Posts Tagged With: german history

Shattered Past

Jarausch & Geyer

Jarausch, Konrad J. and Michael Geyer.  Shattered Past: Reconstructing German Histories.  Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.

In this book, Jarausch and Geyer have attempted to set the new direction for writing twentieth century German history.  Gone is the Sonderweg thesis; gone is national history; gone are master narratives of any kind.  What the authors offer as replacement is a collage of German histories that come closer to truly representing what happened in Germany during the last century.  Shattered Past offers new analytical and interpretive frameworks that the authors hope will help explain how Germany went from the devastating Third Reich to the prosperous Federal Republic of Germany.

At the heart of this book lies the contention that there are no master narratives that are adequate to explain Germany’s turbulent past.  The title phrase “shattered past,” refers to the fact that Germany’s past is fractured politically, socially, and even geographically.  The narrative of national history lost credibility when it was used for legitimizing mass violence by the Nazis.  And while Marxist history sought to create an “emancipatory history” (61), it ultimately became nothing but the mouthpiece of the SED dictatorship in East Germany.  Lastly, the authors assert that a liberal, progressive narrative – even one that ‘admits’ that the Great War, the Third Reich, and socialist East Germany were ‘detours’ – is not a satisfying narrative.  Instead of seeing 1918, 1933, 1945, and 1989 as aberrations of a teleological German history, the authors ultimately conclude that “uncertainty might be the principle of twentieth century history rather than an abnormality to be explained away” (350).

While Jarausch and Geyer are leery of single master narratives, they do suggest a historical approach that they feel is most able to create these new, alternate German histories.  By using the methodologies and approaches of cultural history, we may be able to rewrite German histories “from the margins to decenter received conceptions of what it meant to be German at a given time” (83).  In this light, Jarausch and Geyer are interested in German identities.  “Cultural history explores the ways and means by which individual and social bodies constitute themselves, how they interact with each other, and how they rip themselves apart” (15).

The book lays out seven themes that should act as “guideposts in deciphering the shifting map of territories and people that make up the twentieth century German past” (18).  These themes include: war and genocide, the contested nature of German governance, the decline of German power in Europe, migration of German peoples, the struggle over German identity, competing visions of German womanhood, and lastly, the rise of consumerism.

By viewing Germany’s twentieth century past through these seven themes, we may gain a more complex, and thus accurate understanding of the shattered past.  More focus would then be given to peoples that previous master narratives had marginalized, like women and homosexuals.

Women’s history would no longer be a separate “critical counternarrative,” but would be central to understanding the gendered nature of power and identity (247, 268).  Part of these German histories would be the fact that national boundaries would no longer be as important, and people who still claimed a German identity but who did not live within Germany’s geographic borders (emigrants and refugees, for example) could still have an important place in their histories.

The book also has an interesting chapter on individual and collective memory in which the authors demonstrate that just as there are no adequate master narratives for historians, there is a vast array of personal narratives competing to make sense of Germany’s shattered past.

For more books on Modern German History, see my full list of book reviews here

Categories: Book Review, German History, History | Tags: , , , , | 1 Comment

Die Suche nach Sicherheit


Conze, Eckart.  Die Suche nach Sicherheit: eine Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland von 1949 bis in die Gegenwart.  Munich: Siedler, 2009. 

In Die Suche nach Sicherheit, Eckart Conze has written a comprehensive history of the Federal Republic of Germany that ranges from its foundation in 1949 to 2009, the year this work was published.  At over one thousand pages and covering topics from politics, society, culture, and the economy, Conze’s book is a Gesamtdarstellung of the history of the Federal Republic.  The book proceeds chronologically, but within this chronological framework, Conze employs a thematic approach, dedicating chapters to particular themes such as “Modernization in the Reconstruction,” “Security and Stability,” and “the Search for Identity and New Optimism.

The leitmotif of Conze’s book – as the title suggests – is the Germans’ search for security, certainty, and safety. “Die Geschichte der Bundesrepublik ist bestimmt von der Suche nach Sicherheit,” he writes (15).  Since the foundation of the Federal Republic, every administration and every political party has taken security as the goal of their politics.  In the Adenauer Era, stretching from 1949 to 1963, the focus was on securing stability for the newly-formed nation.  Political and civilian institutions had to be reestablished, all under the pressures of the Cold War. The American-Soviet binary put the divided Germany right at the center of the tense political climate.  Therefore, the ‘search for security’ during the 1950s was the search for military and physical safety, along with a sense of autonomy.

