CFP: Europe in the 20th century – An Asymmetric Europe International Association for the Contemporary History of Europe

For its forthcoming participation to the International Committee of Historical Sciences (ICHS) congress in Poznan in 2020, the International Association for Contemporary History of Europe (IACHE) is organising three conferences on the theme ‘Europe in the 20th century – an asymmetric Europe.’

European history of the twentieth century has been characterised by an alternation between common European projects and a questioning of such projects, often vehemently, through alternative visions. To borrow an expression from an American president, the vicissitudes of the European continent’s history have led to a significant difference between the « Old Europe » and that which took shape at the end of the First World War, referred to either as « Central Europe » for some, « Eastern Europe » for others, even sometimes « East-Central » or « Danubian » Europe. The divergences between these « two Europes », as Francis Delaisi first pointed out in the inter-war years, are striking and manifest themselves throughout the twentieth century. They are present in the Versailles system, and throughout the Hitlerian project for Europe. They are still present during the Cold War.

The conferences that will take place leading up to the 2020 International Congress of Historical Sciences intend to explore this asymmetry. Have these projects influenced interpretations of European history ? Did they present Europe as a homogeneous entity? Or as a differentiated entity? Which interpretation is most current in Western Europe ? And Eastern Europe ? The idea will be to cross-compare these different currents.

A first conference took place in Moscow in December 2019, focusing on the ideologies during the Second World War. A second conference is being organised in Paris focusing on asymmetric Europe after the Treaty of Versailles. The third conference will take place in Luxembourg on 11 December 2019.

This third conference will be focusing on the cold war. The organisers are particularly interested in proposals looking at the following asymmetries:

  • Asymmetry Council for Mutual Economic Assistance / European Economic Community
  • Asymmetry Relations US/Western Europe on the one hand; USSR/Eastern Europe on the other
  • Asymmetry in the types of cooperation put in place in the field of energy, and transport
  • Asymmetry in the political and economic organisation of the European continent
  • Calls into question of these asymmetries (de Gaulle, Ostpolitik) and their outcomes
  • Intellectual and scientific exchanges between East and West
  • The development and evolution of bilateral cooperations
  • European integration and cold war dynamics

Applicants should submit an abstract of no more than 500 words, and a short CV, by 30 June 2019, to Frédéric Clavert (Université du Luxembourg, frederic.clavert at and Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol (University of Glasgow, emmanuel.mourlon-druol at Proposals can be written in English or in French. Selected applicants will be informed by mid-July 2019.

This conference is organised with the support of the International Association for Contemporary History of Europe (IACHE), the Luxembourg Centre for Contemporary and Digital History (C2DH, University of Luxembourg, the ERC-funded research project EURECON: The Making of a Lopsided Union: Economic Integration in the European Economic Community, 1957-1992 (grant agreement No 716849) and the Centre d’Excellence Jean Monnet Franco-Allemand (Université de Strasbourg).

ISCH: New board members – call for applications

“The International Committee of Historical Sciences (ICHS) – Comité international des sciences historiques (CISH) – has been founded in Geneva on May 15, 1926. Today, the organization encompasses a total of fifty-seven countries.

The ICHS includes two sorts of organizations. First of all, there are the National Committees formed in each country from their individual centers for historical research. In addition, International Commissions specializing in particular fields of history (some known as ‘International Affiliated Organizations’ and others as Internal Commissions) have formed over the years.

The major occupation of the ICHS is the Congress, held every five years. The Committee shall hold a General Assembly at least every three years. Each Congress shall be immediately preceded and followed by a General Assembly.

A Board is responsible for the functioning and co-ordination of ICHS activities. Please, see the constitution of ICHS. (…)”

More (PDF).

Call for applications for the XXIVth ICHS Congress

“In 2020, during the XXIIIrd Congress held in Poznań, the General Assembly of ICHS will choose the place where the XXIVth International Congress of Historical Sciences will be hosted.

Organized every five years, the ICHS Congress is a major stage in the life and the development of our institution. We can hope, thanks to a good promotion, to attract between 1,500 and 3,000 delegates coming from at least 100 countries. The ICHS Congress is a very large scale enterprise which requires an important financial support and a rigorous management. But the potential benefits are considerable. The Congress offers to the City host a unique opportunity to promote the scientific works of the local historians and to confirm its cultural standing. The Congress should also result in an increased interest for the discipline and for ICHS in the concerned region.

The participants will expect a high level academic program. Famous participants can bring a considerable prestige to the Congress, whereas well prepared professional visits and cultural excursions before or after the Congress can contribute in an important way to the global success of the event. (…)”

More (PDF).

Call for papers: Europe in the 20th century – An Asymmetric Europe

Version française

For its forthcoming participation in the International Congress of Historical Sciences in Poznan, Poland in 2020, the International Association for the Study of Contemporary Europe is organising three conferences on the theme : « Europe in the 20th century – An Asymmetric Europe ».

European history of the twentieth century has been characterised by an alternation between common European projects and a questioning of such projects, often vehemently, through alternative visions. To borrow an expression from an American president, the vicissitudes of the European continent’s history have led to a significant difference between the « Old Europe » and that which took shape at the end of the First World War, referred to either as « Central Europe » for some, « Eastern Europe » for others, even sometimes « East-Central » or « Danubian »  Europe. The divergences between these « two Europes », as Francis Delaisi first pointed out in the inter-war years, are striking and manifest themselves throughout the twentieth century. They are present in the Versailles system, and throughout the Hitlerian project for Europe. They are still present during the Cold War.

