Of all fields of historical enquiry, Germany’s Third Reich is perhaps the richest in sources and historiography. Therefore, it is logical to assume that this is where we see history done at its best. The chief interest of this dissertation is how historians select their sources and how they use the evidence they find in their sources. I have taken relations between Jewish Germans and non-Jewish Germans as a case study because of the enormous quantity of primary source material and because so many historians have commented on the issue. I do not attempt to make any claims about what happened between Jewish Germans and their non-Jewish compatriots nor do I make a moral assessment of behaviours and attitudes among the ‘ordinary’ people of Germany under the Third Reich. Rather, this is a technical exercise to examine how well the historians have done history in this particular area. My systematic review of the historians’ methodologies reveals that many either distort the evidence they cite or put forward arguments that go well beyond what the evidence warrants, perhaps because of pre-conceived theories which shape their approaches to the evidence. Moreover, they fail to make the best possible use of some types of source such as personal narratives. In order to ascertain whether these sources can be better used, I systematically analyse a selection of personal narratives which are sometimes quoted by historians, in particular the 1933-1945 diaries of Victor Klemperer. My question is: Do these testimonies really say what the historians claim they say about relations between Jewish and non-Jewish Germans? And if not, how can we analyse them to determine what they actually do say? The two kinds of problems which emerge are how to select a balanced range of sources and how to use them properly. My argument is that there are six methodological principles that should underpin good historical practice. Because historians are not scrupulous to apply these common-sense rules, their arguments are methodologically flawed and they do not use some sources to the full extent of their value. This raises the question of whether these problems are confined to this particular field or whether they are endemic to the history profession as a whole.

Much has been written about twelfth-century chroniclers in England, but satisfactory reasons for their approaches to historical explanation have not yet been advanced. This thesis investigates how and why historians in England retold accounts of England's eleventh-century invasions: the Danish Conquest of 1016 and the Norman Conquest of 1066. The object is to illuminate the consistent historical agendas of three historians: William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon and John of Worcester. I argue that they share a view of royal responsibility independent both of their sources (primarily the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) and of any political agenda that placed English and Norman allegiances in opposition. Although the accounts diverge widely in the interpretation of character, all three are concerned more with the effectiveness of England's kings than with their origins. Part One outlines trends in early insular narratives and examines each of the three historians' background, prose style and view of English history to provide the necessary context for understanding how and why they rewrote narratives of kings and conquest. Part Two analyzes narratives of defending kings Æthelred and Harold; Part Three conducts a parallel analysis of conquering kings Cnut and William. These sections argue that all three writers add a significant and new degree of causal and moral responsibility to English kings in their invasion narratives. Part Four discusses the implications and significance of the thesis's findings. It argues that the historians' invasion narratives follow consistent patterns in service of their projects of redeeming the English past. It contends that modern understanding of the eleventh-century conquests of England continues to be shaped by what historians wrote years later, in the twelfth. In departing from prior modes of explanation by collective sin, the three historians' invasion narratives reflect a renaissance of ancient ideas about rule.

Cette thèse s’intéresse aux historiens classicisants de langue grecque de l’Antiquité tardive. Elle développe une analyse sociale de ces historiens et de leurs écrits. Son objectif principal est de souligner les interactions entre l’écriture de l’histoire, vu comme une pratique sociale, et la société romaine tardo-antique. La première partie dresse la biographie des historiens, d’Eunape de Sardes à Théophylacte Simocatta. Le profil social de ces historiens y est défini, et une attention particulière est portée aux liens entre activité littéraire et carrière professionnelle. La seconde partie étudie plus spécifiquement les élites provinciales tardo-antiques, groupe auquel appartiennent en majorité nos historiens. Elle explique pourquoi pratiquement tous les historiens étaient des avocats et comment ces derniers en venaient à écrire de l’histoire. La dernière partie analyse les fondements sociaux de l’histoire. Elle souligne ce que l’histoire devait à l’éducation tardo-antique et montre comment les vertus de l’historien reflétaient les vertus sociales attendues d’un membre de l’élite tardo-antique. / The main objective of this dissertation is to offer a social analysis of the classicizing historians of late antiquity. It aims to underline the interactions between history-writing and society. The first part presents the biographies of late antique classicising historians, from Eunapius of Sardis to Theophylact Simocatta. It describes the social profile of those historians, while insisting on the interactions between professional career and literary endeavours. The second part explains why most historians were lawyers and analyzes the place history-writing occupies in their social life. The third part deals with the social foundations of history writing. It focuses on the role of rhetorical education in the formation of future historians and shows how the virtues of the historian mirrored the social virtues of late antique elites.

No description available.

