Articles de revues sur le sujet « National monuments – Germany »

AbstractThis article shows how the material culture of nationhood can reveal a different perspective on the problem of nationalism. Using simple time graphs and Geographic Information Systems (GIS), the article considers temporal and spatial dimensions of “nation objects” in an effort to understand the allusive phenomenon of banal, everyday national identity. Specifically, it brings together quantitative evidence for the pervasiveness of veterans monuments, Kaiser Wilhelm I and Otto von Bismarck monuments, as well as monuments to Germany's great intellectuals, and then examines the world of objects, largely kitsch, that these monuments brought forth. The article argues that, especially in small-town Germany, objects signifying the nation point to a national sentiment governed less by the sharp logic of ideology than by the harmonizing tendencies of kitsch.Dieser Aufsatz zeigt, wie die materielle Kultur der nationalen Einheit eine andere Perspektive auf das Problem des Nationalismus bieten kann. Durch die Verwendung einfacher Zeitgraphiken und Geographic Information Systems (GIS) werden die zeitlichen und räumlichen Dimensionen von “Nationalobjekten” betrachtet, um das anspielungsreiche Phänomen banaler, alltäglicher Nationalidentität zu begreifen. Konkret werden quantitative Nachweise weit verbreiteter Kriegsdenkmäler, Denkmäler für Kaiser Wilhelm I. und Otto von Bismarck sowie Denkmäler für Deutschlands führende Intellektuelle zusammengeführt und im Anschluss daran die Welt der Objekte – größtenteils Kitsch –, die diese Denkmäler hervorgebracht haben, untersucht. Dabei wird argumentiert, dass diese die Nation repräsentierenden Objekte vor allem im kleinstädtischen Deutschland auf ein Nationalgefühl verweisen, das weniger durch klar definierte Ideologie als vielmehr durch die harmonisierenden Tendenzen von Kitsch bestimmt ist.

Claus Leggewie and Erik Meyer, “Ein Ort, an den man gerne geht” Das Holocaust-Mahnmal und die deutsche Geschichtspolitik nach 1989 (Munich: Carl Hanser Verlag, 2005)Karen E. Till, The New Berlin: Memory, Politics, Place (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005)Peter Carrier, Holocaust Monuments and National Memory Cultures in France and Germany since 1989: The Origins and Political Function of the Vél’ d’Hiv’ in Paris and the Holocaust Monument in Berlin (New York: Berghahn Books, 2005)

Polish Góra św. Anny (Saint Anne Mountain), previously German Annaberg, is one of the few places in the world where art was utilized to promote two regimes—fascist and communist. With the use of art, the refuge of pagan gods and then, Christian Saint John’s Mountain with Saint Ann’s church and a calvary site were transformed into a mausoleum of the victims of uprisings and wars—those placed by politics on opposite sides of the barricade. The “sacred” character of the mountain was appropriated in the 1930s by the fascist Thingstätte under the form of an open-air theatre with a mausoleum, erected to commemorate fallen German soldiers in the Third Silesian Uprising. After the Second World War, the same place was “sacralized” by the Monument of the Insurgents’ Deed, which replaced the German object. The aim of both of them was to commemorate those who had perished in the same armed conflicts—uprisings from the years 1919–1921, when the Poles opposed German administration of Upper Silesia. According to the assumptions of both national socialism as well as communism, the commemorative significance of both monuments was subjected to ideological messages. Both monuments were supposed to constitute not only the most important element of the place where patriotic manifestations were intended to be held, but also a kind of counterbalance for the local pilgrims’ center dedicated to the cult of Saint Anne. The aim of the paper is to present the process of transforming a Nazi monument into its communist counterpart, at the same time explaining the significance of both monuments in the context of changing political reality. This paper has not been based on one exclusive research method—historical and field studies have been conducted, together with iconographical and iconological analyses of the monuments viewed from their comparative perspective. The text relies on archive materials—documents, press releases, and projects, including architectural drawings of the monument staffage—discovered by the authors and never published before. They would connect the structure not only to the surrounding landscape but, paradoxically, to the fascist Thingstätte.

The subject of this research is the activity of non-profit organizations in aimed at preservation and promotion of the monuments of medieval fortification as an integral part of the cultural heritage of the country of their location. The author carries out the classification of non-profit organizations in Germany dealing with the preservation of monuments of fortification architecture of the Middle Ages. Methodological framework is comprised of typological and systemic analysis used for selecting organizations as the key objects of research, as well analyzing the main vectors of their activity. The author explores most significant projects of the selected organizations, their contribution to preservation of the monuments of fortification architecture on the national and international levels. Special attention is given to the analysis of official Internet resources of such organizations in the German and English languages, as well as to the work with digital databases of the objects under review. The novelty lies in conducting classification of non-governmental communities engaged in preservation of the monuments of medieval fortifications in Germany, which allows systematizing them for considering the experience of foreign colleagues within the framework of the approach towards organizing public projects aimed at preservation of the sites of historical and cultural heritage. The author outlines several priority vectors for providing support to the objects of fortification architecture: informational, scientific, financial and tourist. As a result, the author compiles a chart of classification of non-profit organizations, demonstrates interdependence of public initiatives related to preservation of cultural heritage sites on the ongoing globalization processes that take place in the society. Attention is also turned to the differentiated approach towards preservation of cultural heritage on the national and international levels.

The subject of this research is the activity of non-profit organizations in aimed at preservation and promotion of the monuments of medieval fortification as an integral part of the cultural heritage of the country of their location. The author carries out the classification of non-profit organizations in Germany dealing with the preservation of monuments of fortification architecture of the Middle Ages. Methodological framework is comprised of typological and systemic analysis used for selecting organizations as the key objects of research, as well analyzing the main vectors of their activity. The author explores most significant projects of the selected organizations, their contribution to preservation of the monuments of fortification architecture on the national and international levels. Special attention is given to the analysis of official Internet resources of such organizations in the German and English languages, as well as to the work with digital databases of the objects under review. The novelty lies in conducting classification of non-governmental communities engaged in preservation of the monuments of medieval fortifications in Germany, which allows systematizing them for considering the experience of foreign colleagues within the framework of the approach towards organizing public projects aimed at preservation of the sites of historical and cultural heritage. The author outlines several priority vectors for providing support to the objects of fortification architecture: informational, scientific, financial and tourist. As a result, the author compiles a chart of classification of non-profit organizations, demonstrates interdependence of public initiatives related to preservation of cultural heritage sites on the ongoing globalization processes that take place in the society. Attention is also turned to the differentiated approach towards preservation of cultural heritage on the national and international levels.

Many monuments and places related to historical events and people connected with Bulgarian history can be found throughout Western Europe (and beyond). They are often the result of the wish of Bulgarians to commemorate prominent figures in Bulgarian history. Such sites, depending on the visitors and the commemorative practices performed there, are perceived as national memorials or as religious sites. At the same time, they contribute to the preservation of Bulgarian national memory and cultural heritage beyond Bulgaria’s borders. The text will explore “Bulgarian” sites (memorial plaques, chapels, and other places) in various locations in Germany, including Heidelberg, Ellwangen, Regensburg, Reichenau, and others, with a focus on the visits Bulgarians organise and the commemorative and religious practices they perform on-site.

In the slipstream of the Black Lives Matter movement in the United States, there has been a global mobilisation around monuments and statues of famous figures involved in the slave trade and European colonial conquest. In former colonial states – such as France and Britain – and states shaped by the legacies of slavery – such as the United States – activists have defaced, damaged or torn down monuments associated with these contested pasts. This is hardly a novelty. The destruction of physical symbols is often a response to regime change. But, in this case, the mobilisation has taken a different form. Instead of legitimising a new regime and new elites, the destruction of monuments is part of a demand for justice from historically marginalised groups who are seeking to reclaim their heritage. The deconstruction of these monuments automatically entails the deconstruction of dominant national narratives that have contributed to such marginalisation.

The purpose of this article is to reveal the Latvian cultural space of the 1930s, how it appears in present-day reminiscences of Baltic Germans, people with German heritage residing in Latvia, or their descendants. The data consists of extended interviews recorded as a part of the Latvian Academy of Culture project “Latvija – Heimatland” (2017–2019). One of the project objectives is to register and explore the reminiscences of this social group. The article analyses the accounts of 22 people residing in Latvia and 14 in Germany. These are accounts of events experienced either by themselves or their family members. It covers a time when the community of Latvians and Germans residing in Latvia was polarised by national interests, and the decade ended with Baltic Germans emigrating, followed by the Soviet occupation of Latvia. The Latvian cultural space of the 1930s is indirectly described by quotes from the respondents that relate to the resettlement in 1939 (Umsiedlung in German). The reminiscences illuminate cultural space components such as social practices, symbols, languages, and their use, traditions, and cuisine. The individual memories of Baltic Germans and their descendants significantly contribute to how the Latvian cultural space of the 1930s is already seen through collective memory, which includes monuments, written work, and art. They outline the lifestyle of this specific minority group, diversity of cultures, and interaction between them in Latvia, as well as a theme of Latvia as the lost motherland.

