I'm reading a history of Prussia at the minute. It just made me wonder what the general approach in Germany is to pre-1870 history (and pre-unification Italy too)? I imagine a sort of Whiggish story of Prussia's not taught, given the connotations of that state. But do you learn about the history of your region, just general German events like the Thirty Years War or something else?
My middle school curriculum:
Egypt
Greece
Rome
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Empire (Otto the Great, Barbarossa etc.)
Crusades
Hansa
Reformation
Age of Discoveries
Thirty Years War
Founding of Prussia
French Revolution/Napoleon
Prussian Reforms (Hardenberg/Stein)
1848
Industrial Revolution
Founding of Germany
Bismarck's politics and reforms
Colonies/Imperialism
WW1
Weimar
Third Reich
Cold War (division of Germany, Ostpolitik etc.)
I had to look up Whiggish history as I didn't know the term.
Quote from: WikiWhig history (or Whig Historiography) is the approach to historiography which presents the past as an inevitable progression towards ever greater liberty and enlightenment, culminating in modern forms of liberal democracy and constitutional monarchy. In general, Whig historians stress the rise of constitutional government, personal freedoms and scientific progress.
That's certainly not how history about Prussia is taught in Germany. Some characteristics of Prussia are considered as one of the roots of Nazi ideology and as the Nazi time is considered civilization's greatest failure, the concept of inevitable progress towards liberty and democracy does not fit.
As far as regional history goes, I am from Schleswig-Holstein, like Syt. I can't remember anything about regional history other than maybe some stuff about my hometown in elementary school. But then Schleswig-Holstein's history isn't particularly exciting either. :P
I am not sure we had all the topics that Syt mentions in my school time.
In the senior years, I can remember talking a great deal about republicanism/democracy in Greece and Rome, skipping virtually everything until the state philosophers of the modern time (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Montesquieu etc.) and the French Revolution and Prussian Reforms, then a lot about liberal thought and 1848 (Marx, Mill, various other liberals), a bit about the founding of Germany, a bit about how WW1 started, a lot about Weimar and why it failed, a lot about Nazi ideology and the Holocaust, and a bit about how postwar Germany was created constituitionally. So a lot about various political ideologies, but very little about e.g. wars. IIRC the military aspect of WW2 was just one hour and I don't think the Napoleonic Wars were really mentioned. The teacher I had was interested more in the underlying motivations and ideologies.
Why is it, btw, that the two active Germans on Languish are both from Holstein (and no longer live there)? :P
And even if we include Syko, he's from Lower Saxony (and the weird guy Isebrand was obviously a big Dithmarschen fan :P ).
German official history: Junkerism led inevitably to the NS-Zeit, around which everything in German history from Arminius onwards revolve. The end.
Which history about Prussia do you read, Sheilbh? Christopher Clarke? I read that a year or so ago and found it very well written.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 02, 2012, 09:53:42 AM
I'm reading a history of Prussia at the minute. It just made me wonder what the general approach in Germany is to pre-1870 history (and pre-unification Italy too)? I imagine a sort of Whiggish story of Prussia's not taught, given the connotations of that state. But do you learn about the history of your region, just general German events like the Thirty Years War or something else?
Are you reading Iron Kingdom perhaps? I am reading that as well. I was especially interested in the 17th century stuff.
Quote from: The Brain on November 02, 2012, 10:59:27 AM
German official history: Junkerism led inevitably to the NS-Zeit, around which everything in German history from Arminius onwards revolve. The end.
Lies! Arminius and his tribe are ancestors of the Franks and thus French :frog:
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2012, 12:05:27 PM
Quote from: The Brain on November 02, 2012, 10:59:27 AM
German official history: Junkerism led inevitably to the NS-Zeit, around which everything in German history from Arminius onwards revolve. The end.
Lies! Arminius and his tribe are ancestors of the Franks and thus French :frog:
it's oddly disconcerting how germans/germanics go to shit once roman blood enters their cultures. Spain, Portugal, France, Italy...
:p
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 02, 2012, 03:28:56 PM
it's oddly disconcerting how germans/germanics go to shit once roman blood enters their cultures. Spain, Portugal, France, Italy...
:p
If by going to shit you mean become the greatest civilization evah on Continental Europe then it is a little strange. -_-
Sweden taught Prussia that they needed a military. :)
The area of Germany that was ruled by Sweden is still the poorest and most backward area of the country. :hmm:
Quote from: Zanza on November 02, 2012, 04:15:18 PM
The area of Germany that was ruled by Sweden is still the poorest and most backward area of the country. :hmm:
We take, we never give.
