Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Letter from the Editor: Am Anfang war Unfug!

  • Andrew I. Port
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Letter from the Editor: Am Anfang war Unfug!
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Letter from the Editor: Am Anfang war Unfug!
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Letter from the Editor: Am Anfang war Unfug!
      Available formats
      ×
Abstract
Copyright
References
Hide All

1 Michael Geyer similarly recalls that his first and only article in CEH was “written in 1990 but published in a 1989 issue.”

2 She also helped create an extremely useful index for the first twenty volumes published between 1968 and 1987. This appeared as a hundred-page addendum in CEH 20, no. 3/4 (1987).

3 The reflections by Barkin and Chickering are reprints of essays that were previously published in CEH. I tried to solicit a contribution from Ursula Marcum and several others, but was unable to establish contact, despite repeated attempts.

4 Sheehan also perceptively writes the following in his essay: “If there is a decline in contentious passion among contemporary German historians, it is because we have less in common, not because our views about what matters have become more alike.” If that is true, then one wonders about the future tenor of Habsburg studies, where, as the essays by Bryant and Deak suggest, a new revisionist consensus has emerged, one claiming that nationalism was not the cause of the empire's ultimate downfall. In other words, will debates about the role of nationalism in the Habsburg lands go the same way one day as those about an alleged German Sonderweg? And if so, what effect will that have on the field of Habsburg studies? Deak and Bryant both address that important theme head-on in their contributions to this issue.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Central European History
  • ISSN: 0008-9389
  • EISSN: 1569-1616
  • URL: /core/journals/central-european-history
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 22
Total number of PDF views: 197 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 225 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 28th March 2018 - 21st August 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.