The conferences that will take place leading up to the 2020 International Congress of Historical Sciences intend to explore this asymmetry. Have these projects influenced interpretations of European history ? Did they present Europe as a homogeneous entity? Or as a differentiated entity? Which interpretation is most current in Western Europe ? And Eastern Europe ? The idea will be to cross-compare these different currents.

The first conference on this theme will take place in Moscow from 6-8 December 2018. It will be focussed on : « Ideologies during the Second World War».

This conference is organised around several questions. First it is interested in the Hitlerian project for Europe. National-socialist plans were different for West and East Europe. Their application in different European spaces demonstrates this differentiated vision of Europe. Integration in a Nazi Europe was equally variegated (incorporation here, occupation there or satellitisation). Several works exist on these aspects. In the context of this conference we wish to favour a comparative approach, which is often fruitful for historiography if one confronts narratives and interpretations. The different experiences in the East and West offer a wide variety of perspectives.

But it is equally important to question the European projects of the Allies, of governments in exile or resistance movements. There too asymmetry exists and the different contexts lead either to uniform projects or infra-regional projects for the organisation of Europe.

Paper proposals should be sent by the deadline of 8 May 2018 to

John Keiger / Sylvain SchirmannTomaz Schramm

Proposals should include the title of the paper, a summary of the argument in a maximun of 3500 characters. It should be accompanied by a short cv giving career, present occupation and a list of the author’s publications.

Proposals should be written in either French or English.

The selection panel will notify applicants of their success or failure by the end of June 2018.

A second conference will look at the asymmetry of the Versailles system. It will take place in Paris at the Scientific Centre of the Polish Academy of Sciences from 20-22 June 2019. A call for papers will go out nearer the date.

Conference: Pierre Renouvin, Jean-Baptiste Duroselle (1917-2017) – 7-9 juin 2017

Ce colloque porte sur la naissance d’une discipline, l’histoire des relations internationales, qui est née de l’effervescence intellectuelle qui a marqué la première guerre mondiale. Ni mausolée à la mémoire de deux historiens français, ni récit hagiographique d’une « école » historique française, le colloque aura pour objectif de replacer le parcours intellectuel et académique des deux historiens dans les débats intellectuels de leur temps. La construction méthodique de ce nouveau champ académique sera examinée dans le cadre d’une approche transnationale et comparative.

More information (French).

East Central Europe in the First Half of the 20th Century – Transnational Perspectives

Traditionally the decades of the first half of the 20th century appear as a period of nationalization
and de-globalization, and seems to be true also for the region East Central Europe. After World War I (Nation)states such as Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia were (re)established after the monarchies of the Habsburgs, Hohenzollerns, and Romanovs had fallen apart. Wilsonian idealism, promoting national self-determination, gained a fertile ground. The 1930s were dominated by the Great Depression, autarkic economic policies and nationalist ideologies. Following World War II and in an ex-post perspective, these “national” lines of development were made more prominent in historical narratives
so that the whole period seemed as a “road from war to war”. In this reductionist view, aspects of continuities across the apparent historical breaks of 1914 / 18 or 1939 / 45 often are marginalized. What about the sense for the beginning of a “New Europe” in a “New World” after the break-up of the empires, or the openness of the moment felt by contemporaries once the wars were over? How changed the conditions under which people migrated? How enterprises gained new markets? How cultural exchange was revived? How territorialization processes were globalized? A transnational perspective can help to find answers concerning the region and the period under question in the conference.

Program (PDF)

Call for Papers : The International Echoes of the Commemorations of the October Revolution (1918-1990)


Location & date

Switzerland, University of Lausanne, Géopolis (Room: 2227), 14-16 September 2016.

Organising Committee

J-F Fayet (Univ. of Lausanne) – Stéfanie Prezioso (Univ. of Lausanne) – Kevin Morgan (Univ. of Manchester) – Norman Laporte (Univ. of South Wales)

Scientific Committee

Dr. Marco Albeltaro (Univ. of Torino, Historia Magistrae. Rivista di storia critica), Prof. Korine Amacher (Univ. of Geneva), Dr. Bernhard Bayerlein (Ruhr-Univ. Bochum, dir. The International Newsletter of Communist Studies), Prof. Sophie Coeuré (Univ. Paris-Diderot), Prof. Angelo d’Orsi (Univ. of Torino, Historia Magistrae. Rivista di storia critica), Prof. Sabine Dullin (IEP Paris), Prof. Jose Maria Faraldo Farillo (Complutense Univ. of Madrid), Prof. José Gotovitch (Univ. Libre of Brussels), Prof. Gianni Haver (Univ. of Lausanne), Prof. Catherine Gousseff (dir. of Marc Bloch Center, Berlin), Dr. Alexander Hobel (Fondazione Istituto Gramsci), Dr. William A. Pelz (dir. Institute of Working Class History, Chicago), Prof. Silvio Pons (Univ. of Roma II, dir. of Gramsci Foundation), Dr. Tauno Saarela (Univ. of Helsinki), Prof. Emer. William H. Sewell Jr. (Univ. of Chicago), Prof. Brigitte Studer (Univ. of Bern), Prof. Emer. Ronald G. Suny (Univ. of Chicago), Prof. Alexandre Vatlin (Lomonosov Moscow State Univ.), Prof. Jean Vigreux (Univ. of Bourgogne, dir. ANR Paprik@2F).


Swiss National Science Foundation, University of Lausanne, Manchester University, the journal Twentieth Century Communism: a Journal of International History.