Rafaela Dancygier, Dilemmas of Inclusion: Muslims in European Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017) Reviewed by Hilary Silver, Sociology, George Washington University Thomas Großbölting, Losing Heaven: Religion in Germany since 1945; translated by Alex Skinner (New York: Berghahn Books, 2017. Reviewed by Jeffrey Luppes, World Languages, Indiana University South Bend Hans Vorländer, Maik Herold, and Steven Schäller, PEGIDA and New Right-Wing Populism In Germany (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018) Reviewed by Joyce Mushaben, Political Science, University of Missouri St. Louis Kara L. Ritzheimer, “Trash,” Censorship, and National Identity in Early Twentieth-Century Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016) Reviewed by Ambika Natarajan, History, Philosophy, and Religion, Oregon State University Anna Saunders, Memorializing the GDR: Monuments and Memory After 1989 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2018) Reviewed by Jeffrey Luppes, World Languages, Indiana University South Bend Desmond Dinan, Neill Nugent and William E. Paterson, eds., The European Union in Crisis (London: Palgrave, 2017) Reviewed by Helge F. Jani, Hamburg, Germany Noah Benezra Strote, Lions and Lambs: Conflict in Weimar and the Creation of Post-Nazi Germany (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017). Reviewed by Darren O’Byrne, History, University of Cambridge Chunjie Zhang, Transculturality and German Discourse in the Age of European Colonialism (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2017) Reviewed by Christopher Thomas Goodwin, History, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Marcel Fratzscher, The Germany Illusion: Between Economic Euphoria and Despair (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). Reviewed by Stephen J. Silvia, International Relations, American University

Abstract At the end of the First World War, the memories of the conflict which developed in France and Germany diverged widely. However, Paris and Berlin were something else than just a genuine reflection of their respective national context; their status as capital cities gave them common characteristics. Therefore some similar phenomena appear. On the one hand, those cities may offer a national backing to particular memories, which was especially sought. On the other hand, the concentration of marks of memory in those cities tended to consolidate them in an always more exclusively national role. Thus, a kind of reciprocal nationalization of memory by capital cities and of capital cities by memory occurred. This nationalization is particularly visible in the analysis of the national monuments that emerged in the post-war years. Nevertheless, such phenomena underline variations between Paris and Berlin: Paris stood out without any difficulty as the capital of France, even of the Allied world, while Berlin stood out as the capital of Prussia, with more difficulty as the capital of Germany.

The article outlines the history of the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin as a very good example of how long any such procedure is, from idea to realization, as well as how strong the debate how and whom to commemorate. Federal Foundation Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe also supervised Memorial to the Murdered Sinti and Roma, Memorial to the Homosexuals Persecuted under the National Socialist Regime and the Memorial to mass murder of patients from mental hospitals. Besides that, the author analyzes the initiatives and sollutions for other monuments in Germany?s capital New Guard Room, as well as the Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen near Berlin.

The library holds 87 phaleristic awards 1919–1939, from Austria, Great Britain, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Serbia, Sweden, Ukraine, USA. Among these awards we can conditionally distinguish the following thematic groups: Ukrainian and Ukrainian related awards, foreign phaleristic, international professional congresses. In these groups it is possible to distinguish subgroups representing different individual aspects of social life in Ukraine and in other countries in 1919–1939. Ukrainian and Ukrainian related honors include: Ukrainian-language honors made in Ukraine; honors of the Ukrainian Diaspora; non-Ukrainian-language honors made on Ukrainian lands. Foreign phaleristics are represented by thematic subgroups: state distinctions (Serbian Order of Saint Sava, Polish medals, etc.); non-state public awards; phalleristics of public organizations (the Red Cross, associations of librarians, doctors, electricians, technicians and others); German and Polish phaleristics on the occasion of a plebiscite in Silesia in 1921; monuments of cultural and artistic events; business awards (ASEA, Leica, Germany) and more. Distinctions of international professional congresses concern mainly medical organizations: I General Congress of Slavic Physicians in Warsaw 1927; The 1st, 2nd and 3rd Congresses of the Union of Slavic Dermatologists (in Warsaw in 1929, in Belgorod in 1931 and in Prague in 1934); The Third International Pediatricians Congress, London, 1933; IX International Congress of Dermatologists in Budapest 1935. Available in the library’s collection a memorial award of the International Congress of the World Union of Electricity Producers and Distributors in Paris, 1928 (two variants of decoration with different mounting methods). Keywords: phaleristics, awards, international professional congresses.