By 1965, Conze notes, contemporary observers felt that life had finally become more normalized, or at least stabile.  The Cuban missile crisis had subsided and West Germans were able to focus more on family life and their careers. But 1968 revealed that this sense of security and stability was a farce.  Though Conze asserts that the social revolt symbolized by the year 1968 constitutes the second formative stage of the Federal Republic’s history, he shows that the social revolutions of the late 1960s and early 1970s were not specifically a German phenomenon by situating 1968 in an international context (333).  The result of this tumult was that the 1970s was a period focused on internal security for West Germans.

The economic crises of the late 1970s, as well as the increasing importance of international security politics (NATO armament) in the 1980s forced Germans to, yet again, acknowledge that their futures depended on global factors; therefore, they were not the masters of their own destiny.  Conze speaks of a “return of history,” of an increased interest in German history in the late 1970s that was caused by the loss of a sense of certainty for their own future (655).  The reunification of Germany in 1990 gave Germans a new sense of security as a united nation, but revealed internal tensions between “Wessis” and “Ossis.”  The terror attacks of September 11, 2001 revealed that nation states were not the only source of danger, and that nation states could not always protect its citizens from global terror networks.  The book ends with the conclusion that the economic reform package passed in Germany was not just meant to fight off rising unemployment or rising debt. “It’s about the stabilization of commonwealth and the cohesion of the society.  It’s about trust in the government and the promises of protection by the state. It’s about security” (936).

Beyond giving readers a new analytical framework through which to understand the history of the Federal Republic, Conze also offers a warning against viewing its history as a teleological path towards reunification or a “long path towards the West,” as it has often been portrayed after 1990.  He drives this point home by quoting histories from the late 1980s that still portrayed “ratlosigkeit” or having no sense of where German history would go from there (11).


For more books on modern German history, see my full list of book reviews here.

Categories: Book Review, German History, History | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Hitler State

Broszat Hitler State

Broszat, Martin.  The Hitler State: The Foundation and Development of the Internal Structure of the Third Reich.  Trans. John W. Hiden.  London: Longman, 1981.

Originally published in 1969, Broszat’s Der Staat Hitlers was one of the first works to take a structuralist approach to the Third Reich.  In other words, he sought to uncover the deeper forces behind the regime rather than provide a more biographical overview of the key political players.  As such, Broszat’s book is not structured like a synthesis or textbook that provides a chronological account of events.  Instead, the study is an examination of how power and authority were structured and exercised in Nazi Germany.

Broszat’s main goal is to reevaluate the view of the Nazi state as one in which it exercised complete, systematic, and standardized control over its nation.  The picture of the Third Reich that Broszat paints is one full of complex and overlapping governmental and party structures that were often competing against one another.  There was often tension between Reich ministries and the Länder organizations, between German state offices and Nazi party organs, and most often between different bureaucrats themselves.  Broszat pinpoints Hitler as the reason behind this structure in which power existed not as flowing hierarchically from the top down, but as coexisting simultaneously in different spheres.  Hitler, Broszat argues, demanded full authority in his position as Führer, but was skeptical of establishing a standardized, or rationalized, system of authority below him.  Personal loyalty to him was paramount, but beyond that, Hitler allowed for personal and organizational competition among his underlings.  This helped to assure that no significant amount of power would be collected by one office or individual outside of the Führer.

Broszat’s study focuses on the period between the seizure of power in 1933 and the preparation for war in 1939, and as he demonstrates, this is a period in which there still existed an uneasy relationship between the older conservative tradition and the radical dynamism of Nazism.  In the initial months of 1933, Nazi officials instituted a number of radical policies including purges and the construction of concentration camps.  But because the more traditional conservative forces had apprehensions about such actions – and Hitler still needed their influence, particularly with forming alliances with Germany’s heavy industry for the coming rearming mission – Hitler put a stop to the violence, thus returning to more conventional modes of governing by the end of 1933.  In 1937 and 1938, the gap between old elites and Nazi leaders widened as Nazis began ousting conservatives from the government and formulating more aggressive foreign policies in what Broszat refers to as the “second revolution” of the Nazi regime (354).