Publication of the Lausanne international conference proceedings in a special volume of the journal Twentieth Century Communism: a Journal of International History.

Publication Date: during 2017 (deadline for submitting papers November 2016). Additional publication could be considered depending on the number and quality of the papers presented.


It is necessary (for purely political reasons) to demonstrate to the diplomats and to members of the Communist International the strength of the Republic and the faith the masses of workers have in Soviet power.

Telegram from Trotsky to the CC of the PCR, 1920 F.17/60/163, RGASPI

My only consolation is that as celebrations are bourgeois institutions at which nobody tells the truth it perhaps just as well that I shall be at a safe distance

Letter from G. B. Shaw (who could not attend) to Polovtseva, 18.10.1927, F.5283/8/47, GARF

Commemorations express a political will to remember, a process that relies on establishing a mythologised historical referent. The Russian Communists were aware of the importance of this instrument for the implantation of a regime whose legitimacy was contested both domestically and abroad, and proceeded therefore to construct a new collective memory through the reordering of time around the regime’s founding act: the great socialist revolution of October. From 1918 on, 7 November was a day of celebrations: speeches, military parades, orderly marches, inaugurations of public monuments commemorative plaques, political carnivals, mass spectacles, and popular parties that united the peoples and territories of the Soviet Union in celebration of October. In addition to their domestic role in fostering unity, providing legitimacy, and facilitating internal mobilisations, the practices of commemorations also supported the regime’s international eminence, especially when it presented itself as a model for world revolution.

Inviting foreign dignitaries to celebrations of sovereignty is a tradition as old as diplomacy itself. However, assisted by their numerous political (the communist parties), trade-unionist, and above all associative conduits, in terms of both quantity (the number of persons invited) and quality (the methods of selecting candidates and their handling during the visit), the Soviets took this tradition to a whole new level. While in the first few years celebrations were a modest affair, a thousand foreign delegates are invited to the Soviet Union for the tenth anniversary of the revolution, celebrated in 1927. Unlike the ambassadors, these representatives of the international working class and progressive social forces are far from being passive spectators. Their status, however, is ambiguous. Invited as observers, they are expected to take sides, and then to commit themselves. They have a role in the October spectacle and its political usages. The Soviets intend to show the world that the USSR is not isolated, and that its international legitimacy extends beyond the limited gamut of its diplomatic relations. During this period, except for the duration of the “Great Patriotic War”, foreigners attend the celebrations every year, although at greatly varying numbers. After 1945, it becomes standard to invite the ambassadors posted to Moscow, the heads of friendly states (from Europe, Asia, and soon from Latin America), and the leaders of Communist parties. The circle of invitees traces the contours of, and the fluctuations in, Soviet foreign policy. Let us also highlight the return of youth and women delegations, as well as the presence of intellectuals. In the 1960s, the Red Square becomes an almost obligatory passageway for the representatives of the “progressive” movements of the Third World (the Vietnamese are the most regular, but one finds also Ethiopians, Somalians, and others). In 1977, the sixtieth anniversary parade is watched from the tribunes by over a hundred foreign delegations from left-wing formations, joined by the head of states of communist countries and by the president of Finland (U. Kekkonen). The number of attendees remains high for the seventieth anniversary a decade later and until the last commemoration, in 1990.

Commemorative events were also held outside the Soviet Union, constituting another aspect of the international reach of the October Revolution. Initially, they were small events, organised spontaneously—in Zurich in 1918, Turin 1919, Beijing 1923, but also in Prague, London, Paris, etc.— small street processions, lectures, discussions in factories, an evening at a community centre, evidence of the hopes the Revolution inspired beyond its borders. But in 1927, gigantic meetings take place in Berlin, Paris, London, New York, with workers’ banquets and the projection of Soviet films. An exhibition with fifteen pictures travels across Europe and the Americas under the title “ten years of socialist edification”. In many countries, workers organize strikes in solidarity with the Soviet working class. The internationalisation of the celebrations becomes progressively enmeshed in a very structured context that includes Soviet institutions (embassies, commercial services, and cultural missions), the Communist International, and the many mass organisation that orbit the Communist Parties—in the manner of, for example, the Friends of the Soviet Union. A similar development takes place in Russia: the chaotic, political and artistic carnival of the early commemorations is transformed with time into a very conventional, repetitive, and scripted display of militarism and patriotism. The commemorative date is fixed, but it is part of a changing commemorative calendar. At the beginning, 1 May remains the other great ‘proletarian commemoration day’. A focus on leaders and martyrs – the ‘3 Ls’ of Lenin, Luxemburg and Liebknecht – then shifts under Stalin to the leader’s birthday and a form of commemorative competition.

The military victories of the Soviet Union in the “Great Patriotic War” will lead to the further key commemoration day of 9 May. There is also the exportation of the soviet culture of commemoration, initially to the newly “liberated” areas, with celebrations of 7 November taking place across a Russia that extends from Kaliningrad to Sakhalin, as well as in the Baltic countries and in Moldavia. Next it is the turn of the people’s democracies to integrate the date of the October Revolution in their official calendar, and also to reproduce the Soviet commemorative model in the scope of their own national days, albeit with efforts to mark it with certain national variations. In the capitalist countries, the small communist organisations take advantage of the new prestige of the USSR, victor of the Great War, in order to hold modest commemorative events: concerts, theatre shows, lectures series, etc.