Canon and oblivion. The memorials of archaeologyThe article takes its point of departure in the sun chariot; the find itself and its find site at Trundholm bog where it was discovered in 1902. The famous sun chariot, now at the National Museum in Copenhagen, is a national treasure included in the Danish “Cultural Canon” and “History Canon”.The find site itself has alternated bet­ween experiencing intense attention and oblivion. A monument was erected in 1925; a new monument was then created in 1962 and later moved in 2002. The event of 1962 was followed by ceremonies, speeches and songs, and anniversary celebrations were held in 2002, during which a copy of the sun chariot was sacrificed.The memorial at Trundholm bog is only one of several memorials at archaeological find sites in Denmark. Which finds have been commemorated and marked by memorials? When did this happen? Who took the initiative? How were they executed? Why are these finds remembered? What picture of the past do we meet in this canon in stone?Find sites and archaeological memorials have been neglected in archaeology and by recent trends in the study of the history of archaeology. Considering the impressive research on monuments and monumentality in archaeology, this is astonishing. However, memorials in general receive attention in an active research field on the use of history and heritage studies, where historians and ethnologists dominate. The main focus here is, however, on war memorials. An important source of inspiration has been provided by a project led by the French historian Pierre Nora who claims that memorial sites are established when the living memory is threatened (a thesis refuted by the many Danish “Reunion” monuments erected even before the day of reunification in 1920).Translated into Danish conditions, studies of the culture of remembrance and memorials have focused on the wars of 1848-50 and 1864, the Reunion in 1920, the Occupation in 1940-45 and, more generally, on conflicts in the borderland bet­ween Denmark and Germany.In relation to the total number of memorials and public meeting places in Denmark, archaeological memorials of archaeology are few in number, around 1 % of the total. However, they prompt crucial questions concerning the use of the past, on canon and oblivion.“Canon” means rule, and canonical texts are the supposed genuine texts in the Bible. The concept of canon became a topic in the 1990s when Harold Bloom, in “The Western Canon”, identified a number of books as being canonical. In Denmark, canon has been a great issue in recent years with the appearance of the “Danish Literary Canon” in 2004, and the “Cultural Canon” and the “History Canon”, both in 2006. The latter includes the Ertebølle culture, the sun chariot and the Jelling stone. The political context for the creation of canon lists is the so-called “cultural conflict” and the debate concerning immigration and “foreigners”.Canon and canonization means a struggle against relativism and oblivion. Canon means that something ought to be remembered while something else is allowed to be forgotten. Canon lists are constructed when works and values are perceived as being threatened by oblivion. Without ephemerality and oblivion there is no need for canon lists. Canon and oblivion are linked.Memorials mean canonization of certain individuals, collectives, events and places, while others are allowed to be forgotten. Consequently, archaeological memorials constitute part of the canonization of a few finds and find sites. According to Pierre Nora’s thesis, memorials are established when the places are in danger of being forgotten.Whether one likes canon lists or not, they are a fact. There has always been a process of prioritisation, leading to some finds being preserved and others discarded, some being exhibited and others ending up in the stores.Canonization is expressed in the classical “Seven Wonders of the World”, the “Seven New Wonders of the World” and the World Heritage list. A find may be declared as treasure trove, as being of “unique national significance” or be honoured by the publication of a monograph or by being given its own museum.In practice, the same few finds occur in different contexts. There seems to be a consensus within the subject of canonization of valuing what is well preserved, unique, made of precious metals, bears images and is monumental. A top-ten canon list of prehistoric finds from Denmark according to this consensus would probably include the following finds: The sun chariot from Trundholm, the girl from Egtved, the Dejbjerg carts, the Gundestrup cauldron, Tollund man, the golden horns from Gallehus, the Mammen or Bjerringhøj grave, the Ladby ship and the Skuldelev ships.Just as the past may be used in many different ways, there are many forms of memorial related to monuments from the past or to archaeological excavations. Memorials were constructed in the 18th and 19th centuries at locations where members of the royal family had conducted archaeology. As with most other memorials from that time, the prince is at the centre, while antiquity and archaeology create a brilliant background, for example at Jægerpris (fig. 2). Memorials celebrating King Frederik VII were created at the Dæmpegård dolmen and at the ruin of Asserbo castle. A memorial celebrating Count Frederik Sehested was erected at Møllegårdsmarken (fig. 3). Later there were also memorials celebrating the architect C.M. Smith at the ruin of Kalø Castle and Svend Dyhre Rasmussen and Axel Steensberg, respectively the finder and the excavator of the medieval village at Borup Ris.Several memorials were erected in the decades around 1900 to commemorate important events or persons in Danish history, for example by Thor Lange. The memorials were often located at sites and monuments that had recently been excavated, for example at Fjenneslev (fig. 4).A large number of memorials commemorate abandoned churches, monasteries, castles or barrows that have now disappeared, for example at the monument (fig. 5) near Bjerringhøj.Memorials were erected in the first half of the 20th century near large prehistoric monuments which also functioned as public meeting places, for example at Glavendrup, Gudbjerglund and Hohøj. Prehistoric monuments, especially dolmens, were also used as models when new memorials were created during the 19th and 20th centuries.Finally, sculptures were produced at the end of the 19th century sculptures where the motif was a famous archaeological find – the golden horns, the girl from Egtved, the sun chariot and the woman from Skrydstrup.In the following, this article will focus on a category of memorials raised to commemorate an archaeological find. In Denmark, 24 archaeological find sites have been marked by a total of 26 monuments (fig. 6). This survey is based on excursions, scanning the literature, googling on the web and contact with colleagues. The monuments are presented chronological, i.e. by date of erection. 1-2) The golden horns from Gallehus: Found in 1639 and 1734; two monu­ments in 1907. 3) The Snoldelev runic stone: Found in c. 1780; monument in 1915. 4) The sun chariot from Trundholm bog: Found in 1902; monument in 1925; renewed in 1962 and moved in 2002. 5) The grave mound from Egtved: Found in 1921; monument in 1930. 6) The Dejbjerg carts. Found in 1881-83; monument in 1933. 7) The Gundestrup cauldron: Found in 1891; wooden stake in 1934; replaced with a monument in 1935. 8) The Bregnebjerg burial ground: Found in 1932; miniature dolmen in 1934. 9) The Brangstrup gold hoard. Found in 1865; monument in 1935.10-11) Maglemose settlements in Mulle­rup bog: Found in 1900-02; two monuments in 1935 and 1936. 12) The Skarpsalling vessel from Oudrup Heath: Found in 1891; monument in 1936. 13) The Juellinge burial ground: Found in 1909; monument in 1937. 14) The Ladby ship: Found in 1935; monument probably in 1937. 15) The Hoby grave: Found in 1920; monument in 1939. 16) The Maltbæk lurs: Found in 1861 and 1863; monument in 1942. 17) Ginnerup settlement: First excavation in 1922; monument in 1945. 18) The golden boats from Nors: Found in 1885; monument in 1945. 19) The Sædinge runic stone: Found in 1854; monument in 1945. 20) The Nydam boat: Found in 1863; monument in 1947. 21) The aurochs from Vig: Found in 1904; monument in 1957. 22) Tollund Man: Found in 1950; wooden stake in 1968; renewed inscription in 2000. 23) The Veksø helmets: Found in 1942; monument in 1992. 24) The Bjæverskov coin hoard. Found in 1999; monument in 1999. 25) The Frydenhøj sword from Hvidovre: Found in 1929; monument in 2001; renewed in 2005. 26) The Bellinge key: Found in 1880; monument in 2003.Two monuments (fig. 7) raised in 1997 at Gallehus, where the golden horns were found, marked a new trend. From then onwards the find itself and its popular finders came into focus. At the same time the classical or old Norse style of the memorials was replaced by simple menhirs or boulders with an inscription and sometimes also an image of the find. One memorial was constructed as a miniature dolmen and a few took the form of a wooden stake.The finds marked by memorials represent a broader spectrum than the top-ten list. They represent all periods from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages over most of Denmark. Memorials were created throughout the 20th century; in greatest numbers in the 1930s and 1940s, but with none between 1968 and 1992.The inscriptions mention what was found and, in most cases, also when it happened. Sometimes the finder is named and, in a few instances, also the person on whose initiative the memorial was erected. The latter was usually a representative part of the political agency of the time. In the 18th and 19th centuries it was the royal family and the aristocracy. In the 20th century it was workers, teachers, doctors, priests, farmers and, in many cases, local historical societies who were responsible, as seen on the islands of Lolland and Falster, where ten memorials were erected between 1936 and 1951 to commemorate historical events, individuals, monuments or finds.The memorial from 2001 at the find site of the Frydenhøj sword in Hvidovre represents an innovation in the tradition of marking history in the landscape. The memorial is a monumental hybrid between signposting and public art (fig. 8). It formed part of a communication project called “History in the Street”, which involved telling the history of a Copenhagen suburb right there where it actually happened.The memorials marking archaeological finds relate to the nation and to nationalism in several ways. The monuments at Gallehus should, therefore, be seen in the context of a struggle concerning both the historical allegiance and future destiny of Schleswig or Southern Jutland. More generally, the national perspective occurs in inscriptions using concepts such as “the people”, “Denmark” and “the Danes”, even if these were irrelevant in prehistory, e.g. when the monument from 1930 at Egtved mentions “A young Danish girl” (fig. 9). This use of the past to legitimise the nation, belongs to the epoch of World War I, World War II and the 1930s. The influence of nationalism was often reflected in the ceremonies when the memorials were unveiled, with speeches, flags and songs.According to Marie Louise Stig Sørensen and Inge Adriansen, prehistoric objects that are applicable as national symbols, should satisfy three criteria. The should: 1) be unusual and remarkable by their technical and artistic quality; 2) have been produced locally, i.e. be Danish; 3) have been used in religious ceremonies or processions. The 26 archaeological finds marked with memorials only partly fit these criteria. The finds also include more ordinary finds: a burial ground, settlements, runic stones, a coin hoard, a sword and a key. Several of the finds were produced abroad: the Gundestrup cauldron, the Brangstrup jewellery and coins and the Hoby silver cups.It is tempting to interpret the Danish cultural canon as a new expression of a national use of the past in the present. Nostalgia, the use of the past and the creation of memorials are often explained as an expression of crisis in society. This seems reasonable for the many memorials from 1915-45 with inscriptions mentioning hope, consolation and darkness. However, why are there no memorials from the economic crisis years of the 1970s and 1980s? It seems as if the past is recalled, when the nation is under threat – in the 1930s and 40s from expansive Germany – and since the 1990s by increased immigration and globalisation.The memorials have in common local loss and local initiative. A treasure was found and a treasure was lost, often to the National Museum in Copenhagen. A treasure was won that contributed to the great narrative of the history of Denmark, but that treasure has also left its original context. The memorials commemorate the finds that have contributed to the narrative of the greatness, age and area of Denmark. The memorials connect the nation and the native place, the capital and the village in a community, where the past is a central concept. The find may also become a symbol of a region or community, for example the sun chariot for Trundholm community and the Gundestrup cauldron for Himmerland.It is almost always people who live near the find site who want to remember what has been found and where. The finds were commemorated by a memorial on average 60 years after their discovery. A longer period elapsed for the golden horns from Gallehus; shortest was at Bjæverskov where the coin hoard was found in March 1999 and a monument was erected in November of the same year.Memorials might seem an old-fashioned way of marking localities in a national topography, but new memorials are created in the same period as many new museums are established.A unique find has no prominent role in archaeological education, research or other work. However, in public opinion treasures and exotic finds are central. Folklore tells of people searching for treasures but always failing. Treasure hunting is restricted by taboos. In the world of archaeological finds there are no taboos. The treasure is found by accident and in spite of various hindrances the find is taken to a museum. The finder is often a worthy person – a child, a labourer or peasant. He or she is an innocent and ordinary person. A national symbol requires a worthy finder. And the find occurs as a miracle. At the find site a romantic relationship is established between the ancestors and their heirs who, by way of a miracle, find fragments of the glorious past of the nation. A paradigmatic example is the finding of the golden horns from Gallehus. Other examples extend from the discovery of the sun chariot in Trundholm bog to the Stone Age settlement at Mullerup bog.The article ends with a catalogue presenting the 24 archaeological find sites that have been marked with monuments in present-day Denmark.Jes WienbergHistorisk arkeologiInstitutionen för Arkeologi och ­Antikens historiaLunds Universitet

Francoism was the product of the sum of all the heterogeneous forces of anti-liberal right, from the most radical fascists to Christian traditionalists even further to the conservative right than the Monarchists and the Carlists, and as a result their architectural response to the problem of rebuilding Spanish society following the Civil war could not be unitary either. Each school of thought, each situation to be solved, and each architect generated a different solution, and as a result we find a wide variety of architectural works in Francoist Spain. Rather than revisit the topics studied in multiple works since the seventies, this article will focus the research on typologies that have hardly received any attention, namely constructions of marked ideological and propagandistic character, such as the monolithic monuments dedicated to the Fallen, the reconstructions of ‘mythological’ places for the discourse of the first Francoism, and the production of monumental civic buildings, such as the Universities of Labor. The core issue to be resolved is whether some cultural discourses under Francoism constructed the new regime as pioneering a modernizing national revolution, rather than installing a reactionary counterrevolution, and whether the architectural works that resulted in fact present outstanding elements of modernity that had nothing to envy, in their physical scale, radicalism of design, and futural temporality, those of National Socialist Germany or Mussolini’s Italy. Such a kinship suggests that many buildings of right wing regimes, at least in Spain, in the first half of the twentieth century should be considered as belonging organically to the fascist era, even if the regimes that promoted or hosted them were not technically fascist in a strict political and ideological sense, a kinship expressed in their ‘rooted modernism’.