You gave us flat pack furniture. :)
Quote from: Zanza on November 02, 2012, 04:37:53 PM
You gave us flat pack furniture. :)
Gave and gave. Do you know the markup on IKEA stuff?
Well, italian Unity is seen as the culmination of a 400-year long process. Everything beyond that point is a long, precipitous fall towards chaos.
History of the italian peninsula up to 1861 is in fact the history of how France, or Spain, or whichever empire tried to annex the region, hereby including the Papal States.
Speaking of the area I live, I don't remember a specific focus on the Serenissima during school years; Venice is simply considered one of the many different powers interested in exerting domination over part of the Po plain and the Adriatic coast. I had to study the history of Venice by myself.
The Gentile reform of school and university, dated 1922-23, until some years ago was still the basis of a great part of the school programs: consider I was in primary and middle school between 1977 and 1985, I studied a very centralized, Roma-centric history.
L.
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 10:07:19 AM
My middle school curriculum:
Egypt
Greece
Rome
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Empire (Otto the Great, Barbarossa etc.)
Crusades
Hansa
Reformation
Age of Discoveries
Thirty Years War
Founding of Prussia
French Revolution/Napoleon
Prussian Reforms (Hardenberg/Stein)
1848
Industrial Revolution
Founding of Germany
Bismarck's politics and reforms
Colonies/Imperialism
WW1
Weimar
Third Reich
Cold War (division of Germany, Ostpolitik etc.)
Yep, pretty much the same here. We pretty much skipped WW1 though. Third Reich was expanded on at the cost of all history of the Cold War era.
I took history as one of my main courses (LK2) for the Abitur, 12th and 13th grade. Those two years were pretty much a more in depth revisiting of the late 18th century up to the fall of the Third Reich. More modern history was skipped once again to expand on 1933-1945. :mad:
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 10:54:01 AM
Why is it, btw, that the two active Germans on Languish are both from Holstein (and no longer live there)? :P
And even if we include Syko, he's from Lower Saxony (and the weird guy Isebrand was obviously a big Dithmarschen fan :P ).
And here's another one from Lower Saxony. Everything south of Hannover is pretty much Bavaria, anyway. :P I have mostly limited myself to lurking in the last few years though.
Quote from: Zanza on November 02, 2012, 04:15:18 PM
The area of Germany that was ruled by Sweden is still the poorest and most backward area of the country. :hmm:
Inferior cultures produce inferior colonies.
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 10:54:01 AM
Why is it, btw, that the two active Germans on Languish are both from Holstein (and no longer live there)? :P
And even if we include Syko, he's from Lower Saxony (and the weird guy Isebrand was obviously a big Dithmarschen fan :P ).
We're a forum that grew out of interst in a scandinavian game and was thus full of scandinavians.
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2012, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 02, 2012, 03:28:56 PM
it's oddly disconcerting how germans/germanics go to shit once roman blood enters their cultures. Spain, Portugal, France, Italy...
:p
If by going to shit you mean become the greatest civilization evah on Continental Europe then it is a little strange. -_-
I'm glad you recognize the continental qualified is necessary.
Quote from: Malicious Intent on November 02, 2012, 07:24:49 PM
Yep, pretty much the same here. We pretty much skipped WW1 though. Third Reich was expanded on at the cost of all history of the Cold War era.
Oh, we covered the Cold War alright. I finished middle school in 1992 and we covered the reunification in history class. :hmm: :lol:
Quote from: Malicious Intent on November 02, 2012, 07:28:15 PMAnd here's another one from Lower Saxony. Everything south of Hannover is pretty much Bavaria, anyway. :P I have mostly limited myself to lurking in the last few years though.
Our saying at home was: "South of the Elbe is Northern Italy, and East of Lübeck is Asia." :P
Quote from: Syt on November 03, 2012, 12:56:19 AM
Quote from: Malicious Intent on November 02, 2012, 07:28:15 PMAnd here's another one from Lower Saxony. Everything south of Hannover is pretty much Bavaria, anyway. :P I have mostly limited myself to lurking in the last few years though.
Our saying at home was: "South of the Elbe is Northern Italy, and East of Lübeck is Asia." :P
Pretty much the same here, "Bavaria starts south of Göttingen, East of the Elbe is Asia".
As for the curriculum, it was mostly the same for me, except it feels like we were taught about the 3rd Reich every 2nd year. And we never made past 1945 in the regular lessons. History LK had the Russian Revolution.
