Volume 60, Issue 2 -

Vorspann Historiker sind – entgegen weit verbreiteter Vorurteile – mitnichten streitscheu, wie die lange Reihe heftiger Debatten von der Fischer-Kontroverse über den Historikerstreit bis zum „Amt“-Disput zeigt. Einen besonderen Stellenwert hat dabei die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Scholder/Repgen über das Reichskonkordat und das Ermächtigungsgesetz im Frühjahr 1933, die in den siebziger Jahren die Gemüter bewegte. Der renommierte Kirchenhistoriker Hubert Wolf historisiert diese nie ganz verstummte Debatte, die mit harten Bandagen geführt wurde – aber auch beträchtlichen Erkenntnisgewinn abwarf. Abstract Did the Holy See accelerate the end of the Weimar Republic in 1933 in order to conclude the Reichskonkordat with the National Socialist state in return? Did the Vatican push the Centre Party to accept the Enabling Act and the German bishops to retract their warning against National Socialism? These questions have been widely discussed ever since the Fifties, not only by historians, but also by the general public. The debate reached its peak in the late Seventies, and its protagonists were the Protestant church historian Klaus Scholder and the Catholic historian Konrad Repgen. About thirty years later, after the documents of the pontificate of Pius XI have been made accessible in the Vatican Archives, the present essay reviews this controversy from a new, critical point of view and aims at its historisation. It is now possible to reassess Scholder′s and Repgen′s arguments. Moreover, it is very enlightening to analyse the antagonists′ controversy on the historical method, their argumentative strategies in the dispute and their respective positions in the social networks of the “old” Federal Republic, not least with a view of the position and the methods of today´s contemporary church history.

Vorspann Das rechtsradikale Milieu, das sich nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg in Deutschland etablierte, ist uns in seinen Vorstellungen und seinem Lebensgefühl ziemlich fremd geworden. Die Erforschung seiner heterogenen Ideologien hat diese Distanz eher noch verstärkt. Unbeantwortet aber bleibt damit die Frage, warum ausgerechnet diese weltanschaulichen Entwürfe so viele Anhänger finden und sich letzten Endes durchsetzen konnten. Eine der überzeugendsten Antworten auf diese Frage bietet noch immer der biographische Ansatz. Das wilde, unkonventionelle und in mancherlei Hinsicht extreme Leben des Hans Ramshorn scheint geradezu prädestiniert dazu. Es lässt sich immer auch als Schnittpunkt verstehen, in dem sich viele überindividuelle Zeittendenzen – politische und militärische, ideologische und gesellschaftliche – überkreuzten und bündelten. Abstract How does the conventional life and career of a Prussian officer veer off course and onto the winding path of a Völkisch (ethnic nationalist) paramilitary? This article will address the above question using the biography of Hans Ramshorn (1892–1934) as an example. Characteristic of this soldier´s life was, on the one hand, his absolute hostility towards those he held responsible for Germany′s defeat in the First World War, combined with a radical inclination towards violence, and on the other hand the quest to shape his life as the leader of a militant fraternity of like-minded men. Ramshorn fought in the First World War and on the civil war fronts of the post-war period before playing a substantial role in the suppression of the 1921 uprising in central Germany as a police officer in the service of the Weimar Republic. He later joined the Black Reichswehr , became active in the Völkisch movement and ultimately found his way to the SA in 1931. His excellent connections and qualities as a paramilitary organiser led to his rise to the position of leader of the Upper Silesian SA and finally, in spring 1933, to his appointment as chief of police in Gleiwitz. However, this proponent of an uncompromising course of violence did not succeed in expanding his position of power, and neither did the other Silesian SA leaders. Ramshorn was executed on the night of 1 July 1934 when the conflict between the Reichswehr , the SS and the SA escalated. As with many other soldierly renegades who had organised the rise of National Socialism, Ramshorn ultimately failed due to the political ambivalence of his paramilitary leanings which on the one hand sought subordination, but on the other hand remained “anarchic” (Ernst Jünger).

Vorspann Kaum eine Darstellung des Zweiten Weltkriegs, die ihn unerwähnt ließe: den „Bromberger Blutsonntag“ vom 3./4. September 1939. Die brutale Ermordung von Volksdeutschen war für die deutschen Eindringlinge ein willkommener Vorwand für eine Besatzungspolitik der Unterdrückung, des Terrors und der Vernichtung, deren Opferzahl die der deutschen Minderheit schließlich weit übertraf. Die Instrumentalisierung des „Blutsonntags“ durch die NS-Propaganda hat eine genaue Klärung der Ereignisse jahrzehntelang erschwert – genau so die Frontstellung des Kalten Kriegs oder die tief eingefressenen Ressentiments auf beiden Seiten. Nun aber scheint eine zumindest teilweise Rekonstruktion der deutschen Opferzahl möglich. Abstract To this day, the so-called “Bloody Sunday at Bromberg” (3./4.9.1939) and its consequences are among the most contentious subjects in the history of the Second World War. Despite extensive efforts by German and Polish researchers it has not been possible to clear up the events at the time. In view of the lack of central sources on the German side this is probably no longer possible. In contrast the investigation of the number and names of the Polish victims has advanced noticeably during the last few years. The present article adds to existing Polish material published in 2008/2009 on the basis of unpublished German sources of the Historisch-Landeskundliche Kommission für die Deutschen in Polen [Historical Commission on the Germans in Poland], among them the papers of the former teacher August Müller, kept at the Herder Institute in Marburg. The comparative analysis of the names of the dead exhibits surprising differences, while the estimate of the overall number of casualties (over 400) is astonishingly similar both on the German and Polish side. In any case, final clarification seems impossible on the basis of the sources known to date.