As much as the history of the Free City of Danzig (1920–1939) has been dedicated numerous academic studies, the activity of its institutions and people, particularly Gdańsk residents of German nationality who played a significant role in the city’s political, cultural, scientific, educational, and spiritual life until 1945 has been hardly investigated. One of such individuals is Willi Drost born in Gdańsk in 1892. Following his studies and academic work in Leipzig, Marburg, Cologne, and Konigsberg, in 1930 he returned to Gdańsk, where he was offered the position of a custodian and later conservator of monuments of the Free City of Gdańsk; furthermore, as of 1938 he was appointed Director of the City Museum, which he remained uninterruptedly until 1945. Beginning from 1930, he was also professor of art history at the Technischer Hochschule, engineering university, as well as curator of Museum Collections for the whole region of Gdańsk – Western Prussia. His scholarly activity yielded numerous publications in art theory, North European modern painting, and Gdańsk art. Furthermore, Drost takes credit for the inventory of Gdańsk historic churches conducted from 1934 onwards. Resorting to the preserved materials, in 1957–1964, Drost published a 5-volume series titled Art Monuments of the City of Gdańsk (Kunstdenkmäler der Stadt Danzig). During WW II, together with Prof. Erich Volmar, he supervised the action of protecting and evacuating art works from the City Museum, Town Hall’s Red Room, Artus Manor, Uphagen’s House, as well as from churches and other historic facilities. Directly following the end of WW II, Drost stayed on in Gdańsk, helping Polish art historians to recover art works hidden in the city and its vicinity. Having left for Germany in the spring of 1946, he was professor at Hamburg and Tubingen universities. Until his last days he continued to promote the cultural heritage of Gdańsk. In recognition of his merits, Drost was honoured with numerous awards in Germany, while in 1992, on the 100th anniversary of his Birthday, a plaque commemorating him was unveiled in front of the building of the former City Museum (Stadtmuseum), today housing the National Museum in Gdańsk. The paper’s goal is to popularize Drost’s endeavours as a museologist, and to recall all he did for Gdańsk.

Abstract The Payambar Mosque and Sistani House are two best-preserved monuments of Bam citadel, which suffered severe destruction by the 2003 Bam earthquake. After Bam earthquake, as a part of the national and international efforts for reconstruction of some of the key properties of Bam Citadel, the Iranian experts from RPBCH and Dresden Technical University of Germany, respectively have contributed comprehensive intervention plans for Payambar Mosque and Sistani House. The central idea of these two proposed plans were to find a sensitive balance between the demands of the two adobe world cultural heritage properties and the demands of modern retrofitting techniques in an area with high seismic activity. However, each group through using some new technical methods, which had similarity in manners and differences in employed materials, tried to meet the stability of these adobe monuments. Since by performing a SWOT analysis between the related projects or intervention plans with a common goal, looking at their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, we can compare the results, it would help us to know which procedure can be considered as an ideal method for similar projects in the future. Therefore, in this paper, to get a better insight about the effectiveness of those intervention plans implemented, a comparative analysis (SWOT) as an organization's strategic planning tool is considered for comparison scale.

The article examines the European experience of creating war memorials dedicated to the World War I, using the motives of medieval architecture. The fascination with the Middle Ages, spread through the art and literature of the Neo-Gothic and national Romanism period, was emotionally rethought by the generation that survived the catastrophe of the global conflict of 1914–1918. At the new stage, the symbolic harsh images of the Middle Ages turned out to be more consonant with the social creation of former front-line soldiers than the classical antique forms used in the memorialization of wars in the 18th–19th centuries. This process was reflected in the commemoration of the Great War in Great Britain, France, Germany and other countries, where the monuments to the fallen began to give the appearance characteristic of the towers, fortresses and castles of the long-gone Middle Ages, giving them a new interpretative meaning.

The article examines the positive and negative experience of the consolidation of French and German citizens in process of nation-building by means of culture. The research deals with: practice of collecting masterpieces that influenced the development of public museums and the ability to defend national interests; the practice of consolidation of citizens around monuments of cultural figures; practices of confrontation between conservative intellectuals and modern artistic circles, which led to the fight against dissent, the destruction of books and the formation of the ideology of Nazism; practices of nazification of the education system, which revealed growing of the conflict between ideal virtues and the real behavior of participants in the educational process and politicians, and which subsequently legitimized absolute obedience to the leader; practices of collecting library collections, accompanied by theft of public libraries and private collections. The positive consequences of the consolidation citizens with the help of cultural institutions are indicated: the institutionally formed sphere of culture allows citizens to experience national pride, to be aware of themselves as a part of an original and rich national culture, to form their national identity. Cultural institutions create a space, which creativity is encouraged, opportunity for public discussions about culture and society are provided; educational and scientific activities are carried out. Recommendations on building a strategy for the cultural policy of Ukraine: the sphere of culture should be aimed at consolidating citizens; should expand the possibilities of various subjects of cultural activity and minimize the negative influences of the state; should expand access to quality education that fosters a culture of critical and creative thinking; should expand opportunities for international cooperation in educational and cultural projects based on the values of rights and freedom of individuals, mutual understanding and mutual respect of representatives of different cultures.

Wind from the North: The Discursive Construction of Heimat Exemplified by the Edifice of the Former Royal School of Building Crafts (Königliche Baugerwerkschule) in Katowice and its Decoration The paper examines the edifice of the former school of building crafts (Baugewerkschule) in Katowice, Upper Silesia, which opened in 1901, and its decoration. The works of architecture, painting and sculpture were interpreted as carriers of a discourse calculated to construct Heimat, located within the borders of the Prussian Silesian Province. The building’s forms, reminiscent of the brick Gothic of northern Germany, were characteristic of the milieu of the Technische Hochschule in Hannover, where the designers of the edifice were educated. The city’s coat of arms was depicted on the facade, the vaulted ceiling of the auditorium was decorated with dragon and gryphon motifs of Scandinavian origin, and its walls painted with images of St. Hedwig ‒ the patron saint of Silesia, viewed here as a deconfessionalized personification of the land ‒ the Prussian eagle, and four iconic monuments of historic Silesian architecture. Thus, references were made to various levels of identity ‒ local, regional, national, and the mythologised Germanic North. The narrative constructed in this way fits into the cultural nationalism of the educated German bourgeoisie (Bildungsbürgertum), which grows out of the Romantic tradition. At the same time, the emphasis on the opposition of the North and South can be seen as a strategy for overcoming the peripheral status of Silesia in a world organised by the West-East axis. The school’s building in Katowice exemplifies how the elites of the German Empire used visual means to construct modern imagined communities.

A primeval archaeologist (MA 1955, PhD 1971), an organiser of protection for monuments in the Białystok province (1954–1980), Director of the Regional Museum in Białystok (1974–1980) and the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw (1980–2000). He dealt with archaeology, museology and the protection of monuments. He also popularised related knowledge and linguistic and religious issues. He established the provincial record of archaeological monuments as well as conservation archives, both of which were then developed at the museum. From 1959 to 1975 he was Scientific Secretary to the Yotvingia Scientific Expedition. He was a teacher, an editor and a social activist. He wrote over 200 publications, of which the most important are The funeral rite of the Western Balts at the end of antiquity (Warsaw, 1974); a critical study of Aleksander Brückner’s work Ancient Lithuania: tribes and gods: historical and mythological drafts (Olsztyn, 1979, 1984); Cecele. Ein Gräberfeld der Wielbark-Kultur in Ostpolen (Warsaw, 1996); Krupice. Ein Gräberfeld der Przeworsk- und Wielbark- Kultur in Ostpolen (Warsaw, 2005), Kurgans of leaders of the Wielbark culture at Podlachia (Białystok, 2012); and Switzerland. The cemetery of the Baltic Sudovian culture in north–eastern Poland (Warsaw, 2013). He specialised in researching Roman influence in Central Europe and the prehistory of north–eastern Poland, the culture of Baltic tribes (including the Yotvingians), Baltiysk and the Slavonic border, and in the Przeworsk and Wielbark cultures. He discovered and defined the Cecelska regional group, thus determining the late phase of the Wielbark culture, starting from the early period of Roman influence to its decline as a result of tribal migrations; their kurgans traced the areas of relocation of the Goths and the Gepids from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. His successful exhibitions included “The Balts – northern neighbours to the Slavs” (displayed in Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Lithuania, Italy and Germany several times), “Treasures of primeval Poland” (in Padua, Turin, Aquileia, Schollach) and “The prehistory of Warsaw” (Berlin). He was a member of museum councils as well as the council for museums at the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage.