This unequal distribution of power, which was largely defined by one’s personal connection to Hitler, fueled a Darwinian competition that led to the creation of personal empires within the Third Reich (like Himmler’s death camp system).  In a functionalist vein, Broszat argues that this struggle for power forced people to develop new ways of exercising power.  With the lack of rationalized chains of command, it was left up to subordinates to figure out ways to turn Hitler’s visions into realities. In addition to allowing Hitler to stand alone above – and perhaps beyond – the system, “the “polycracy” of individual office holders…ultimately led to a proliferation of arbitrary decisions and acts of violence” (xi).  Therefore, the National Socialists did not come to the table in 1933 with the blue prints for the Holocaust as a secret goal; instead, the de-centralized and revolutionary power structure of the Nazi state led to the radicalization of goals and to extremism that murdered millions of people.

For more books on modern German history, see my full list of book reviews. 

Categories: Book Review, German History, History | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What Difference Does a Husband Make?



Heineman, Elizabeth D.  What Difference Does a Husband Make?  Women and Marital Status in Nazi and Postwar Germany.  Berkley: University of California Press, 1999. 

Subject: A triangular comparison between the legal status of (un)married women in Nazi Germany, and then in West and East Germanys, and how these states used marital status to define role of women.

Main Points: Heineman shows that single women (whether they were widows, divorcees, or simply spinsters) were all defined by their status in relation to married women.  Under Nazi rule, the married woman was seen as the bearer of the German Volk, quite literally: good German mothers gave birth to good German citizens and passed on good German morals.  Unmarried women were often viewed as “asocials.”  While this is nothing particularly new, Heineman shows the extent to which the state was involved in encouraging women to marry; financial and legal incentives were implemented in an attempt to inspire women to settle down with a man.

Another of Heineman’s arguments is that an inferior view of unmarried women survived the upheaval that the loss of WWII and the subsequent occupation caused.  There was a moment in the final years of the war and the initial years of occupation in which the instability meant the state could no longer influence marital status.  But as two new Germanys were established by the Allies, the place of the state returned.

In East Germany, economic necessity along with the Communists’ favorable view of workers (including working women) meant that the state narrowed the gaps between married and single women.  Equality, including equal pay for women was established early on.  Unmarried women held almost no stigma as long as they were 1) contributing to the labor force, and 2) still raising children.

In West Germany, however, the dominance of married womanhood soon returned.  The previous 10 years when women were forced to work and take on “manly” roles because their husbands were off fighting, dying, or being taken prisoner were seen as an inconvenient, shameful necessity that had to be overcome.   This was a part of Chancellor’s Adenauer’s family politics that was meant to restore the true and “normal” family dynamic that had been disrupted by the war’s end.  Critics claimed that this Adenauer family looked too similar to Hitler’s ideal of family.  But marital status remained the main signifier of female identity, and welfare state entitlements and some legal rights were all tied to whether or not a woman was married.

Heineman concludes that 1945 was a lost opportunity for German feminism because that moment of instability could have been seized to put forth a new understanding of female identity, one that was not tied to marriage with a man.  Instead, traditional roles were reinstituted in West Germany.

My Comments:  This book doesn’t really deal with sexuality itself, but instead focuses more in gender.  But I picked it to read because the Adenauer era of family politics was an incredibly important stage in the development of the history of homosexuality in Germany.  During this time, the monogamous, heterosexual married life was reinstituted as the norm, and homosexual movements were forced to come up with a new image for themselves to get a chance of dialogue with policy makers.  Conservative, masculine, “respectable” homosexuality replaced the flamboyant “fairy” image.

Also, I think another important point from this book is in showing how concerned the state was with gender and sexuality.  It attempted to (and in many cases was successful) control the definition of “woman” by dictating that women should be married.  By passing laws, or restricting benefits, the state meant to control womanhood and manhood.  But this book shows that the female population was divided in one way that the males were not: marital status.


For more books on modern German history or the history of sexuality, see my full list of book reviews. 