Finally, the spectacle of the celebrations is broadcast around the world, first by radio and news reels, and later by television. This was evidently the case with countries in the Soviet orbit. Like in many other people’s democracies, the television services of East Germany and Hungary broadcasted the ritual processions. But this mediated commemoration reached also into Western democracies. Every year in the US, regularly in France and Italy, less often in Switzerland, the October parades were rebroadcast on the national channels. The broadcasting of the military procession was incorporated into the setting of the Cold War, providing fodder for Western military experts and Kremlinologists. While the latter offered theories about the balance of power at the top of the hierarchy deduced from the seating arrangements on the Mausoleum’s balcony, the viewer could see the aging of the leaders, a metaphor for the regime itself, and the growing standardisation of the festivities, symbol of its advancing bureaucratisation. Everywhere, the commemorations represented a pertinent index of the political culture of the country that produces them.

Keywords for proposals (two primary axes)

1. The Participations of foreigners in the 7 November commemorations in the USSR

I. Foreigners invited to the USSR for the October celebrations

a. Workers delegations, by country, political and occupational categories, function, organizational type (sports, Esperanto-related, pacifist, women, youth, etc.)
b. Intellectuals, scientists, and progressive artists
c. Leaders of allied states: the Mongol Republic, European people’s democracies, North Korea, China, Cuba, African states, etc.
d. Military attachés, diplomats, government officers
e. Journalists
f. Undercover
g. Absentees (those who could not come, those who rejected the invitation)
h. Personal consequences of the visit: joining the party, promotion/exclusion in the trade union, job loss, etc.

II. The Soviet side: the inviting structure and the handling in situ

a. Organising committees
b. Welcome desk for the foreigners of the VOKS
c. The foreign relations committee of the trade unions
d. Communist International, Sportintern, KIM…
e. Culture Ministry
g. Translator-guides
h. Intourist
i. The political police (INO-Tcheka)

III. Activities – key moments – mandatory stations for the foreigners

a. The warm welcome: cheering crowds everywhere
b. The learning trip: the itineraries in the different republics
c. The organised tours:
d. Questions time: “tell us the truth comrades…”
e. The commemorative vigils: the stories of veterans, the shows put by worker clubs
f. The military parade, the marching columns and the popular holiday of 7
g. Activities upon return: written and oral testimonies

2. Celebrations of 7 November abroad: by country, type of place, and type of event

I. Commemorations in different territories

a. The big cities: Berlin in 1927, London, Paris, Rome, in the US, Beijing (from 1923 at the university)
b. Allied states: people’s democracies in Europe; in Asia: China, North Korea,
Vietnam; in Latin America: Cuba…
c. Africa:Ethiopia

II. Commemorations in Soviet spaces outside the USSR

a. Embassies
b. Cultural centres
c. Friend circles (Friends of the USSR)
d. The Communists Parties
e. Factories

III. Delegations and tours abroad: political, artists…

a. Official Soviet delegations
b. Lecture tours
c. Cultural events : exhibitions, concerts, and commemorative shows

IV. Opposition events

a. Takeoverorboycottofevents,dissidentevents
b. Anti-Soviet events
c. Competing events (Mensheviks, Trotskyist, etc.)

V. The commemorations in foreign medias

a. The foreign press
b. The foreign radio
c. The newsreels
d. The foreign television broadcasts
e. Films of October as international commemorative medium

VI. October in the communist calendar

a. Proletarian commemoration days
b. Heroes and martyrs as a focus for commemoration
c. Commemorative competition: 1 May, 9 May and the leader’s birthday

Paper Proposals

We invite submissions of proposals for papers on issues pertaining to the international echoes of the commemorations of the October revolution.

Priority will be given to proposals that emphasise long timeframes, use a comparative approach, involve the prosopography of attending delegates, or deal with the international circulation of commemorative practices.

Proposals should include the title of the presentation, an abstract, and a description of the sources. Length should be about 2500 signs. Proposal should be sent to: by 30 November 2015, together with a brief CV including the most important (maximum five) publications.

Financial Matters

In case of a proposal’s acceptation, the costs of the stay and the hotel will be covered. We kindly ask to use own funds for the travel costs. Only in case this should not be possible, coverage of the travel costs can be held in prospect.

Organisation, Networks and Policy-making in European Foreign Ministries in the Twentieth Century

Workshop 16-17 October 2015, University of Cambridge, Department of Politics and International Studies, Alison Richard Building, 7 West Road, Cambridge

Draft Program

  • Aballéa, Marion (IEP, Strasbourg), ‘Les services extérieurs de la diplomatie française entre expertise et marginalisation:l’exemple de l’ambassade de France à Berlin à la récomposition de l’ordre européen (1919-1932)’.
  • Bagnato, Bruna, (Florence), ‘Un renouvellement manqué. La diplomatie italienne de la chute du fascisme au traité de paix (1943-1947)’.
  • Badel, Laurence, (Sorbonne, Paris 1), ‘Around Olivier Wormser, the new influence of economic diplomats in French policy-making towards European integration (1930-1957)’.
  • Johnson, Gaynor, (Kent) ‘The Foreign Office and the concept of security, 1919-1947: variations from departments to personalities.’
  • Keiger, John (Cambridge), ‘Reforming the Quai d’Orsay during the Second World War: recruitment, training and mission’.
  • Lequesne, Christian, (Sciences Po, Paris) ‘Being a French diplomat in 2015: Recruitment, Career and Ideology’.
  • Obichkina, Evguenia, (MGIMO, Moscow),‘La prise de décision en matière de politique étrangère soviétique de Staline à Brejnev’.
  • Raineau, Thomas, (EUI, Florence), ‘“A conspiracy of like-minded men”. Le Foreign Office, Whitehall et l’unification de l’Europe, 1947-1957’.
  • Rolewicz, Adam, (Kent), ‘The “Grand Design”: The Foreign Office Western Department and an “Alternative Europe”, 1957-9’.
  • Schroeder, Corinne, (Archives Nationales, Luxembourg), ‘Le développement du ministère luxembourgeois des affaires étrangères (1930-1973)’.
  • Vardabasso, Valentina (Sorbonne, Paris 1), ‘Le Ministère italien des affaires étrangères et l’élaboration de la politique européenne (1948-53)’.