Vorspann Politische Morde ohne mediale Inszenierung – das war für linke Terroristen immer ausgeschlossen. Sie wollten die Öffentlichkeit erreichen, ihre Botschaften und Heilsideologien in die Gesellschaft tragen. Gabriele Metzler von der Humboldt- Universität in Berlin zeigt, dass der Staat darauf nicht unvorbereitet war. Er reagierte auf die medialen Stilisierungen und Herausforderungen des Terrorismus nicht nur mit politischen, polizeilichen und legislativen Mitteln, sondern auch mit einer breit angelegten publizistischen und performativen Gegenstrategie, die seine Widersacher sogar im eigenen Umfeld isolierte. Besonderen Reiz gewinnt dieser methodisch innovative Ansatz durch den transatlantischen Vergleich: Handelte Washington, das mit den linksradikalen Weathermen konfrontiert war, anders als Bonn, wo man mit der RAF zu tun hatte? Abstract Nearly all Western liberal democracies were facing the challenge of left-wing political violence in the 1970s. Historical research has been focused for some years on the emergence of “terrorist” groups, on their radical political ideas, and their violent strategies that have been interpreted as acts of communication. Only recently, however, have the states′ responses to politically motivated acts of murder, abductions, bomb attacks, and bank robberies come into the focus of research. In this article the “anti-terror policy” of West Germany and the United States are analysed comparatively. Acts of government, police actions, and trials against perpetrators are interpreted from a perspective that blends performance theory and historical methods. Particular emphasis is put on performative acts that also involved the broader public and on narratives that were presented by major political actors (such as heads of government). In these narratives, references to war – either the Second World War or the Cold War – played an equally central part as labeling “terrorists’ and gendering “terrorism”. While terrorism research has highlighted the meaning of violence and living underground as a “way of life”, this article shows that to no lesser degree, also the fight against it implied habitual changes and the adoption of specific roles.

Vorspann Geheimdienste verwahren ihre Dokumente an besonders sicheren Orten. Die Staatssicherheit der DDR schuf sich dafür die „Geheime Ablage“, die mit etwa 13.000 Aktenbänden ein eigenes Archiv im Zentralarchiv war. Wie brisant waren die Dokumente wirklich, die dort abgelegt wurden und größter Geheimhaltung unter-lagen? Karsten Jedlitschka, als Mitarbeiter der Stasi Unterlagen Behörde ein Insider, weiß wovon er spricht: Die „Geheime Ablage“ enthält heute frei zugängliche Akten über besonders wichtige Operative Vorgänge, vor allem aber Unterlagen über mora¬lisches oder strafrechtlich relevantes Fehlverhalten von Stasi Mitarbeitern und SED Genossen. Abstract In December 1953, State Security created an additional sealed section in its Central Archive, the so-called “Secret Section”. During the following decades almost 13000 files with a total volume of approximately 350 linear metres were deposited there. The operations were subject to the highest degree of secrecy, were kept sealed in separate, locked filing cabinets, access was strictly regulated and borrowings and returns were meticulously recorded. The article analyses the contents of this special section and the motives for its establishment. It becomes apparent that, next to highly charged secret service operations, it was mostly used for files recording morally or criminally relevant misbehaviour within the SED security and power structure. The “Secret Section” ensured that these explosive issues were locked away for the long term. This was its contribution to the safeguarding of the Communist dictatorship.

Vorspann Die Historiker Rüdiger Graf und Kim Christan Priemel haben in der Oktobernummer 2011 der Vierteljahrshefte eine wichtige Diskussion über das Verhältnis von Zeitgeschichte und Sozialwissenschaften angestoßen und ihrer Zunft die mitunter allzu unbekümmerte Entlehnung sozialwissenschaftlicher Theorien angekreidet. Bernhard Dietz und Christopher Neumaier führen diese Diskussion fort und stellen dabei ihr Projekt einer Historischen Wertewandelsforschung vor, das von einer reflektierten Nutzung der Sozialwissenschaften zeugt. Abstract In using research results from the social sciences, contemporary historiography is confronted with a methodological problem: should such results be treated strictly as sources that reflect contemporary self-descriptions or do they also contain analytical potential that can be used critically? In contrast to Rüdiger Graf and Kim Christian Priemel (VfZ 59.4 2011), this article argues that they can be used both as sources and as analytical tools. To demonstrate how, this article introduces our approach, Historical Research on Changing Values, which was developed from a methodological criticism of a social science paradigm. Such an approach has enabled us to analyse when, how, and why values changed during the 19th and 20th centuries.