Categories: Book Review, German History, History, Sexuality & Gender | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

German History in Modern Times: Four Lives of a Nation


Hagen, William W.  German History in Modern Times:  Four Lives of a Nation.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.


Hagen’s work is meant to be a survey of German history from the Holy Roman Empire until the present.  It addresses the question of nationality, which is central to modern German history.  Additionally, the book is arranged more thematically than chronologically, thus perhaps avoiding a teleological impression of German history as leading to the foundation of a German nation in 1871.

Summary & Author’s Main Arguments:

Throughout the text, Hagen confronts a question that rests at the core of modern German history:  can one speak of a “German history” before a single entity known as “Germany” ever existed?  Indeed, this is a pertinent question for all historians.  Hagen concludes that one can actually speak of four German nations throughout history (which may stand in contrast to the book’s subtitle “Four lives of a Nation” which hints that he’s studying four epochs of the same nation).  His categorization of these four nations is also different than past historians’ categorization of the Germans’ past.

The first nation is the era of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation and runs right up to the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789.  Hagen stops this period before the official end of the Holy Roman Empire because he feels that the French Revolution actually caused a new surge of self-understanding among the German peoples that predated the HRE’s official end in 1806.  Despite his assertion that the HRE was not a national monarchy (like that of England or France), Hagen justifies considering the HRE as one of Germany’s four national lives by claiming that “Premodern nations were political communities, not ethnic-linguistic or populist” as would define later, “modern” nation states (19).  Moreover, the polycentric entity came to called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, and this expression of consciousness by the German peoples that they were living in a political nation is enough to justify considering this a “German nation.”

The second nation spans the years from 1789 to 1914.  Interestingly enough, this chronology glosses over several dates that historians have considered important in the formation of the German nation:  1806 – the end of the HRE and the formation of the Confederation of the Rhine, 1815 – the defeat of Napoleon, the consolidation of German principalities and the forging of the German Confederation, and perhaps most importantly, 1871 – the forging of the German Reich, the supposed “answer” to the German Question.  This, Hagen argues, signifies that the multiplicity of German peoples (and their ideas of what constituted “Germanness”) did not simply converge into one national identity in the face of Napoleon, nor by consolidating into the German Confederation (which was still dominated by the Prussian and Austrian monarchies), nor was it settled by the kleindeutsch that resulted in the first “official” German nation in 1871.  All saw nationalism as “the political mobilization and enfranchisement of the whole people (however defined) on the premise (however fictive) of their kinship through language, culture, and history,” and that nationalism was “the most indispensable and potentially the strongest, if also most explosive, social cement” (95).  But the question remained:  whose nationalism should ultimately prevail?  This “nation,” then, was one characterized by a multitude of “competing German nationalisms” (including conservative monarchists, social democrats, and Marxist working party movements).

The third “national life” consisted of an age of chaos, war, dictatorship and genocide (1914-1945).  During this stage, Germans are pitted in wars against each other and against most of the world.  Both the German Reich and imperial Austria-Hungary vanish as the harbingers of German national identity, thus revealing the inadequacy of the solution to the German question forged back in 1871.  Democratic republics are installed into the two largest German nations, but these fail and the world witnesses a resurgence of something resembling the Holy Roman Empire (a confederation of all German lands in Europe under one rule: Hitler).  This epoch ends in shattered identities and political maps that no longer showed “Germany” on them.  This national life, Hagen argues, shows that any story of German history cannot be a teleological one of nationalism’s triumph, but instead depicts a nationalism that destroyed all collective identities that previous Germans had pieced together.

The fourth nation is one of where a single German identity is impossible (even in name), for two German nations existed (three, if one includes Austria, which Hagen does).  1945-1989 was a period in which outside nations forced (or at least strongly pressured) particular identities onto a people who felt they had no nation of their own (which was official true, particularly in the years directly following the end of WWII).  East and West Germany were at first governed directly by the Allied Victors, and only as time went on were they able to assume more political sovereignty. German Austrians were forced to take on an identity that refuted Hitler’s National Socialism, which so many had welcomed with the Anschluss of 1938.