The article is devoted to the historical and cultural aspects of the development of Czech art in the late Middle Ages on the example of an exhibition held from August 16 to November 3 at Prague Castle, which was dedicated to the 600th anniversary of the death of the Czech and Roman King Wenceslas IV. The author of the article considers the significance of the Czech culture and sacred art in the context of the political and historical specifics of the development of medieval Bohemia and the features of the reign of Vaclav IV, who wasthe son of the Holy Roman Emperor and the Czech King Charles IV . Wenceslas IV is a complex and controversial figure in Czech history, who stood at the «crossroads» of epochs and cultures, around him various disputes persist in historiography up to our time. This article provides an overview of the nature of the sacred artifacts of culture and art presented at the exhibition «Czech and Roman King Wenceslas IV: «beautiful style» of Gothic art», as well as the characteristics of the artistic style , defined in terms of historical and cultural, internal and external political development of the Czech Republic, crosscultural dialogue of the Czech Republic with European countries on the background of the emerging religious controversy in the country. The work takes into account the features of the Late Gothic style in the Central Europe. On the example of the remarkable works of painting, sculpture, fragments of architectural monuments, decorative and applied art and manuscripts, first of all the monumental Wenceslas Bible, many of which were brought to Prague from various European Galleries and Castles of Poland, Germany, France, New York, as well as from private collections, can demonstrate the rise of Czech culture and art in the late XIV-early XV centuries, which was presented the process of cultural accumulation of the European style of the late Gothic, received Czech national artificial identity.

Many things allow us to recognize that the Poles have a greater and fuller affinity with the Poznań Land than the Germans, even today. It is interesting, for example, with what confidence Polish architects, in contrast to their German counterparts, incorporate historical and regional characteristics in their designs.Moritz JafféThe Archive of the Town Curator of Monuments in the Polish city Poznań contains material about streets, monuments, Old Town Square, the cathedral, and other valuable constructions there. A folder labeled Nowy Ratusz (New Town Hall) attracted my attention, because I knew nothing about such a building. The folder contained photographs of a large neo-Gothic building. It looked like a typical Prussian public building, similar to hundreds of other postal, school, and government offices throughout the Prussian/German state. But what of this building? Had it been another casualty of the Second World War? The postwar images showed, that although seriously damaged, the building still stood in the ruins of the Old Town Square.

The article deals with the peculiarities of providing charitable assistance to captive Ukrainians from the Rastatt camp (Germany), as well as the specifics of the charitable activities of the camps. The prisoners Ukrainians have often acted as donors, raising funds for different national needs, for patients in the camp infirmary and so on. However, the prisoners did not refuse assistance to the Germans themselves – donating money to the German orphans of war and to the needs of the German Red Cross. Numerous donations have been made to build a monument that forever etched in stone the memory of the deceased Ukrainians. The prisoners, in turn, received charitable assistance from international and national Red Cross organizations, which had never been of a regular nature. Considering the scarcity of the camp rations and the quality of the food, the quality of the food is not always sufficient; the prisoners had some hopes of receiving charitable help. She was especially needed by patients from the camp hospital as well as prisoners with disabilities. The distribution of charitable assistance in Rastatt was carried out by the Central Committee, which was composed of elected representatives of prisoners.

For four decades, Germany was ground zero of the Cold War, cut in two by an 870-mile-long wall and sophisticated military infrastructure that separated the capitalist west and the communist east. This border region, shaped by demographic and economic decline, became an ecological refuge for over a thousand of Germany’s endangered plant and animal species. In 1989, when the wall fell, West and East German conservationists launched an effort to convert the borderlands into a protected ecological corridor called the ‘Green Belt’. This essay takes a closer look at the on-the-ground implications of such a project by examining what, and whose, stories it tells. As a case study, it looks at the German federal state of Thuringia’s recent decision to create the country’s first ‘National Nature Monument’, a new protected area category, out of the section of the Green Belt that runs through that state. The article argues that there are three deftly interwoven narratives: the story of German Democratic Republic oppression, of ecological resurgence, and of the rural idyll. All are powerfully evocative of some of the historical meanings of this border space and together they manage to craft an intriguing, hopeful, and pragmatic story of nature–culture hybridity. In the process, however this storyline silences others, including that of local farmers, some of whom reject what they see as an overreach of conservation. Rethinking the audience and in turn developing narratives about protected areas that more accurately represent local histories could be one component of creating ownership and increasing the acceptance of these spaces among local communities. Conservation and restoration, both in Germany and beyond, may well require plurivocal narratives.

Abstract This article considers the involvement of Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany at the 1939 New York World’s Fair. It considers the form, function, and content of the Italian Pavilion designed for this fair and asserts that the prefabricated monumental structure would be best interpreted, not in isolation, but as an element of the larger architectural conversation which continued to unfold across contemporary fascist Europe. Such reconsideration of this building makes it possible to evaluate the relationship between Fascist design, the assertion of political will, and the articulation of national identity and cultural heritage within a larger, transnational context. The author also investigates the American exhibition committee’s earnest and persistent, yet ultimately unheeded, solicitation of Nazi German participation and argues that motives behind German withdrawal from this event had as much to do with the threat of popular protest as economic pressure.

Another round of the Soviet ‘monument fall’ in the Baltics, which began in the early 2000s, continued into 2022. This process, however, has not affected Soviet memorials at the sites of mass violence perpetrated during the German occupation of the Baltics. This article aims to investigate major trends in the Baltics’ politics of memory regarding Soviet monuments erected at sites of mass violence. The official policy of the Baltics towards these memorial sites has been largely shaped by the international agenda and the perception of the commemorated events. During the Euroatlantic drift, the concept of the Baltic States’ past incorporated the Holocaust narrative, recoding the symbolic space of Soviet sites remembering Nazi crimes against Jews and integrating them into the national culture of remembrance. Soviet memorials at sites commemorating the tragedy of local peoples were incorporated as is into the national memorial landscape. Yet, Lithuanian authorities viewed these memorials with greater suspicion because of the Soviet countermemory, which the sites preserved. Memorials to Soviet POWs, albeit perceived as ‘alien’, are protected by law in the Baltics. Nevertheless, it did not save the places of remembrance from acts of vandalism. Moreover, there are trends in the Baltics towards a revision of the laws protecting the monuments.

