The Trial of the Germans: An Account of the Twenty-two Defendants before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg

by Eugene Davidson

The "definitive one-volume study of Nuremberg," The Trial of the Germans is now available in paperback. An astute observer of the Nuremberg trial, Eugene Davidson has struggled with the issues it Was it a necessary response to the heinous crimes of the Third Reich? How were Germany and the Germans capable of such extraordinary evil? Was the trial just, given the claims that the defendants were simply serving their country, doing as they had been told to do? And if not just, was it nonetheless necessary as a warning to prevent future crimes against humanity? Davidson's approach to these and other large questions of justice is made through examination of each of the defendants in the trial. His reluctant, but firm, conclusion "In a world of mixed human affairs where a rough justice is done that is better than lynching or being shot out of hand, Nuremberg may be defended as a political event if not as a court." Some sentences may have seemed too severe, but none was harsher than the punishments meted out to innocent people by the regime these men served. "In a certain sense," says Davidson, "the trial succeeded in doing what judicial proceedings are supposed to it convinced even the guilty that the verdict against them was just." Faulty as the trial was from the legal point of view, a catharsis of the pent-up emotions of millions of people had to be provided and a record of what had taken place duly preserved for whatever use later generations would make of it.

Genres: History, Nonfiction

696 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1969

Reviews

[Paul Cornelius · Rating 4 out of 5]

While it has been over 50 years since publication, The Trial of the Germans is not dated. It contains biographical sketches of the 22 most notable major Nazis put on trial at Nuremburg. Divided into sections, it apportions equal time to those defendants that represented the party, the diplomatic corps, the police and army, the navy, the justice system, and business. Davidson, of course, not only provides biographies and background context, he also describes the process of the trials and an assessment of their validity and fairness. His last few sentences are revealing of the insight the book yields:

One red thread runs through the trial and binds in a curious way both the victors and the vanquished. It is the power exerted by an ideology. The power was manifested in those on the German side who accepted the fixed ideas of their society, in their Russian opposite members who could cooly accuse the Germans of a crime they knew the defendants had not committed (the Katyn massacre), in the American and British who could swallow almost any legal nostrum as long as it made them see a postwar society of their imagining. Small things were rescued at Nuremburg (although they meant in some cases the difference between life and death), such as the unspoken principle that no one be convicted of the same crime the Allies conceded their side had committed, that no one be hanged for the crime of having waged or plotted to wage war. For the deeper answers we must look to history and its meaning for ourselves.

[Mosco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Non mi era mai capitato di essere in dubbio sul fatto di avere o no terminato un libro. Ma sì, l'ho finito, almeno credo: saltabeccando fra una biografia e l'altra, tornando indietro e avanti a rileggere, fra un capitolo e l'altro, fra un ragionamento e l'altro; quindi forse mi manca qualcosa, ma in linea di massima l'ho finito.
E' un libro impegnativo, sia per il numero di pagine, più di 900, sia per i temi affrontati. Non solo le biografie molto esaurienti dei 22 imputati, il come hanno fatto la loro parte nel servire con prontezza e (alcuni) con entusiasmo e convinzione il 3° Reich, come non si siano posti domande e abbiano ubbidito passivamente agli ordini, l'andamento del loro dibattimento; dall'altra parte quanto sia stato equo il processo dei vincitori nei confronti dei vinti. Quanto sia stato "onesto" che regimi che hanno eseguito atrocità simili a quelle naziste (la Russia a Katyn per esempio) abbiano fatto parte della giuria. Come sia stato possibile, dal punto di vista strettamente processuale, giudicare per reati che non esistevano in nessun ordinamento giuridico, come ad esempio "genocidio" o "guerra di aggressione".
Detto questo, era un processo da fare? Sì, era da fare. Gli alleati non hanno commesso atrocità? Sì ma sono sempre i vincitori a processare i vinti: impossibile pensare a un tribunale che mettesse sotto processo gli americani. Giusto condannarli a morte o all'ergastolo? Forse qualcuno ha pagato troppo. Però sì, era giusto nei confronti dei milioni di persone trucidate dal regime che tutti loro hanno contribuito a tenere in piedi, nei confronti delle atrocità commesse dal regime; giusto mettere un limite, una cesura fra il prima e il dopo. E giusto separare le responsabilità dei nazisti da quelle del popolo tedesco sottolineandone la non responsabilità personale.
Un sacco di domandone una più pesante dell'altra in un libro che mi ha impegnata per un bel po' di tempo e per un bel po' di fatica.
[EDIT] ripensandoci l'ho trovato forse un po' indulgente nei confronti di qualcuno, Speer per esempio. E qualche osservazione un po' datata, ma è stato scritto prima dell'istituzione del tribunale dell'Aja. Che fa quel che fa, ma qualche risposta a molte domande di Davidson cerca di darla]

[Malachy Morehead · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don’t think you could get much more of a complete account of both the Nuremberg trials and the crimes of the defendants. It’s certainly a depressing read at points I’d split it up with another book. From the book you can tell the trial was certainly imperfect. The only peace you could get from this, is in my opinion everyone who needed to be hung was hung. But, as the author states, only the losers can be judged, and to come up with a system where a victorious country will hang its victories generals seems impossible to me. Still a scary book, there’s atleast like 5 Streicher’s online right now with thousands of followers. Would highly recommend this as a subsequent reading after reading Any WWII book; it helps put everything into perspective on how it began and concluded

[Chiara Ruffinengo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Il processo più famoso della storia. Ventidue imputati e le loro storie, raccontate da loro stessi o attraverso i loro avvocati o i documenti dell'epoca. Uno spaccato di quello che è stato il Terzo Reich visto dall'interno, cioè dalle persone che lo hanno reso possibile. Un frammento di storia indispensabile.

[Roberta · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5: very interesting portraits of 22 Nazis in the Nuremberg Trials.

[Max Hiznay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book but it shows its age with some elements of clean Wehrmacht mythos that were spread by the Western powers post World War II.