Hagen ends by suggesting the emergence of a new, fifth German nation: a (re)united Germany, beginning in 1990 (but, still separate from Austria, which, up until this point played a vital role in Hagen’s book – one wonders his thoughts on the fact that “the Germans” remain in two nations: Austria, and the Federal Republic of Germany – or would he argue that the Fed. Republic is now “the” German nation, the seat of German identity, while Austria has now produced a specific “Austrian” identity that trumps any ties to a larger “German” one?)

Concluding Comments & Questions:

Hagen’s work effectively steers readers away from a traditional national history of Germany, though questioning the concept of nation remains central to the study.  In fact, by questioning “nation” and offering a new understanding of the concept, I feel that Hagen makes good on his word to reveal a new understanding of the German past.   He avoids forcing our modern concept of “nation” onto the past peoples, and is therefore able to recreate four “nations” as they were viewed by their contemporaries.

In this sense, Hagen places a fair emphasis on the importance of consciousness, or awareness, in history.  What a people thinks it is, is more important than our technical definitions and classification system of today.  Through this realization, Hagen is able to explain why and how local identities (instead of national ones) remained prevalent through most of German history.  “Identities reflected local neighborhoods and dynasties, and political loyalties were dynastic, not ethnic” (36-39).   He also adds that “National identities remained in the realm of culture.”  This shows that in different spheres of life, different notions of identities and nationalism can reign simultaneously.

On a historiographical note, Hagen’s work resembles Sheehan’s German History, in that it 1) places emphasis on the multitude of German identities that existed at any given time; 2) constantly reminds readers of the contingency of historical processes.  Both Hagen and Sheehan caution readers against viewing German history as going inevitably towards unification in 1871, or towards National Socialist genocide of the Third Reich.  Though, they have to balance this need to show contingency with the need to explain why these processes produced the outcome that they did.

And lastly, Hagen situates himself against the notion of a Sonderweg.  A couple of points on the structure of the book:  Hagen doesn’t cite anything throughout the book which can be a little annoying, because it makes it hard to refute or confirm what he’s said.  Also, the inclusion of a large number of visual images is a strength of the book.


For more books on modern German history, see my full list of book reviews. 

Categories: Book Review, German History | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

German History: 1770-1866

German History

Sheehan, James J.  German History, 1770-1866.  Oxford:  Clarendon Press, 1989.


Sheehan provides a survey of German history from the end of the Holy Roman Empire to the eve of German unification, exploring themes of culture, society, economics, and politics.

Author’s Main Arguments:  

“German history from the middle of the eighteenth century until 1866 must be,” Sheehan writes, “the history of the Germans’ various efforts to master their political, social, and cultural worlds, the history of their separate achievements and defeats, institutions, and innovations” (7).  This is one of Sheehan’s three main themes that run throughout his book. He divides the story he is telling (or more accurately, stories) into sections, arranged chronologically, with each section broken down into chapters, each devoted to a specific sphere: politics, society, or culture.

The tale opens on the eve of the French Revolution in a weakening Holy Roman Empire.  This is an important scene because Sheehan tries to convey the order of life before the nation or state.  Unlike nations and states, Sheehan says, the Holy Roman Empire did not command total sovereignty over its land or its variety of peoples.  Nor did it insist upon unquestioning allegiance.  “Its goal was not to clarify and dominate but rather to order and balance fragmented institutions and multiple loyalties.” (14).  This fragmentation is central to Sheehan’s book, reminding us that the Reich contained a vast number of languages, cultures, and political loyalties.  We also shouldn’t forget the religious and confessional divides that were prominent in these German lands.  “Most Germans remained locked in their insular worlds – or were forced to wander in desperate search of a world in which they might find a place.” (73).   Two of the main contributors of this isolation were the difficulty of travel and the “backwardness” of the communication systems.  Sheehan utilizes the tools of social history to try to recreate everyday life for people (Alltagsgeschichte).

The second and third themes of the book are as follows:  “This time period must also be the history of the emerging questions about Germany’s collective identity and its future as a national community.  Finally, it must be the history of the multitude of answers to this question which Germans formulated and sought to act upon” (7).  In other words, it is important to remember that it can be misleading (and sometimes difficult) to speak of a “German” history during this time period because “Germany” did not exist as a single political, cultural, or even lingual entity.