AbstractTwo things long stood in the way of the erection of statues in public in the Northern Netherlands, on the one hand the lack of a strong central government and on the other the wrongly interpreted - Calvinist interdict on them (Note 1). The first statue of this kind, that of Erasmus in Rotterdam by De Keyser (1622), was attacked by strict Calvinists, but noted throughout Europe as an early paradigm (Note 3). Not until the 19th century did the Netherlands join in the nationalistic 'statue craze', which was just breaking out then, with two monuments to the supposed Dutch inventor of printing, Laurens Janszoon Coster. These statues of a private citizen had a predecessor in the 18th century, while a statue had already been demanded in the 17th-century eulogies of Coster. Cities had long honoured their famous inventors as important contributors to civilization and praise of the inventor was also a fundampental ingredient of the history of learning (e.g. in Pliny). In the Renaissance scientific inventions acquired a special emphasis, modern inventors being held up as evidence that the model of Antiquity could be not only equalled, but also surpassed, while both Christian civilization and the northern countries could also gain credit here (cf. Johannes Stradanus, Figs. 2, 3, Note 9, and Francis Bacon, Note 10). The significance of the invention of printing for Christianity was soon recognized, so that it was lauded above other inventions as 'divine', an attitude that was certainly also strengthened by its decisive role in the Reformation. In the Netherlands in particular, where religious and political developments were so closely interwoven, printing was regarded as an important aid to both (Notes 14, 15), while the young Dutch Republic, in which printing played such an important part, could claim the honour of counting the inventor of this important art among its citizens. This 'pious fraud' (Hellinga) is fundamental to the discussion of the history of the statues. The Coster tradition can only be traced back to about a century after the supposed invention, acquiring its definitive form at the end of the 16th century in Hadrianus Junius' Batavia Illustrata of 1598. The further enlargement on the merits of Coster also necessitated a portrait of him which, in de fault of an authentic one, had to be fabricated for the purpose, the features of the statue of Erasmus being taken over for a full-length portrait (Fig. 5), which served as a 'graphic monument'. A fictitious bust of Coster was also cited in the 17th century (Fig. 7) and this, like the early sculptural marks of honour to him (Fig. 16), belongs to the iconography of printing, the practitioners of the craft evoking their inventor. Such representations - a more or less life-size statue of Coster is still to be seen on the house of the Haarlem printer Enschedé - were not yet very public in character. The statue of Coster projected from the end of the 17th century for the garden of the Hortus Medicus in Haarlem did acquire greater publicity, however. This humanist garden of a bourgeois learned society (Note 28), reflected not only nature, but also the world of learning, as a microcosm of the arts, with sixteen busts of connoisseurs and scholars under the leadership of a full-length statue of Coster, since it was he who by his art had made the dissemination of learning possible, although he owed his place here largely to his Haarlem origins, of course. The designs made by Romeyn de Hooghe for this statue (Note 29) were only realized in 1722 in a statue by Gerrit van Heerstal, which tried to unite historical and classical features (Figs. 8-13). In the years thereafter, up to the tercentenary of the invention, the poems, medals and a weighty commemorative publication (Fig. 14, Note 35) celebrating the Haarlem inventor of printing all referred to this statue in his birthplace. Meanwhile Germany too had honoured her inventors of printing - Fust in addition to Gutenberg, initially - in 1640 and 1710 by centenary festivities often of a Protestant cast. Privileges relating to public statues may have been one of the reasons why no monuments were erected on these occasions. These privileges were, however, annulled by the French Revolution, just as the Enlightenment and political renewal furthered the cult of honouring leading civic 'geniuses'. Two Gutenberg cities under French rule took pride of pace here, but only in 1840 did Strasbourg acquire a statue of Gutenberg by David d'Angers, which illustrated his role as the enlightener of all mankind (Figs. 15-18, Note 39). In Mainz a private initiative of 1794 came to nothing (Note 40), as did a Napoleonic rebuilding plan centred on a Gutenberg Square with a statue. Not until 1829 was a semi-public statue by Joseph Stok set up there (Note 41), while in 1837 the Gutenberg monument designed by Bartel Thorwaldsen was unveiled with great ceremony (Fig. 19). The two last-mentioned statues in Mainz, like the many others erected after 1814, were the products of the nationalistic pride in the country's past history that flared up after the defeat of Napoleon. This pride in the past generally took on a nostalgic cast and served to compensate for the failure of current political ambitions: The unity of Germany long a dream, while the hoped-for great changes in the Kingdom of the Netherlands were dealt a bitter blow by the breakaway of the 'southern provinces' in 1831 (Note 44). This last event marked the start for the Northern Netherlands of a long-lasting rivalry with their Belgian neighbours, which was pursued by means of monumental art, from the statue of Rembrandt (1852) as an answer to that of Rubens (1840) to the Rijksmuseum (1885). The great importance attached to Coster in the 19th century was already manifested in 1801 by the removal of the statue in Haarlem from the Hortus Medicus to the marketplace (Note 45). National pride is abundantly evident in the prizewinning treatise published in 1816 by Jacobus Koning, who is a weighty investigation confirmed Coster's right to the invention and with it that of the Netherlands to a leading place among the civilized nations. The quatercentenary, fixed surprisingly early, in 1823, comprised every imaginable type of public entertainment and demonstration of scholarship. It is, however, striking that these expressions of national pride were still balanced by references to the elevating effect of the invention (Note 56). The most lasting mark of honour of the celebration of 1823, the abstract monument by the Haarlem sculptor D. Douglas, also looked back to the sensibilities of the 18th century in its placing on the spot where the invention had come into being in the Haarlem Wood (Fig. 23, Note 59). After this Haarlem monument of 1823 had been adduced in the discussions about the statue in Mainz before 1829, Thorwaldsen's statue, which attracted great international attention, became a greater source of annoyance to the Dutch adversaries of Gutenberg after 1829 than the statue to the Belgian inventor Dirck Martens in Aalst (Note 63) or the projected monument to William Caxton in England. Jan Jacob Frederik. Noordziek summed up this dissatisfaction in his call in 1847 to 'uphold the honour of the fatherland', in which he pleaded for a monument that would surpass the Gutenberg statue and thus serve as an argument that would establish the Dutch claim for good (Note 64). The erection of this statue was further expressly intended to be an exclusively national affair: the citizens of the Netherlands must raise the money and only Dutch artists be charged with the execution. The general discussion about the statues appears to have been less virulent than was usually the case in the preliminaries to other monuments (Note 66), Coster's merits evidently being little contested within the country itself. There were two notable critical voices, however (see Appendix). Professor M. Siegenbeek rang the changes on an old Calvinist argument in refusing a seat on the preparatory committee: in addition to the fact that there were certainly more people who deserved statues, he pointed out that the great expense involved merely evinced ostentation and that the money would be better spent on social ends. The Neo-Classicist Humbert de Superville, on the other hand, did express doubts as to Coster's right to the title, repeating aesthetic arguments which had been adduced before: statues ought, in his view, to be made in the form of durable stone herms, but he thought there was as little chance of that in this 'age of modish lay-figures' in the bronze of melted-down coins, as that the statue would be made by a Dutchman (Note 67). A typical Romantic historical controversy threw the organizers into turmoil, namely the authenticity of the representations of Coster. In particular Westreenen van Tielland unmasked the idealizing and forged portraits, arguing against the erection of a historicizing representational statue. But the defenders of Coster's honour opted for the usual historical realism (Note 68). The tenor of these polemics is found again in the conflict over the 'historical or allegorical' nature of the composition, which can be seen in the designs. Louis Royer, to whom the commission was given in 1848, wanted to show Coster walking with a winged letter A in his hand, as if on his way to show people his discovery, which was soon to wing its way round the world (cf. Fig. 22). However, this allegorical element disappeared completely in the final version, in which the choice fell on a realistic portrait, albeit Coster was still shown walking like a classical predecessor, Archimedes, who could not keep his discovery to himself (Fig. 23, Note 69). The architect H. M. Tetar van Elven was commissioned to make a base in the style of 'the last era of the Middle Ages'. The inscriptions also presented problems, but were finally agreed on in September 1855. The ceremonies, which after all manner of altercation between Royer and the main committee (Note 70) and various financial problems, were finally able to be staged from 15 to 17 July) 1856, included, in addition to the actual unveiling of the statue on the marketplace ( Van Heerstal's statue being returned to the garden again) , pageants, meetings, an exhibition and all sorts of popular entertainments. Everything was on a grander and more extensive scale than 33 years before and little remained of the motif of enlightenment through printing which had been so important then. Nalionalistic merry-making now predominated, along with expressions of devotion to the House of Orange. Less emphasis was also given to the 'darkness' of the Middle Ages, which were now beginning to be valued as part of the nation's history. The most monumental homage to this monument was a 360-page account of the events by the indefatigable Noordziek. His dream of the recognition of Coster and the nation as a whole seemed to have become a reality. But it was not to be so for long. Only fifteen years after the unveiling A. van de Linde unmasked the' 'Haarlem Coster legend' and called for the demolition of the statue, again in the interests of the nation (Note 81).

Socio-economic indicators of the Irkutsk region, Buryatia and the Far East, dynamics of their development in 2016-2017, and problems and prospects are considered in this paper. Today, the priority for the regions of Siberia and the Far East, which possess unique natural resources and a vast territory, is the complex task of increasing the living standard of the population and launching a new economic strategy. The Irkutsk region is one of the largest industrial regions of Russia. The city of Irkutsk was formed as an administrative, commercial and cultural-educational center. Currently, it is home to more than 50% of the urban population of the Irkutsk region. Some enterprises of the city have a machine-building profile. The production of food (more than 45% of the total volume), the construction material, and wood processing also play an important role. External migration has a significant impact on the demographic situation in the region. Most of the migration processes with the crossing of the boundaries of the region take place within Russia. According to statistical data, external migration can be divided as the three main flows of foreign citizens entering the territory of the Irkutsk region: the Central Asian direction (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan 44.3%); the East Asian direction (China, Mongolia, DPRK, Japan, and Vietnam 30.8%); and the Western direction (Germany, France, and Poland). It should be also noted that 13.9% of all migrants are migrants from Ukraine, Armenia, Belarus, and Moldova, these are mainly young people of working age. The Baikal region is famous in Russia for its natural landscapes: there are more than 1,500 objects of excursion and cognitive significance (natural, architectural, cultural and historical monuments) in the region. The region has a great industrial potential that is of national importance. Several basic complexes and industries compile a modern industrial structure. There are opportunities for further development of the industrial production in the oil and gas industries, diamond mining industry, the production of composite materials, fibers and mineral fertilizers. On the Far East, priority is given today to the raw material economy and the related infrastructure facilities, including the modernization of the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Baikal-Amur Mainline.

