-concept: “cultures of memory” explain European situation of
today
§ The way WWII is commemorated defines the situation/society of today
Caesurae in contemporary history
1
,It depends on the questions you ask and the perspective you take… the ones above are the
ones you’d most likely find in text books + a more simplistic view of history than it is
Temporalities
• Broader concepts of historical change: Anthropocene (Crutzen), Great Acceleration,
second modernity (Beck), network society (Castells), knowledge society, third modernity
(liquid modernity, retropia (Bauman))
• But also different temporalities of politics, social change, cultural change, technological
change etc. à connected with the critique of the caesura above
• Different temporalities/spatialities of ’Space of experience’ and ‘Horizon of Expectation’
(Koselleck): true on an individual level but also ex. differences West- and East Europe
• Changing concepts and modes to narrate a new reality: graphic novels, Netflix-shows,
(pop) music etc.
Challenges of and for contemporary history
• Studied problems and developments often not yet concluded (lack of distance)
• Problem of sources:
o Lack of sources (or access to sources): ex. classified sources
o Abundance (and impermanent character) of sources (social media, internet, media,
visual and audio- material, digital history)
o Nota bene: tension between what happened and how remembered
Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine as an example of how ‘current issues’ are
integrated in this course
Why full-scale invasion of Ukraine different from other conflicts?
• Constituting a caesura?
• Impact: biggest refugee movement in Europe since 1945, economic impact
• Character of Russian conduct of war (genocide, crimes against humanity)
• Historical shifts (political position Germany, questioning of neutral position of
Switzerland (took action to denounce Russian acts), Finland & Sweden (joining NATO))
• ‘Hardening’ of global alliances
o Group of 50 countries that have never really worked together on a such a large
scale before vs. some countries that grow closer to Russia
• End of postwar, but what is our new epoch?
• ‘Zeitenwende’ (Olaf Scholz) – return of military violence – but 2014?
o Excuse for politicians?
• The revision of European peace order of 1989/91 (or even of 1945)?
• Renewed question of when the second WW did end?
Lecture 2: From critical engagement to reclaiming national greatness?
(Politics of memory)
• Painting “Angelus Novus” by Paul Klee:
o Interpreted by Walter Benjamin "A Klee painting named Angelus Novus shows an
angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly
contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is
2
, how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we
perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling
wreckage upon wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to
stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is
blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the
angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him into the future to
which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This
storm is what we call progress.”
§ = Interpretation of what history is, interwoven with contemporary history (history
that still affects us) and with perception of history as progress
§ Walter Benjamin = historical philosopher (20th century) who is increasingly
discussed since his death during WWII (committed suicide after fleeing the
Nazis (he was Jewish)), at the basis of thinking of history in the 21st century
• Last session – today’s session
o Last session: what is contemporary history – example of invasion of Ukraine
§ CH = a product of WWII, historians trying to deal with experiences they thought
were such deep ruptures that the traditional ways of looking at history was no
longer valid
o Today’s session: politics of memory as a current issue
§ PoM = how societies/states deal with history and how this is something new
§ The legacy of WWII / 8 May 1945
§ Politics of memory as a new phenomenon?
§ Fields of conflict and tension – different examples
Politics of memory as a current issue
The enduring legacy of WWII
• Picture 1 & 3: an enigma machine (= a decoding machine which Germans used in
submarine warfare to decode messages which allowed to read it so that the allied forces
couldn’t read it); decrypted with the help of Poles in England
• Picture 2: old undetonated bombs of WWII, roughly 16 bombs are found on a daily basis
that sometimes still explode (controlled)
è The war is still very much with us, but what does it mean?
8 May as a lasting caesura (see last session)
• The endurance of 8 May 1945 as a caesura
o In Russia: 9 May (second capitulation), which is why it is celebrated there (and other
old SU nations)
• In some respects even more important in politics today
à Example text Katz, struggle over interpretation WWII.
o Interpretation of WII through Putin (his statements on how WWII should be seen)
§ Questioning of commonly held wisdom of how WWII started: politics of
aggression by Hitler (Sudetencrisis, annexation of Austria…) which usher in
WWII in September 1939 + the important role of the Soviet Union:
t Stalin concluded a pact in August 1939 which made it easier for Hitler to
invade Poland (no 2-front war)
3
, t The Soviet Union invaded Poland 2 weeks after Germany did
è Putin questions the role of the western allies and of the Soviet Union +
he sees the invasion of the Baltic States as if they invited Russia to do so
o Who owns the victory?
§ Nobody would have contested this 20 years ago, there was no strong dispute
§ Now differently discussed, who is responsible for the beginning of the war?
§ See below
• Russia vs. western allies / Russia vs. Ukraine (and other former Soviet Republics)/ Russia
vs. Poland
o Who started the war? Should former SU-countries get credit for ending of the war or
only Russia? Does Poland bear a responsibility in the beginning of the war?
• Article Putin: stressing role of SU - military impact, suffering. Pointing to structural
difference between nazism and communism
• But important omissions: impact/relevance for today (politics of memory and
geopolitics)
è Example of Nord Stream 2: immediate effects of world leader challenging basic
historical assumptions: likened to pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union
o In that it would bypass Ukraine and Baltic countries (who mainly brought gas to
Europe pre-2005) so that they weren’t necessary anymore: “leave it to Russia”
o Both pipelines were blown up in the second half of 2022: major environmental
disaster (because of the gas): all kinds of theories: Russians, Americans, Germans…
o Was for a long time seen as one of the major political issues in Eastern Europe
• Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (August 1939): between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany
o It allowed Nazi Germany to attack Poland less fearful for a war on 2 fronts
o Unexpected: both systems/countries were seen as most unlikely to work together
o Both countries wouldn’t attack each other (non-aggression)
o Economic part to it: exchanging German technology for Russian raw materials
o Secret protocol (only known after the war): division of Eastern Europe between the 2
§ Led to extreme human suffering, especially in the German-occupied territory
§ Effect until today: the eastern border of Poland remains the same
§ What it says about history: traumatic experience for Eastern Europe since the
west didn’t really do anything about it (didn’t want to sacrifice soldiers for this)
The war in the East
• Characteristics of the war in the East (not adequately talked about)
o No sparing of civil population
o Early use of aerial warfare against civilians (Wielún more than 1.000 victims)
o Already the German war in Poland (September/October 1939) has characteristics of
war of annihilation from day 1
o Role of 'Einsatzgruppen', racist dimension
§ Small elite groups of soldiers that would kill specific groups that could organise
resistance behind frontline (logic of the Nazis) but regular army also involved
o The 'Generalgouvernement', ghettos
o Extreme loss of life on eastern front. Destruction of western part of Soviet Union
4