Organisation, Networks and Policy-making in European Foreign Ministries in the Twentieth Century

Workshop 16-17 October 2015, University of Cambridge, Department of Politics and International Studies, Alison Richard Building, West Road, Cambridge

This workshop is part of a major four-year AHRC (Arts and Humanities Research Council, UK) funded research project entitled ‘Networks and Actors in the British and French Foreign Ministries : Responses to the Idea of European Integration, 1919-1957’, conducted by Prof John Keiger (Cambridge University) and Prof. Gaynor Johnson (Kent University).

The thesis which this project seeks to test is that in both the British and French foreign ministries from the end of the First World War – when ideas of European integration gained ascendancy as a means to international security and prosperity – to the establishment of the European communities in 1957, permanent officials were at least as important as their political masters in promoting or blocking the path towards some form of European integration. Two principal research questions emerge from the project:

  1. How were the foreign ministries of Britain and France organised between 1919 and 1957 in their dealing with questions relating to European integration ? In particular which foreign ministry departments (eg in the case of the British Foreign Office, the Central European Department, the Western European Department and the League of Nations Department) were the most powerful and influential in driving the policies of these two states in relation to Europe : how did the power distribution fluctuate between the departments over time and how did this affect policy ?
  2. Who were the permanent officials formulating policy on key issues affecting Europe ? In particular, what were the social and educational backgrounds of these actors ? How did this cultural context and training influence their world view and lead to formal or informal networks of like-minded individuals championing particular positions within their respective foreign ministries ? And how did all these factors influence the thinking of permanent officials when they considered the issue of a more integrated Europe ?

The workshop is intended to broaden this approach to other European foreign ministries across the whole of twentieth century Europe, broadly conceived, either through comparative perspectives or single state studies.

Papers of 20 minutes duration might consider, for instance :

  • organisation of foreign ministries or their reform

  • education and background of permanent officials and diplomats

  • networks and sociability in the diplomatic world

  • schools or academies of diplomatic preparation, training and competitive exams

  • impact of the European ideal on permanent officials

  • influence of other government departments or agencies (finance, commerce, defence, central banks etc) on policies for European integration

  • the policy-making process in foreign ministries

  • bureaucratic politics and policy blocking tactics in foreign ministries.

The working languages of the workshop will be French and English. Please send abstracts (one page A4) of your paper in either English or French, with a brief cv, to by 15 August 2015. An editorial panel will select the papers.

In memoriam: Jacques Bariéty

Auteur: Chantal METZGER (Professeur émérite des Universités)

Notre association vient de perdre en la personne de Jacques Bariéty son président honoraire. Il fut surtout, de 1982 à 2010, le dynamique président de l’Association internationale d’histoire contemporaine de l’Europe, fondée en 1969 par Fernand L’Huillier après le printemps de Prague pour permettre aux historiens de l’Europe de l’Est de maintenir et de développer les contacts avec leurs collègues occidentaux. Grâce à son action, l’AIHCE est devenue un lieu scientifique privilégié de rencontres et d’informations entre professeurs et chercheurs de haut niveau travaillant sur l’histoire des relations internationales en Europe de 1815 à nos jours. Grâce à son action également, notre association s’est ouverte davantage aux pays de l’Est de l’Europe après 1989/1990. Il a toujours continué après avoir quitté la présidence de l’AICE à s’intéresser à ses activités.

Né à Paris le 11 janvier 1930, Jacques Bariéty nous a quittés le 20 novembre 2014, à la veille de son 85ème anniversaire. Fils d’un célèbre médecin pneumologue, il a fréquenté les Lycées Condorcet et Henri IV avant de se consacrer à sa passion, l’histoire, et de commencer ses études à la Faculté des Lettres de Paris.

Agrégé d’histoire, il a entamé une longue carrière d’enseignant dans l’Est de la France (lycée de Nancy en 1954) tout en débutant ses recherches sur les relations franco-allemandes et l’histoire de l’Allemagne. Ses premiers écrits portent sur Franz von Papen et l’accession de Hitler au pouvoir. Dès 1957, il participe aux travaux de la Commission interalliée d’étude des archives allemandes séquestrées à Whaddon Hall (Grande-Bretagne) aux côtés d’historiens américains et britanniques. Il se rend ensuite en Allemagne où il enseigne à l’Institut français de Bonn (1959) et devient, l’année suivante, membre de la Commission internationale de publication des archives diplomatiques allemandes. De 1968 à 1971, il dirige l’Institut français de Francfort-sur-le-Main.

Il entre dans la carrière universitaire en occupant, à son retour d’Allemagne en 1971, le poste de Maître assistant à la faculté des Lettres de Metz, avant de rejoindre l’université de Strasbourg où il occupera les fonctions de Directeur de l’Institut d’histoire contemporaine à partir de 1975. Il est nommé en 1979, Professeur d’histoire contemporaine à l’université de Paris IV-Sorbonne et y restera jusqu’à son départ en retraite en 1996. Il était Professeur émérite.