Given the turbulent nature of recent German history, studies of postwar German memory understandably have focused upon the issue of Vergangenheitsbewältigung—the difficult process of “coming to terms” with the historical experience of the Third Reich and the Second World War. This topic's magnitude has rightly inspired considerable scholarly attention but, at the same time, it has also had the unintended effect of overshadowing other German struggles with memory. In recent years, however, this state of affairs has begun to change. As the epochal events of 1989–90 have forced Germans to confront still another burdensome historical legacy—that of communism—the increasing calls for a “second” Vergangenheitsbewältigung have, for better or worse, broken the monopolistic hold of the Third Reich on the nation's historical consciousness. course of this new Vergangenheitsbewältigung by comparing it to the experience of coming to terms with the legacy of Nazism.

AbstractIn large parts of late 19th-century Europe, monumental landscapes in the metropoles appear as public platforms where national realms of the pasts were invented. Public statues installed in Paris, Berlin and London would hardly express coherent national mentalities. They rather symbolize their initiator's propagandist attempts at defining the nation while they could be perceived quite controversially. Beyond state-dominated images of the nation in Berlin, there were attempts at referring to more liberal demands in the German national movement. In London, the seemingly consensual recourse to British Monarchy testifies to the fact that monument committees transformed the concept of monarchy into a common reference point of civic patriotism while public reference to the highly non-egalitarian social order was ignored. In Paris, the placement of national cult figures was even more part of a controversial process and hardly exemplified a constantly assured French nation. A comparative analysis of rhetorical strategies and their repercussions upon the public could add to a pluralistic European history of resilient nationalistic rhetorics and their questionable success in each case.

Introduction. The paper briefly reviews the current state and prospects of Mongolian studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS) that celebrated its 200th anniversary in 2018. The Institute maintains and strengthens its positions as a leading national and global research center for Oriental studies. Goals. The study attempts at summarizing the Institute’s 2010–2020 experiences in developing Mongolian studies as a traditional branch of Russia’s Oriental studies, characterizing the present state and development prospects with due regard of actual achievements, challenges, and problems. Materials and Methods. The work analyzes scholarly publications authored by associates of the Mongolian Studies Unit (Department of Korean and Mongolian Studies) and other departments of the Institute in 2010–2020, including operating archives ― through the use of historical, chronological, descriptive, analytical and other methods. Results. The study shows that despite a number of objective and subjective difficulties, associates of the Institute keep developing Mongolian studies exploring some topical and understudied issues of ancient, medieval, modern, and contemporary Mongolia; providing comprehensive insights into present-day political, socioeconomic, and cultural frameworks of Mongolia proper and Russia-Mongolia relations. Still, the Institute ― and specifically the Mongolian Studies Unit ― experiences a critical shortage of qualified young Mongolists, and if the problem remains unsolved respective research perspectives should encourage no optimism. The number of highly experienced Mongolists and Orientalists that conduct research activities on a range of Mongolia-related issues (history, historiography, source studies, discoveries and publications of new sources, written monuments and archives, philology, etc.) affiliated thereto is small enough. The former publish their scholarly works and actively cooperate with colleagues from similar scientific and educational organizations of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Irkutsk, Ulan-Ude, Elista, Kyzyl, Vladivostok and other Russian cities; establish relations with foreign humanities research centers of Mongolia, China, Japan, the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France, etc. Chronologically, the review covers the period between 2010 and 2020, and characterizes key changes in staff composition; shows fundamental research trends; summarizes outcomes of scholarly, organizational and publishing activities; mentions main joint and individual monographs authored (published) by associates of the Department of Korean and Mongolian Studies in 2010–2020. The paper specifies basic development problems faced by Mongolian studies in the context of Oriental studies as such, provides conclusions and prognoses for further evolution of this research line at the Institute of Oriental Studies (RAS).

The question as to why a national monument to the “Murdered Jewsof Europe” should be erected in Berlin is multi-dimensional, and hasanswers in political, cultural, and historical contexts. As most peoplealready know, I once took a hard stand against actually ever completinga central memorial in Germany to the Holocaust. “Better athousand years of Holocaust memorial competitions in Germanythan any final solution to Germany’s Holocaust memorial problem,”I wrote many years ago. “Instead of a fixed icon for Holocaust memoryin Germany, the debate itself—perpetually unresolved amid everchangingconditions—might now be enshrined.”

Abstract Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s personal library was a prime source of his literary and scientific writings, but has nonetheless found little attention in research. This study explains this disregard by examining the library as both “familial inheritance” (Erbe) and “cultural heritage” (Kulturerbe), two conflicting concepts that, nonetheless, both resulted in the monumentalization of the writer’s book collection. By turning Goethe’s library into a monument, the individual, telling histories of the books he owned, has often been overshadowed. Many books are associated with multiple owners and have gone through the hands of Goethe’s family, friends, and assistants. Against this background, provenance research allows us to gain new insights into Goethe’s works, reading and writing practices, as well as his stylization as a German national poet.

The article covers the formation of the scientific base for working with visitors at the Paleontological Museum of Liaoning in China. The original reason for the creation of the museum is stated, it was connected with 1990s, when numerous fossils were discovered in Liaoning province. The first of them were Sinosauropteryx and the Liaoning ancient fruit (Archaefructus liaoningensis). Later large number of fossils were discovered, they represent the flora and fauna of China existed more than 3 billion years ago. It is important to say that the Liaoning Provincial Department of Land Resources and Shenyang University saw scientific value of the paleontological findings. They decided to build a paleontological museum on a parity basis. Construction of the museum building at Shenyang University began in 2006, and the Paleontological Museum of Liaoning was opened in 2011. The world-famous paleontologists contributed immensely to the formation of the Paleontological Museum of Liaoning. They are Sun Ge (Chinese researcher), M.A. Akhmetyev (Russian scientist), F. Mosbrugger (director of the Museum of Natural History of Germany), K. Johnson (director of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, Washington, USA) and professor P. Godfroy (Royal Institute of Natural History of Belgium). The staff of the Liaoning Museum, part-time researchers, as well as student volunteers of the Shenyang University participated in the development of the museum resources. Thanks to joint hard work, the museum has collected more than 30 thousand paleontological fossils. At present, the collection of the Liaoning Museum includes all kinds of animals and plants of ancient China, they are subdivided into seven classification groups. The reliance on the rich resources of the museum ensured the creation of the exposition, which occupies eight exhibition halls. They exhibit genuine monuments of paleontology, as well as replicas and models. They acquaint visitors with the ancient world of China, communicate the geological history of the Liaoning province, and reveal the kingdom of dinosaurs. The author of article emphasizes that in 2011, when the museum was opened, a department for the popularization of science was formed along with other departments. The main task of the workers of this department was to carry out cultural and educational activities with specialists and ordinary visitors. The department organizes exhibitions in China and abroad, conducts seminars for workers of Chinese nature museums. The scientific and educational section within the department for popularization of science also work with schoolchildren. During the first nine years of the museum's creation, three million single visitors and twenty thousand social groups have visited Paleontological Museum of Liaoning. So the article reveals the importance of cultural and educational activities that ensures the cooperation of the Liaoning Museum with other schools and museums in China, brings the museum to the international level.

The author analyzes recent Polish debates on researching silenced aspects of national history and the problem of the "collective guilt". One of the major questions arising in these debates is: does the study of "white spots" from the past (have to) lead to a trauma of continuous collective self-blame? In Poland, a specialized institution, the Institute of National Memory, was founded in 1998, engaging in research, documentation and public education on events related to German and Soviet occupation during WWII and the activity of political police under communism. Polish debates on the past got particularly inflamed after the discovery made by the historian J.T.Gross on the participation of Poles in the massacre of Jewish inhabitants of the town of Jedwabne in 1941. His book published in 2000 provoked a heated debate in which methodological, political and moral arguments were used on both sides. This case also occasioned a polemic between two prominent historians, identifying two basic visions of national history: the "monumental" one, recognizing only the heroic deeds that the nation takes pride in, and the "skeptical" one, which looks for silenced and shameful facts. Though both participants in the polemic opt for the third vision, the "objective" history which dispassionately seeks the truth, one of them stresses the role of the monumental history in maintaining the cohesion of the national community, while the other emphasizes that the collective acknowledgement of the nation's crimes can be a basis for national pride. .

A murder of an Afro-American detainee by a policeman at the end of May 2020 caused a public outrage in the United States, which led to a campaign against the monuments to historical figures whose reputation, according to the protesters, was marred by racism. Some German publicists, impressed by the campaign, initiated an analogous search for racists among the national thinkers and politicians of the past. Suddenly Kant emerged as a ‘scapegoat’. This statement is an attempt to assess such reactions from the perspective of Russia’s experience.