Throughout the work, Sheehan cautions readers to not see this story (or amalgamation of stories) as leading up to the creation of a German nation.  At each of the major signposts that German historians have traditionally labeled as “progress towards unification” (the Confederation of the Rhine, the German Confederation, the Revolutions of 1848), Sheehan attempts to show that each of these developments were not inevitable; he then deftly shows how (and more importantly why) particular events developed in the ways they did.  In other words, Sheehan is granting contingency to the history of “Germany” during this period.

For example – the role of the French Revolution, and subsequently Napoleon’s expansion into central and eastern Europe is usually portrayed as having a “liberating” effect on the German lands, Sheehan recounts, freeing the people from local forms of antiquated Herrschaft, which then allowed for political reform and consolidation.  The reality is much more complicated, Sheehan asserts.  In many cases, France may have been the ally or even the instrument of political reform, but in many other cases, German reformers tried to emulate France politically so they could defeat them militarily.  Ultimately, though, the end was that by 1815, the hundreds of German principalities had become consolidated into a German Confederation consisting of 16 large states (the largest of which were the Kingdom of Prussia and the Austrian Empire) and 23 smaller states (387-88).

The next big turn would be trying to settle “the German Question” with either a “small Germany” or “large Germany.” In other words, would all German lands be incorporated (including the Austrian Empire), or would it be the core of the previous Holy Roman Empire?  Related to this debate was also the debate surrounding the political & economic reform of Germany.  These debates came to a head during the European Revolutions of 1848 – which in Germany manifested itself as liberals convening a Frankfurt Parliament, which sought to create a constitution that would grant the King (Frederick William IV of Prussia) his power (instead of divine right).  This failed and resulted in the “German Question” being answered by the “blood and iron” policies of aristocratic politicians like Otto von Bismarck, which called for a “small Germany,” run by Prussia.  Sheehan’s book ends in 1866, with the outbreak of the Prusso-Austrian war.

To conclude, Sheehan’s book reveals the multiple developments (bureaucratic and participatory institutions, economic expansion that increased industrial and agricultural productivity, and the rise in print culture that helped develop new ideas in philosophy, literature, and religion) all led to a transformation of the rule and procedures of everyday life and to an erosion of traditional values and institutions.  This did not mean that the powerful nation-state of a “Small Germany” was the only inevitable result, though (for instance the consolidation of the smaller principalities into firmer states after Napoleon could have made it more difficult to consolidate further into a single nation).  However, throughout the 900 pages, Sheehan shows why Prussia ultimately won and led the Germans to forced unification in 1871.


For more books on modern German history, see my full list of book reviews. 

Categories: Book Review, German History | Tags: , , | 1 Comment

Keep on Reading!

Since my partner’s gone to see his family for a few weeks, I’ve had plenty of time to catch up on reading for my qualifying exams. Just in case I have any interested folks out there, here’s what’s on my current reading list:  (to see Section One of my lists, go here.)

Modern European History:

  1. Waldstreicher, David. In the Midst of Perpetual Fetes: The Making of American Nationalism, 1776-1820. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997.
  2. Applegate, Celia. Bach in Berlin: Nation and Culture in Mendelssohn’s Revival of the St. Matthew Passion. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2005.
  3. Todorova, Maria. Imagining the Balkans. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
  4. Mazower, Mark. The Balkans: A Short History. New York: Modern Library, 2002.
  5. Winter, Alison.  Mesmerized:  Powers of Mind in Victorian Britain.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.
  6. Geison, Gerald L. The Private Science of Louis Pasteur.  Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995.
  7. Kern, Stephen.  The Culture of Time and Space, 1880-1918.  With a new preface by Stephen Kern.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
  8. Schorske, Carl E. Fin-de-SieÌcle Vienna: Politics and Culture. New York: Knopf, 1979.
  9. Coen, Deborah R. Vienna in the Age of Uncertainty: Science, Liberalism, and Private Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
  10. Schwartz, Vanessa R. Spectacular Realities: Early Mass Culture in Fin-de-Siècle Paris. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.
  11. Eksteins, Modris. Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1989.
  12. Mosse, George L. Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Modern German History:

  1. Thomas Nipperdey, Germany From Napoleon to Bismarck
  2. Matthew Levinger, Enlightened Nationalism:  the Transformation of Prussian Political Culture, 1806-1848
  3. Lother Gall, Bismarck:  Der weisse Revolutionär
  4. Jonathan Sperber, Rhineland Radicals:  The Democratic Movement and the Revolution of 1848-1849
  5. Celia Applegate, A Nation of Provincials:  The German Idea of Heimat
  6. Hans-Ulrich Wehler, the German Empire 1871-1918
  7. Vernon Lidtke, The Alternative Culture:  Socialist Labor in Imperial Germany
  8. Geoff Eley, Reshaping the German Right:  Radical Nationalism and Political Change after Bismarck
  9.  Helmut Walser Smith, German Nationalism & Religious Conflict:  Culture, Ideology, Politics, 1870-1914
  10. Margaret Anderson, Practicing Democracy: Elections and Political Culture in Imperial Germany
  11. Lora Wildenthal, German Women for Empire, 1884-1945

The History of Sexuality & Gender: 

  1. Duberman, Martin, Martha Vicinus, & George Chauncey, eds., Hidden from History:  Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past (1989)
  2. Abelove, Henry, Michele Barale, & David Halperin, eds., The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader (1993)  
  3. Rosario, Vernon A.  ed., Science and Homosexualities, (1997)
  4. Rupp, Leila. Sapphistries: A Global History of Love between Women (2009)
  5. Plummer, D.  One of the Boys:  Masculinity, Homophobia, and Modern Manhood, (Harrington Park Press:  1999).
  6. Stryker, Susan.  Trangender History (Seal Press, 2008).
  7. Lancaster, Roger N.  The Trouble with Nature: Sex in Science and Popular Culture (2003)
  8. Laqueur, Thomas, “Orgasm, Generation, and the Politics of Reproductive Biology,” in Thomas Laqueur, ed., The Making of the Modern Body:  Sexuality and Society in the Nineteenth Century (University of California Press, 1987).
  9. Boyd, Nan Alamilla and Horacio N. Roque Ramierez, eds.  Bodies of Evidence: the Practice of Queer Oral History, Oxford Oral History Series, 2012.
  10. Angelides, Martin.  A History of Bisexuality (2001)
  11. Herzog, Dagmar.  Sexuality in Europe:  a Twentieth-Century History (2011)
  12. Houlbrook, Matt. Queer London:  Perils and Pleasures in the Sexual Metropolis, 1918-1957 (2006)
  13. Walkowitz, Judith R.  City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late-Victorian London (1992)
  14. Clark, Anna. Desire: A History of European Sexuality (2008)
  15. Healey,Dan. Homosexual Desire in Revolutionary Russia: The Regulation of Sexual and Gender Dissent (2001)
  16. Vicinus, Martha. Intimate Friends:  Women Who Loved Women, 1778-1928 (2006)
  17. Trumbach, Randolph. Sex and the Gender Revolution: Heterosexuality and the Third Gender in Enlightenment London, (1998)
  18. Kennedy, Pagan. The First Man-Made Man: The Story of Two Sex Changes, One Love Affair, and a Twentieth-Century Medical Revolution (2008)
  19. Mosse, George L. Nationalism and Sexuality: Respectability and Abnormal Sexuality in Modern Europe, (1985)
  20. Marcus, Sharon.  Between Women: Friendship, Desire, and Marriage in Victorian England (Princeton, 2007).
  21. Tampagne, Florence.  A History of Homosexuality in Europe: Berlin, London, Paris, 1919-1939 (2004)
  22. Ruehl, Sonja “Inverts and Experts” in Judith Newton & Deborah Rosenfelt, eds., Feminist Criticism & Social Change:  Sex, Class, and Race in Literature
  23. Boswell, John. Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, (1980)
  24. Martel, Frédéric.  The Pink and the Black:  Homosexuals in France Since 1968 (1999)
  25. Merrick, Jeffrey and Bryant T. Ragan, Jr., eds. Homosexuality in Modern France, (1996)
  26. Bunzl, Matti.  Jews & Queers: Symptoms of Modernity in Late Twentieth Century Vienna 

And on my Kindle, for a little bit of pleasure reading before I go to bed (if my brain’s not completely mush): Casual Vacancy by J.K. Rowling (I’ve still got mixed feelings about it).  

Categories: History | Tags: , , | 2 Comments

Blog at