It's cute when Germans think they're northern or non-decadent.
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:30:33 AM
It's cute when Germans think they're northern or non-decadent.
Comes with being the north-most part of civilization. Not that you would understand that.
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:30:33 AM
It's cute when Germans think they're northern or non-decadent.
Not as bad as domesticated city-dwelling Swedes who think they've still got Vikingishness in them. It's like modern Greeks claiming they're direct descendants of ancient Greece.
I got one word for you: Auschwitz. Crawl back and hide in your holes.
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:41:55 AM
I got one word for you: Auschwitz. Crawl back and hide in your holes.
I have another word for you: ball bearings.
Also, how could you bring this up, it's a touchy subject. My grandfather died there! :mad:
He fell off a guard tower while drunk.
Quote from: Valmy on November 02, 2012, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 02, 2012, 03:28:56 PM
it's oddly disconcerting how germans/germanics go to shit once roman blood enters their cultures. Spain, Portugal, France, Italy...
:p
If by going to shit you mean become the greatest civilization evah on Continental Europe then it is a little strange. -_-
france is not a civilization, it's an army.
and Italy.... oh italy.
Quote from: Zanza on November 02, 2012, 10:51:08 AM
I had to look up Whiggish history as I didn't know the term.
I think that's mayybe too British and constitutional definition. The other one quoted by Wiki is more what I meant:
QuoteBy the mid-1970s, it had become commonplace among historians of science to employ the terms 'Whig' and 'Whiggish', often accompanied by one or more of 'hagiographic', 'internalist', 'triumphalist', even 'positivist', to denigrate grand narratives of scientific progress. At one level there is, indeed, an obvious parallel with the attacks on Whig constitutional history in the opening decades of the century. For, as P. B. M. Blaas has shown, those earlier attacks were part and parcel of a more general onslaught in the name of an autonomous, professional and scientific history, on popular, partisan and moralising historiography. Similarly,... For post-WWII champions of the newly professionalized history of science the targets were quite different. Above all, they were out to establish a critical distance between the history of science and the teaching and promotion of the sciences. In particular, they were suspicious of the grand celebratory and didactic narratives of scientific discovery and progress that had proliferated in the inter-war years.
Maybe Whig history is the wrong phrase but I basically meant a sort of historical narrative that celebrates the past as to some extent a story of progress.
I can see how arguably the natural story of Germany in a positive light is of natural progress towards unification and eventual reunification in which case the Prussians play a large, arguably positive role. But that what you say about them means that story isn't necessarily accurate and can't really be told that way because of their influence on the Nazis and certain 'Prussian values'.
So it just interested me how Germany deals with that history and with the fact that there are a myriad of local histories that can be quite divergent before you reach 'Germany'. Similarly in Italy there's no Italian narrative and I can't see one of progress towards unification that isn't effectively triumphalist about the North.
Do you know if there's any local element in areas like Saxony or Bavaria?
Yeah it's the book you and Valmy mentioned that I'm reading. So far I think it's very interesting about a state I know very little about. I also don't really know much about the 17th and 18th century in Europe beyond the Thirty Years War and the Revolutionary period so the early section's been fascinating.
Quote from: The Brain on November 02, 2012, 04:04:18 PM
Sweden taught Prussia that they needed a military. :)
Eh, no, that would be Lithuania and Poland and all their easily conquerable land. Sweden probably taught Brandenburg and Saxony that they needed militaries. Brandenburg learned, Saxony didn't.
Quote from: Viking on November 04, 2012, 12:38:33 PM
Quote from: The Brain on November 02, 2012, 04:04:18 PM
Sweden taught Prussia that they needed a military. :)
Eh, no, that would be Lithuania and Poland and all their easily conquerable land. Sweden probably taught Brandenburg and Saxony that they needed militaries. Brandenburg learned, Saxony didn't.
I knew a messerschmitt would play the Brandenburg/Prussia card.
How can anyone deny the enormous positive influence of Prussia on Germany?
I found the Christopher Clarke book unreadable, in spite of several attempts.
Far more focused and well-written (though less focused on Prussia and covering a shorter time period) is Martin Kitchen's "A History of Modern Germany: 1800 - 2000."
Quote from: Syt on November 02, 2012, 10:07:19 AM
My middle school curriculum:
Egypt
Greece
Rome
Charlemagne
Holy Roman Empire (Otto the Great, Barbarossa etc.)
