This contribution results from a place of serious discomfort regarding recent public and academic discussions in Germany, where Holocaust memory and its political instrumentalization have seemed to produce a growing dogmatism, harming academic freedom. Because we both direct university research centers in Berlin and Los Angeles dedicated to the study of the Holocaust, we have decided to join forces and share our particular German perspectives on this debate. Our views are in part generational, in part personal.

A group of 24 bronze finger-rings threaded onto a wire bracelet was unearthed in 2018 at the Roman vicus at Wareswald (the “Forbidden Forest”) in Gallia Belgica. The find is analyzed here alongside evidence for the use, sale, and production of Roman rings. The find represents the work of a local craftsman, active in the first quarter of the 4th c. CE. While the rings were made in a small rural town, they closely imitate expensive global ring forms. The function and meaning of the very common class of trinket rings to which the Wareswald rings belong are considered, along with how these rings were used to make statements about identity, including local and regional affiliations, literacy, marital status, or other social connections. It is suggested that the popularity of many trinket rings lay in their ability to provide a sense of participation in upper-class fashion at a very low price.

This article explores ideas about stable-barracks, which have received much attention in recent provincial Roman archaeology. This renewed attention stems from new discoveries in Romania that prompt a re-evaluation of earlier conclusions. Geomagnetic investigations and subsequent excavations of the fort of the ala I Batavorum milliaria in Războieni-Cetate (Alba County) have shown that, contrary to prevailing opinion, stable-barracks could be considerably larger than similar buildings known from Great Britain and Germany. These findings suggest that a significant reconsideration of the concept of stable-barracks is required, along with an updated discussion about the normal troop strength of alae milliariae in the Roman army.

German commemorative culture is clearly in flux. Over the last year or so, a series of seemingly never-ending controversies have made it abundantly clear that, more than seventy-five years after the end of the Second World War, the memory of National Socialism and the Holocaust is not only very much present in contemporary Germany but also remains deeply contested. The list of controversies is familiar to everybody who has followed German public debates over the last three years: first the debate over the planned appearance of the Cameroonian philosopher Achille Mbembe at the 2020 Ruhr-Trienale in the spring of 2020; then the publication of the German translation of Michael Rothberg's book Multidirectional Memory in March 2021 and the heated controversy around A. Dirk Moses's “catechism” blog article a few months later; and finally, the recent debate about antisemitism at the documenta art exhibition curated by an Indonesian artist collective.

The politics of history and memory culture have recently been the topic of increased discussion again—and this discussion has by no means been cool-headed, but hot, with a high potential for conflict. An argument is ongoing in the public sphere over which (hi)stories are present and visible and which are not, who is being recognized and who is not, as well as what is being forgotten, repressed, or tacitly accepted in this context. Corresponding to this general development, a debate is currently ongoing in the German press that has been dubbed “Historikerstreit 2.0,” or “the historians’ debate reloaded.” The controversy was initially sparked by a discussion about the Cameroonian intellectual Achille Mbembe, his position toward the State of Israel, and his involvement with the BDS movement, before continuing on to a discussion about Michael Rothberg's book Multidirectional Memory when it was published in a German translation. Finally, the debates deepened with the controversy surrounding Dirk Moses's polemics concerning an ostensible “German catechism” with regard to Holocaust commemoration.