Ses travaux portent tous sur les relations franco-allemandes. Sa thèse d’Etat sur Les relations franco-allemandes après la première guerre mondiale fut couronnée par le prix Gobert de l’Académie française en 1977. Il publie de nombreux livres avec ses collègues, Raymond Poidevin, Les relations franco-allemandes de 1875 à 1977, Jacques Droz, République de Weimar et régime hitlérien, Jean-Marie Valentin et Alfred Guth, La France et l’Allemagne entre les deux-guerres mondiales ; Pierre Miquel, Journal de Raymond Poincaré de 1919 ; René Pillorget, France-Bavière, allers-retours, 100 ans de relations franco-bavaroises. La plupart d’entre eux sont utilisés par des générations d’étudiants et prouvent aussi qu’il était très apprécié de ses collègues, spécialistes des relations franco-allemandes.

Il a aussi contribué à la publication de nombreux colloques de l’AIHCE et notamment à celui consacré à Aristide Briand, la Société des nations et l’Europe (1919-1932) en 2007. En 2011 paraissait son dernier livre, A la recherche de la paix France-Allemagne un commentaire des cahiers d’Oswald Hesnard, conseiller et ami d’Aristide Briand. Tous ces travaux illustrent l’importance et l’impact de son œuvre scientifique.

Reconnu au niveau national et international comme un grand spécialiste de l’Allemagne, J. Bariéty fut responsable de la publication des Documents diplomatiques français (années 1920), membre de la commission des archives du ministère des Affaires étrangères (1975-2011) et de 1981 à 2004, conseiller historique auprès du ministère des Affaires étrangères.

Son autorité scientifique le conduisit également à assumer diverses responsabilités au niveau universitaire puisqu’il fut membre élu du Comité consultatif des universités (1973-82) et du Comité national du CNRS (1976-82), et auditeur à l’Institut des hautes études de défense nationale (IHEDN) (1980-1981).

Il était très apprécié de ses collègues et entretenait des relations notamment au sein de l’AIHCE avec des chercheurs de tous les pays d’Europe, mais aussi des Etats-Unis, du Canada et du Japon.

Par son enseignement, ses ouvrages, ses activités auprès de nombreuses instances, sa présence au sein du Comité scientifique de nombreuses revues, il a contribué à la formation de plusieurs générations d’historiens. Ils n’oublieront pas sa direction de recherche, ses interventions dans les soutenances, dans les débats, la fidélité de sa participation aux réunions organisées par les jeunes chercheurs. Cet historien, d’une immense culture, toujours clair et précis dans ses communications et ses interventions, a grandement contribué à faire connaître l’histoire des relations internationales à travers l’exemple franco-allemand dans le monde entier. Tous ses collègues, dont de ses nombreux anciens élèves, comme moi, sont infiniment touchés par cette perte.

Contrats doctoraux : « Défis internationaux et émergence d’un espace public en Europe depuis les années 1970 » (Institut historique allemand)

Durée : 01/10/2014–30/09/2017
Date limite de candidature : 22/06/2014

Version allemande.


Logo de l'Institut Historique Allemand à ParisInstitution : Institut historique allemandDans le cadre d’un nouvel axe de recherche, l’Institut historique allemand (IHA) à Paris offre pour l’automne 2014 des contrats doctoraux sur le thème «Défis internationaux et émergence d’un espace public en Europe depuis les années 1970». Les recherches porteront sur la question des convergences dans la perception des défis internationaux en Europe, ainsi que sur la définition d’une politique européenne qui en résulte. Il s’agira de mettre à l’épreuve la pertinence de cette approche pour décrire l’histoire européenne récente, en prenant pour exemple les questions environnementales. Les candidats traitant d’un point de vue historique l’émergence d’un espace public en Europe dans d’autres domaines sont également les bienvenus. Les sujets en lien avec l’Allemagne et/ou la France sont appréciés, mais pas obligatoires.

Le contrat doctoral vise à l’élaboration d’une thèse dans le cadre d’un projet de recherche lancé au printemps 2014 sous la direction de Christian Wenkel à l’IHA, en coopération avec les professeurs Éric Bussière et Hélène Miard-Delacroix, du laboratoire d’excellence Écrire une histoire nouvelle de l’Europe. Le présent appel à candidatures s’adresse au premier chef aux doctorants qui se trouvent au début de leur travail. Le poste est à pourvoir si possible au 1er octobre 2014. Avec Christian Wenkel, les doctorants constitueront un groupe de recherche auquel peuvent participer également des personnes dont les travaux sont financés par une autre structure. L’inscription en doctorat doit être faite dans un établissement d’enseignement supérieur en France ou en Allemagne et ne peut pas être réalisée à l’IHA. Tout accord de cotutelle entre un établissement allemand et établissement français est bienvenue.

Le contrat doctoral de droit français est conclu pour une durée de trois ans. La rémunération mensuelle s’établit à 1 818 € brut (assurances maladie, vieillesse et chômage françaises incluses). L’IHA met à disposition un poste de travail dans ses locaux, ainsi que les infrastructures de l’institut.

Les doctorants s’engagent à participer activement aux travaux et manifestations de l’IHA et notamment du groupe de recherche. Les candidats doivent maîtriser l’allemand ou le français et posséder de solides notions dans l’autre langue.