Crusades
Hansa
Reformation
Age of Discoveries
Thirty Years War
Founding of Prussia
French Revolution/Napoleon
Prussian Reforms (Hardenberg/Stein)
1848
Industrial Revolution
Founding of Germany
Bismarck's politics and reforms
Colonies/Imperialism
...
Lol oops ran out of time kids!
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:30:33 AM
It's cute when Germans think they're northern or non-decadent.
Or when they consider their neighbours to be inferior and uncivilized.
Quote from: Neil on November 04, 2012, 12:54:13 PM
How can anyone deny the enormous positive influence of Prussia on Germany?
Ideas (including national ideas) have best before date. They usually are a good influence at the time, but then they get rotten and all kinds of slime, mold and bacteria corrupt them. Same could be said about the Catholic Church - for a while it has an enormous positive influence on Europe.
Quote from: Martinus on November 05, 2012, 02:03:32 AM
Quote from: The Brain on November 03, 2012, 04:30:33 AM
It's cute when Germans think they're northern or non-decadent.
Or when they consider their neighbours to be inferior and uncivilized.
We consider our countrymen inferior and uncivilized. Asia begins at the Elbe.
Quote from: Neil on November 04, 2012, 12:54:13 PM
How can anyone deny the enormous positive influence of Prussia on Germany?
West Germany is better. I suspect due to French influences :frog:
Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 11:02:56 AM
Quote from: Neil on November 04, 2012, 12:54:13 PM
How can anyone deny the enormous positive influence of Prussia on Germany?
West Germany is better. I suspect due to French influences :frog:
east Germany was Russian administered for a bit. That may,perhaps, have something to do with it :P
Quote from: The Brain on November 04, 2012, 12:47:54 PM
Quote from: Viking on November 04, 2012, 12:38:33 PM
Quote from: The Brain on November 02, 2012, 04:04:18 PM
Sweden taught Prussia that they needed a military. :)
Eh, no, that would be Lithuania and Poland and all their easily conquerable land. Sweden probably taught Brandenburg and Saxony that they needed militaries. Brandenburg learned, Saxony didn't.
I knew a messerschmitt would play the Brandenburg/Prussia card.
Do not call me a cutler. ffs a swede is calling me a fucking knife maker
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifeviewoutdoors.com%2Fimages%2Fdetailed%2F1%2FMora-Knife-Scout-440.jpg&hash=0c78661b2ada24589b2a9a92c1f9071f5161ac06)
Quote from: HVC on November 05, 2012, 11:34:11 AM
east Germany was Russian administered for a bit. That may,perhaps, have something to do with it :P
I mean historically not just recently :P
Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 11:02:56 AM
Quote from: Neil on November 04, 2012, 12:54:13 PM
How can anyone deny the enormous positive influence of Prussia on Germany?
West Germany is better. I suspect due to French influences :frog:
Not at all. Besides, the French influenced all of Germany pretty thoroughly. It's hard to remember when you look at the French today, but once upon a time they were a cultural colossus, influencing all the civilized peoples of the world. Unfortunately, they twisted themselves up when their civilization finally collapsed in 1870, and have become less and less as the years drag on.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on November 04, 2012, 09:10:48 PM
I found the Christopher Clarke book unreadable, in spite of several attempts.
I have to admit that I wasn't really a fan either and am not sure if I finished it.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 04, 2012, 12:33:09 PMI can see how arguably the natural story of Germany in a positive light is of natural progress towards unification and eventual reunification in which case the Prussians play a large, arguably positive role. But that what you say about them means that story isn't necessarily accurate and can't really be told that way because of their influence on the Nazis and certain 'Prussian values'.
Bismarck is seen as an ambivalent figure. Sure, he was successful and did unite Germany, but he also started conflicts, both external and internal (against the social democrats and the Catholics) which would cause problems long after his death. He's certainly not seen as an unabashed hero who founded our nation.
Prussia's role and the unification "from top" is contrasted with the attempted unification "from the bottom" in 1848, which is seen in a much more positive light and considered as a huge missed chance for Germany to unify peacefully into something better than the eventual Prussian Reich.
QuoteSo it just interested me how Germany deals with that history and with the fact that there are a myriad of local histories that can be quite divergent before you reach 'Germany'.
Do you know if there's any local element in areas like Saxony or Bavaria?
No idea, but then I don't see how Bavarian or Saxon history for example would in itself be much more interesting than Schleswig-Holstein's history. In the grand picture, none of the various German principalities except for Prussia and Austria mattered much.