The history of the early Germans is controversial terrain. This is known, though not invariably admitted. A few years ago, Klaus von See summed up the underlying predicament:Germans (Deutsche) have it hard with the origins of their national past. The oldest texts are not indigenous; they stem from Latin and Greek authors — Tacitus, Ammianus Marcellinus, Procopius. If stone vestiges are sought, one mostly has to be content with Celtic and Roman remains…. Supplementary efforts are made to unearth authentic Germanic monuments in large parts of Old Norse [literature]… — it being readily overlooked that the Edda and the sagas bear witness not to Germanic antiquity, but to the Scandinavian early and high Middle Ages, [and were] only written long after Christianization. As a result, studies of the early Germans are a difficult terrain for historical science….

Abstract The article (developing a paper presented at 2010 SHARP international conference) investigates the ways grand Faust editions from the 1850s and 1870s make sense as equivocal cultural objects migrating within and beyond Germany. Scholars have focused on these imposing tomes to herald the play as expression of a nation-centred claim, with Faust as heroic myth. This interpretation relied on costly plates and external characteristics for principal evidence. This article instead draws attention to circulation, transformations and fuller readings of these items, combining first-hand research in many collections. On the one hand, it looks into the editorial versions as adjustable to different audiences and cultures, using editorial data, reception evidence, and image analysis. On the other, it shows how fuller readings of a tome, based on material, symbolic and archival evidence, tell two different stories. This study of a text’s print apparel and circulation, at odds with its significance as a national myth, has implications well beyond this singular work.

In 2008 the Campus of the Warsaw School of Economics (SGH) was entered into the register of monuments. The Research Pavilion, so called Building A, is the oldest of the campus buildings. It was constructed between WWI and WWII according to the design of Jan Koszczyc-Witkiewicz, one of the most renowned contemporary architects. During WWII, immediately after the end of the Warsaw Uprising, the Germans burnt down this building despite the signed capitulation agreement guaranteeing the protection of Polish national heritage monuments. The building accommodated at that time the archives of Polish pre-war state institutions, which were completely destroyed. The building was reconstructed after the WWII as a results of the efforts of the university authorities and personal involvement of Professor Stanisław Skrzywan. The paper presents the process of reconstruction of the listed building based on archive sources - the Archives of the capital city of Warsaw (the archives of the Capital Reconstruction Bureau)and SGH Archives (the minutes from meetings of the SGH Senate), the memoires and contemporary press

The planned removal of a Civil War monument in Charlottesville, Virginia, was the pretext for a white supremacist rally there in August 2017. It brought American fascists back into the streets, marching under the banner of a virulent nativism, of a vicious fear of being removed from the pedestal of their proper place in society. It also brought to the minds of people watching these images on TV older visual repertoires dating back to Nazi-Germany, fascist Italy, and similar racist clashes elsewhere. In such a stream of consciousness, such a chain of visual recollections, national settings—American or otherwise—are transcended. The wandering—and wondering—mind of the observer moves in a space naturally trans- national. The following essay considers the implications of such mental processes for the established forms of discourse among historians.

AbstractOn 11 October 1941 the Vichy government passed legislation mandating the dismantling and smelting of French bronze statues and monuments in the public domain. Crippled by copper shortages and bound by the terms of the Franco-German armistice, the etat français sought to ‘mobilise’ all potential sources of non-ferrous metals, including public statuary. The statue of Mistral in Arles was one of the monuments that were dismantled. The destruction of this tribute to the Provençal poet and founder of the Félibrige sparked considerable protest and opposition, but from an unusual quarter – supporters of Pétain's National Revolution. The case of the destruction of the statue of Mistral in Arles reveals the intersection of regionalism and resistance in wartime France and challenges many of our perceptions about both these movements.Ame de Mon PaysAme éternellement renaissanteAme joyeuse, fière et viveQui hennis dans le bruit du Rhône et de son vent!Ame des bois pleins d'harmonieEt des calanques pleines de soleilDe la patrie, âme pieuseJe t'appelle! Incarne-toi dans mes vers provençaux!1

This article presents a book review about Brian Ladd’s book, The Ghosts of Berlin. He uncovers the manifested and the hidden history of this city as well as the complexities of its life through its actual buildings, streets, traffic, and monuments and through the blueprints of unrealized projects, such as Hitker’s grandiose plans for a thoroughly revised capital. The result is a fascinating book about the development of Berlin and its role in national and international politics from the Middle Ages to the present.

Lietuvos nacionalinė Martyno Mažvydo bibliotekaGedimino pr. 51, LT-01504 Vilnius, LietuvaEl. paštas: viktorija.vait@gmail.comStraipsnyje nagrinėjami Lietuvos nacionalinės Martyno Mažvydo bibliotekos Retų knygų ir rankraščių skyriaus paleotipai: jų leidimo vieta, spaustuvininkai, tematika bei proveniencijos, dėmesį telkiant į retesnius, Lietuvos knygos kultūrai svarbesnius leidinius. Iš šiame skyriuje saugomų daugiau kaip 800 paleotipų analizuojama tik dalis jų, nes daugiau negu 200 knygų teturi kortelinį bibliografinį aprašą ir išsamiai juos ištirti šiuo metu neįmanoma. Dalies šių paleotipų analizė papildo jau esamus tyrimus, praplečia senosios knygos kultūros vaizdą.Reikšminiai žodžiai: knygotyra, paleotipai, retos knygos, spaustuvininkai, proveniencijos.THE COLLECTION OF POST-INCUNABULA IN THE MARTYNAS MAŽVYDAS NATIONAL LIBRARY OF LITHUANIAViktorija VAITKEVIČIŪTĖ AbstractPost-incunabula or the books printed in the first half of the 16th century (from January 1, 1501 to January 1, 1551), along with incunabula, are considered to be the oldest and most valuable publications in the world. Due to their likeness to incunabula and publishing specifics, post-incunabula are considered to be historical treasures and monuments of culture. The Rare Book and Manuscript Department of the National Library of Lithuania has in its holdings more than 800 post-incunabula, not including the ones kept at the Department of the National Archival Fund of Published Documents. The exact number is still unknown, since not all the books have been included into the electronic catalogue: more than 200 of them have only a card catalogue description and are awaiting a more detailed study. This article analyses specific features of part of the post-incunabula collection in the NLL Rare Book and Manuscript Department: their place of publication, publishers, thematics and provenances. Principal attention is accorded to the books that are rarer, more interesting and more important for Lithuania’s culture and book culture in general.The most of the post-incunabula kept in the Rare Book and Manuscript Department were published in Germany, many in Switzerland, France and Italy. There also is a small number of post-incunabula published in Poland (Cracow). Of the publications produced by Cracow’s printers, the article discusses those by Jan Haller (ca. 1467–1525), Hieronim Wietor (ca. 1480–1546) and Florian Ungler (d. 1536). It is necessary to mention Aldines – the publications by one of themost famous European printers, Aldo Manuzio (Lat. Aldus Manutius; ca. 1450–1515) and by his descendants. The article also touches upon the work of such acclaimed French publishers as Henri Estienne (lat. Henricus Stephanus, ca. 1460–1520), founder of the famous dinasty of printers, and the Lyonese printer Sébastien Gryphius (ca. 1493–1556). The Rare Book and Manuscript Department also keeps quite a few post-incunabula published by Johannes Frobenof Basel (1460–1537).As to the content aspect, the collection of post-incunabula in the department is versatile. For the most part, it is made up by religious literature: sermons, bibles, theological treatises, Church Fathers’ writings. There are many works by and commentaries on classical authors, of whom Cicero, at the time of the Renaissance viewed as the greatest authority on rhetoric, is the most famous one. The post-incunabula collection illuminates the emergence of the Reformations and the related spread of new ideas in the first half of the XVIth century. The Rare Book and Manuscript Department boasts a number of works by the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther (1483–1546) and by the most acclaimed humanist of the times, Desiderius Erasmus (1469–1536).The provenances in the post-incunabula (manuscript inscriptions, stamps, bookplates) provide much interesting information. Most often found are ownership marks of the establishments that since the olden times had been preserving books: various monasteries, churches and priest seminaries,. The notable representative of the post-incunabulum culture is the Bernardine Order. According to the electronic catalogue, the Rare Book and Manuscript Departmenthas in its holdings 21 post-incunabula formerly kept by the library of the Tytuvėnai Bernardine Monastery. Most provenance inscriptions are from Kaunas Priest Seminary, the library of the Samogitian Priest Seminary, the library of the Vilnius Seminary and Kražiai College. Of the XIXth century personal libraries,particularly noteworthy are the collections of Jonas Krizostomas Gintila (1788–1857), XIXth-century bibliophile, hebraist and administrator of the Samogitian Diocese, and of Friedrich August Gotthold (1778–1858), educator and music theorist. A separate, rather abundant group of provenance inscriptions consists of the books that formerly belonged to Königsberg University. An in-depth study of all the post-incunabula kept in the NLL would significantly add to the existing research and broaden the understanding of old book culture.