Pour en savoir plus sur le projet «Défis internationaux et émergence d’un espace public en Europe depuis les années 1970», consulter la rubrique «Recherche» sur le site Web de l’institut. Pour toute question de fond sur le projet de recherche, contacter Christian Wenkel (cwenkel [at] dhi-paris [point] fr). Les requêtes administratives doivent être adressées à Stefan Martens, directeur adjoint de l’IHA et directeur du département Histoire contemporaine (smartens [at] dhi-paris [point] fr).

Modalités de candidature

Merci de bien vouloir envoyer votre candidature avec votre C.V., les copies de vos diplômes, l’exposé de votre projet de thèse accompagné d’un calendrier et d’indications sur les sources pertinentes pour votre travail (4 pages max.), ainsi que les coordonnées de deux personnes de référence d’ici au 22 juin 2014, par e-mail uniquement (dans un seul fichier PDF) au directeur de l’IHA, M. Thomas Maissen (bewerbung [at] dhi-paris [point] fr). Les entretiens de recrutement se tiendront probablement du 7 au 9 juillet 2014.


Christian Wenkel
8 rue du Parc-Royal
75003 Paris
+33 1 44 54 23 80
+33 1 42 71 23 90
cwenkel [at] dhi-paris [point] fr

For Fritz Klein – Für Fritz Klein

Professor Fritz Klein was a member of the Board of the AIHCE from 1980 to 2005 and then an honorary member. This text was written by Frank Hadler, who kindly gave us the authorisation to reproduce it. Frank Hadler and Carole Fink wrote another text, available on the AHA’s website.

Berlin, 24.6.2011, 11 h

Liebe, hoch verehrte Frau Klein,

liebe Familie Klein,

sehr geehrte Damen und Herren

Historiker haben es gut. Sie entdecken Spuren der Vergangenheit und können dabei Spuren für die Zukunft hinterlassen. Prof. Fritz Klein ist ein bedeutender Spurenleser und Spurenleger – gewesen. Dieser im Präsens begonnene Satz muss seit einem Monat ins Präteritum gesetzt werden. Gleichwohl, es soll das Imperfektum sein, die unvollendete Vergangenheit, in der wir an den Kollegen, Freund und Lehrer Fritz Klein denken.

Im ersten Entwurf der „Gedanken zum Konzept einer Autobiographie“, getippt vor inzwischen eineinhalb Dekaden, umriss Fritz Klein, was er in seinen ein paar Jahre später erschienenen Erinnerungen nachzuzeichnen gedachte: „den Lebensweg eines Mannes, der auch heute noch einsehbare Gründe hatte, seinen Weg so zu gehen, wie er ihn gegangen ist“. Diesen nun, nach fast 87 Jahren an ein Ende gekommenen Weg nicht rundheraus erfreulich lang zu nennen, wäre wohl unangemessen, vielleicht auch einfach falsch. Nichts desto trotz war die Todesnachricht ein Schlag und alle, die das Glück hatten, Fritz Kleins Weg zu kreuzen, ein Stück zu teilen oder gar über weite Strecken mit ihm zu gehen, werden sich inzwischen vielfach Gedanken über die gemeinsam erlebten Zeiten und Momente gemacht haben.

Nun ist die Vermutung sicher nicht ganz abwegig, dass dabei selbst im großen Familienkreis vor allem der Historiker Fritz Klein die jeweils ganz persönlichen Reminiszenzen bestimmt. Mithin ist es vielleicht gut und in geboten breiten Pinselstrichen auch angemessen, noch einmal wesentliche Felder zu umreißen, die sein nachhaltiges Wirken als Geschichtsforscher, –schreiber und –vermittler bestimmten.

Zur historischen Primärerfahrung wurde fraglos der Weltkrieg. Diesen hat er freiwillig als Soldat erlebt und an der Ostfront leicht verwundet überlebt. Sich nach Kriegsende jenen politischen Kräften anzuschließen, die für den Aufbau eines neuen Deutschlands standen, das konsequent mit den kriegerischen Traditionen brach und sich mit seiner Vergangenheit kritisch auseinander setzte, war für Fritz Klein ein Gebot der Stunde. Zweifellos von seinem Pflegevater Wilhelm Deiters für die Welt der Pädagogik sensibilisiert, wollte er Lehrer werden. Gleich nach ihrer Wiedereröffnung studierte er Geschichte an der Berliner Alma Mater die nun die Namen der Humboldts trug. Hier wurden die zunächst in Unterzahl lehrenden Marxisten nach eigener Aussage „prägend“ für seine „Vorstellungen von Verlauf und Inhalt der Geschichte“. Das traf vor allem auf Alfred Meusel zu. Als kritischer Doktorvater begleitete Meusel die Entstehung einer zu Studienende verteidigten Dissertation über die deutsch-sowjetischen diplomatischen Beziehungen. Noch 1952 erschien sie in der heute Schwindel erregenden Auflage von 10.000 Exemplaren, die sich auch noch binnen kurzem restlos verkauften, was den Verlag zu einer sofortigen Zweitauflage veranlasste.

Die erste Veröffentlichung war dieses Buch freilich nicht, denn schon als Student hatte Fritz Klein begonnen, für die „Weltbühne“ und andere Zeitschriften zu schreiben. Den Drang und das Talent, sich wieder und wieder mit publizistischen Wortmeldungen in die Debatten seiner Zeit einzubringen –bis zuletzt als eifriger Leserbriefschreiber -, hatte er offenbar von seinem früh verstorbenen Vater mitbekommen. Bis 1933, als er aus politischen Gründen daran gehindert wurde, hatte Dr. Fritz Klein sen. als Chefredakteur der einflussreich-konservativen „Deutschen Allgemeinen Zeitung“ gewirkt. 20 Jahre später war Dr. Fritz Klein jun. selbst Chefredakteur und stand an der Spitze der gerade gegründeten „Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft“. Welche Gedanken werden ihm durch den Kopf gegangen sein, als er in den widersprüchlichen Turbulenzen der ostmitteleuropäischen Entstalinisierungskrise von 1956/57 ebenfalls aus politischen Gründen gezwungen wurde, seinen Posten aufzugeben?