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2001. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In this thesis I will examine and discuss the reasons given for the Jewish War of AD 66 - 70. Reasons put forward by modern scholars specializing in the study of the works of Flavius Josephus are examined and discussed. However, the bulk of my study centres on the reasons that Flavius Josephus supplies for the war as found in his major work Bellum Judaicum. One is lead to the conclusion that he firmly believes that reasons on the human and transcendent planes contributed to the catastrophic events that lead to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. The worldview of this Jewish priest, general and accomplished historiographer was strongly influenced by the religious tenets of the Torah and the past history of the Jewish nation. He cannot countenance the wicked and evil deeds committed shamefacedly by his people against the clear standards that God had given to the nation, and believes that retribution by God will follow. He cannot forget occasions on the past when God intervened in the affairs of his nation by using a pagan world power to accomplish the purposes of God. He sees a similar recurrence of the events that lead to the destruction of the Jerusalem and the Temple in 587/6 BC being manifested in the Jewish War of AD 66 - 70. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In hierdie tesis word die redes wat vir die Joodse Oorlog van AD 66-70 aangebied word, ondersoek en bespreek. Veral die redes wat moderne geleerdes wat in die bestudering van Flavius Josephus se werk spesialiseer, word nagespeur en bespreek. Die grootste deel van die studie fokus egter op die redes wat Flavius Josephus self vir die gebeurtenis voorhou, soos wat hy dit in sy belangrike werk, Bellum Judaicum, uiteensit. 'n Mens kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat hy met groot oortuiging glo dat die redes wat tot die katastrofiese gebeure rondom die vernietiging van Jerusalem en die Tempel 'n bydrae gelewer het, op die vlak van sowel die menslike as bomenslike te vinde is. Die wêreldbeskouing van hierdie bedrewe geskiedskrywer en Joodse priester is deur beide die Torah se godsdienstige voorskrifte en volksgeskiedenis sterk beïnvloed. Hy kan nie sy steun aan die blatante en bose dade van sy volksgenote teen die duidelike standaarde wat God gegee het, toesê nie. Volgens hom moes God se vergelding volg. Hy kan ook nie vergeet hoe God in sy volk se verlede ingegryp het deur om goddelose wêreldmagte aan te wend om sy Goddelike doelwitte te bereik nie. Hy gewaar 'n soortgelyke herhaling van gebeurtenisse wat tot die vernietiging van Jerusalem en die tempel in 587/6 vC gelei het, in die aanloop tot die Joodse Oorlog van AD 66-70.

This dissertation examines the practice of writing military history in conjunction with military theory. It shows that in the pursuit of establishing military theory, military history is often actively distorted and manipulated by military theorists. Those military theorists who, consciously or subconsciously, succumb to this practice are identified here as "theorist-historians". The effect of this manipulation, its implications and consequences for the field of study as a whole are examined, as is the didactic nature of military history in the light of historical accuracy. In conclusion the role and effect of the military theorist~historians are evaluated against those of purely academic historians. The unique didactic needs of military history are also highlighted. Two twentieth century British military theorists, B. H. Liddell Hart and J. F. C. Fuller, were chosen as being representative of the military theorist-historian group. / Political Science / M.A. (International Politics)

No description available.

Douglas Henry Pike was born in China in 1908, the second of five children, whose Australian parents were missionaries with a Protestant interdenominational faith mission, the China Inland Mission. Following graduation from an English style mission boarding school at Chefoo in northern China, Pike came to Melbourne in 1924; and from 1926 spent twelve years jackerooing on various New South Wales country properties. He returned to Melbourne in 1938, trained for the ministry in a Churches of Christ College, graduated in November 1941, married Olive Hagger and was sent to Adelaide. During pastorates at Colonel Light Gardens and Glenelg he studied at the University of Adelaide for his BA. He achieved History Honours, resigned from the ministry, taught briefly in Adelaide and at the University of Western Australia then returned to Adelaide as Reader from 1950 to 1960. Pike obtained his MA, then the D. Litt. for Paradise of Dissent, a history of South Australia. During the 1950s he wrote a series of newspaper articles, ‘Early Adelaide with the lid off’. Douglas Pike (1908-1974) South Australian and Australian Historian. In 1960 he was appointed to the Chair of History at the University of Tasmania and published his second book, Australia: The Quiet Continent. In 1964 he moved to the Australian National University and commenced his pioneering task as founding editor of the Australian Dictionary of Biography. Therefore the most significant period of his working life in history and historiography covers the years from 1948 until his sudden illness in November 1973, and death in May 1974. The Second World War at first slowed but then stimulated the teaching and writing of history in Australia. Pike commenced his university studies during the war; his research and writing followed in the post-war period. His years in academia witnessed the establishment between 1946 and 1958 of four more universities in Australia, including the ANU, where he spent the last ten years of his life. However, apart from book reviews, obituaries in newspapers and journals, biographical paragraphs and the ADB, Pike’s contribution and significance to Australian historiography has been largely neglected. My thesis is based on personal interviews and correspondence with people who knew Douglas Pike, including family members, together with archival material from the Australian National Library and the universities where Pike worked. Printed sources include newspapers, journals, and Pike’s own published writings. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1347424 / Thesis (M.A.) - University of Adelaide, School of History and Politics, 2008

Univ., Diss.--Gießen, 2002.

This dissertation examines the practice of writing military history in conjunction with military theory. It shows that in the pursuit of establishing military theory, military history is often actively distorted and manipulated by military theorists. Those military theorists who, consciously or subconsciously, succumb to this practice are identified here as "theorist-historians". The effect of this manipulation, its implications and consequences for the field of study as a whole are examined, as is the didactic nature of military history in the light of historical accuracy. In conclusion the role and effect of the military theorist~historians are evaluated against those of purely academic historians. The unique didactic needs of military history are also highlighted. Two twentieth century British military theorists, B. H. Liddell Hart and J. F. C. Fuller, were chosen as being representative of the military theorist-historian group. / Political Science / M.A. (International Politics)