Die Binsenweisheit, dass jedes Ende zugleich ein Anfang ist, bewahrheitet sich auch in politisch unruhigen Zeiten, denn nun, als Mitarbeiter am Institut für Geschichte der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin begann das eigentliche Geschichtsforscherdasein des Fritz Klein. Nicht die Geschichte des selbst erlebten zweiten Weltkrieges, sondern die des ersten Großen Krieges des vergangenen Jahrhunderts wurde zu einer Art Generalthema seines so unermüdlichen wie erfolgreichen Spurenlesens und Spurenlegens. Als Leiter der „Arbeitsgruppe Erster Weltkrieg“ zeichnete er verantwortlich für das kollektive Buchprojekt „Deutschland im Ersten Weltkrieg“. Es erschien dreibändig ab 1968. Dass es sich bei dem Klein’schen Dreibänder um eine bleibende Leistung der DDR-Historiographie handelt, ist vieler orten und völlig zu recht immer wieder betont worden.

Mit seinen Arbeiten über die Kriegsschuldfrage, die von einer aktiven Teilhabe an der Fischer-Kontoverse gekennzeichnet waren und die ihn ungeachtet aller politischer Divergenzen mit so unterschiedlichen Kollegen wie Fritz Stern und Fritz Fellner in eine Reihe zur Unterstützung von Fritz Fischer stellte, habilitierte sich Fritz Klein 1968. Dies passierte  an der Universität Leipzig bei Walter Markov. Der weltweit agierende und anerkannte Ordinarius für Allgemeine Geschichte empfahl seinen Habilitanden an die School of Advanced International Studies in Washington D.C., was Prof. Fritz Klein 1975 für mehrere Monate in jenes Land brachte, das Günter Kunert ein Jahr zuvor in seinem Bericht „Der anderen Planet“ nannte.

Markov, der 1968 zu den Mitgründern einer als „Amical“ von Zeithistorikern aus Ost und West gedachten Vereinigung gehörte, aus der 1980 die dem Welthistorikerverband affiliierte Association internationale d’historie contemporaine de l’Europe , kurz AIHCE, hervorging, machte Fritz Klein 1982 zu seinem Nachfolger in dessen Bureau genanntem Leitungsgremium. Auf vielen AIHCE-Tagungen wie auch auf den insgesamt neun von ihm besuchten Welthistorikerkongressen galt der Historiker aus der DDR als international renommierter Fachmann, kritischer Kommentator und gefragter Gesprächspartner.

Ohne davon viel mehr als einen Hauch Ahnung zu haben, lernten wir jüngeren Fritz Klein ungefähr vor einem Drittel bis einem Viertel Jahrhundert als Historiker in der DDR kennen. Er war Chef des Bereiches Allgemeine Geschichte und wir wirklich noch jung. Er zeigte uns Offenheit für die Welt, bevor sie offen für uns war, ließ uns viel Freiraum bei der Themenwahl unserer Dissertationen, lehrte uns, in allen Diskussionen stets noch ein möglichst gutes Argument bis zum Schluss in petto zu behalten, nahm uns mit auf Konferenzen der „hochlöblichen“ AIHCE, half uns beim Durchboxen kritischer Texte für unseren Geschichtskalender im Dietz-Verlag – kurz machte uns fit für die Academia, die in der DDR gleichwohl zunehmend verkrustete und alsbald, wie das Land auch, in Auflösung geriet. So nimmt es eigentlich nicht Wunder, dass der „Jemand“, der nach seinem Erinnerungen Ende 1989 vorschlug, man solle ihn aus dem gerade begonnen Rentnerdasein „reaktivieren und zum Direktor berufen“ einer der ganz jungen war. Das es so kam, war ein Glück in vielfacher Hinsicht – ersparte dem Institutsdirektor Fritz Klein aber nicht, am 16. Dezember 1991, wenige Tage vor dem aufgrund eines Wissenschaftsratsvotums beschlossenen Ende des Instituts für Allgemeine Geschichte eine, wie er zugab, „seiner schwersten Reden zu halten“ – die Abschiedsrede.

Ein Abschied aber war es nicht, denn wie in der Nachbemerkung seines Buches angedeutet, blieb er mit Freunden und ehemaligen Kollegen in Kontakt, die ihm beim Schreiben halfen, „diesen oder jenen Vorgang“ zu rekonstruieren. Vielen von Ihnen, meine Damen und Herren werden sich an die Telefonate erinnern, die stets mit der Frage eingeleitet wurden: “Du, sag, störe ich gerade?“, um dann in oft lange Erörterungen der früher gewesenen und damals seienden Lage überzugehen. Nicht zuletzt hierdurch wird er uns als Mann von großer Redlichkeit und freimütig mitgeteilter Nachdenklichkeit in Erinnerung bleiben.

Frank Hadler                                                      Berlin, Pankow-Rosenthal, 19. Juni 2011


The mission of the International Association for the Contemporary History of Europe, affiliated to the International Committee of Historical Sciences, will describe the Association, its activities, its news and will promote its members’ activities. This mission will focus on the core of the AIHCE, that is the contemporary history of Europe.

Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search