מהלך ההיסטוריה הגרמנית: תולדות התפתחותה של ההיסטוריה הגרמנית מאז שנת 1815

by A.J.P. Taylor, א.ג'.פ טיילור, חיים איזק (מתרגם)

מהלך ההיסטוריה הגרמנית מאת א.ג'.פ. טיילור נמנה כיום על גדולי ההיסטוריונים בעולם. כולל מפות התמחה בניתוחים מבריקים של מערכות השילטון באירופה.

Genres: History, Germany, Nonfiction, War, World War II, World War I, Politics

264 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1946

About the author

Alan John Percivale Taylor was an English historian of the 20th century and renowned academic who became well known to millions through his popular television lectures.

Reviews

[Ted · Rating 4 out of 5]

Small text but jam-packed with information. Its closeness to the end of WWII can be felt at times, and Taylor was certainly less hostile to Germany in his later works, but much can be gained from this manuscript.

[carl theaker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book, which is renown itself. A recent review regarding its reprinting inspired me to read it. First published right after wwii, it remains in print to this day which is an endorsement of its insights.

Which I've since read that people don't necessarily agree with them!

Appears that Taylor was a bit of personality of the day, appearing on radio talk shows and panels of all sorts in his day 1940-50s. Not a typical description for the 'stodgy' British historian.

It is one of those books where i start taking notes, but then half the book is worthy of remembering, so give up after awhile.

some of the interesting observations :

Without democracy socialism would be worth nothing, but democracy is worth a great deal even when it is not socialist.

(Regarding the Slavs)
... as the Anglo-Saxons had succeeded in North America exterminating the Indians, the effect would have been what it had on the Americans: The Germans would have become the advocates of brotherly
love and international reconciliation.

Cheap trade with India -crushed the prosperous Hanseatic League.

Luther, in the end sided with the Northern princes (against the little people).

Junkers - a working upper class, different than the gentry of England or aristocracy of France, had to be painfully frugal to make an existence out of the sandy plains and marshes of Prussia. This later reflected in the general 'German' character of efficiency. The middle American farmer also came to reflect these values.

(Re: Hitler's rise)- at once everyone's enemy and everyone's friend: his programme of contradictory principles could succeed only in a community which had already lost all unity and self-confidence.
offering all to all. The people could find the promise of action, new hope for themselves.

Bismarck creating social security, a peculiarly ingenious idea, a great political coup, the people & somewhat the employer paid their money to the government, which provided a structure to dispense their own money back to them, in turn they gave up an amount of liberty because now they were in debt to their government for their own money. making the workers value security more than liberty.

[Will · Rating 4 out of 5]

Taylor is always an enjoyable read and so this gets a minimum of three stars for me.

However it is very much a book of its time and suffers from a view of the German character as being docile morons led by warlike and anti-democratic leaders. Worth remembering that this was written in 1945!

Nonetheless despite the slightly ridiculous underlying argument, it is an entertaining and informative read which gives a good overview of German history between 1803-1939.

This edition (Routledge 1988) really shouldn’t have been allowed to be published in its current state. Typos abound and about one sentence in every hundred simply does not make sense, as words like ‘the’ and ‘is’ tend to go missing for some odd reason. I can only assume the editor was asleep when reviewing it. Try to buy another edition if you can.

[Arthur · Rating 4 out of 5]

My favourite kind of history: sharply opinionated and controversial. A.J.P. Taylor is not afraid to reject conventional interpretations regarding the course of German history, nor to impose his own constructs in replacement of them. The two most salient arguments that Taylor repeatedly stresses in this book are:

1) Mere "ideals" are not substitutes for raw POWER.

2) Attempts at sociopolitical revolution without the broad support of the masses is folly.

In many cases, I found myself fundamentally disagreeing with Taylor's view of German history because of his overtly left-socialist political leanings. But that's okay, because his biases are not hidden nor obscured, and I was able to extract many relevant lessons from the book and add them to my own personal conception or "model" of German history.

[Adam Dayan · Rating 3 out of 5]

lucidly written but wow Taylor really h9s Germans

[Jack Kelly · Rating 5 out of 5]

A. J. P. Taylor - hates Germans and the whole German scene.

Incredible book. Basically argues Nazism was the logical and probably consequence of German history. Gotta say I agree. When the US descends into civil war and withdraws all her forces from Europe, expect Germany to once again start flexing and build on her economic might. Only way to safeguard against this - from a British perspective - is by allying with Russia (regardless of the nature of Putin's regime).

But tbf I'm on mescaline.

[Connor]

Hard to take seriously. Taylor basically argues that Germans are an inherently violent, power hungry people, and that the course of German history could not possibly have culminated in anything other than Hitler and the Nazi Party. A "caricature of anti-German history" this certainly is. See Richard Evans for genuine analysis on this topic.

[Rallorien]

I picked up this book on a whim from the library, mostly because my German history between Charlemagne and the world wars was completely lacking. I ended up actually reading it as an anthropological study of the history of history – or something like that. Taylor was purposely being rather absurd in his claims, such as "... after Bach, Lutheran Germany had no cultural existence" (10) and phases like "an attempt without meaning" (165) to describe any democratic or non-fascist political moves. His general thesis – that Germany was to always work to conquer all of Europe and who's people never tried to make it democratic – is as outdated as his love of "inevitable" directions of history.

That being said, however, it's an interesting book. His understanding of balances within the political structures of each of the governments is a good description of the complexity of governance, and his ability to explain the historical trends is very helpful, although he does tend to ignore any popular ideologies or movements because they, supposedly, made no difference to Germany. If you don't mind playing "what's obviously wrong on this page?" it's a good historical overview. However, I perhaps should have picked up a different, more moderate history to gain a general understanding before reading this book and trying to pick out the controversial (or just wrong) statements.

[Jeremy Thin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ridiculous, preposterous but enjoyable.

[G. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Much like the wand chooses the wizard, AJP Taylor announced himself in my life at precisely the right moment in the form of this book. I had the serendipitous good fortune to come across this wee gem for 50p (!) in a used furniture shop earlier on this year. I bought it with a view to supplementing my teaching armed with additional knowledge of Germany through the tumultuous period of the Weimar Republic to the rise of Nazi dictatorship. Weirdly it wasn't long afterwards that I was asked to teach Advanced Higher History on this very topic, at least for two weeks at the end of term!

For students and scholars of history, for teachers, and for anyone with a general interest this is a downright brilliant work of lucid historical analysis and writing; two skills which do not necessarily go together. Taylor's voice is clear throughout, and his condemnation of the 'violent oscillations' of German history is unflinching, even brutal in parts. Indeed, Taylor's argument goes that Hitler and the Nazis were an inevitable result of 'the course of German history' from the establishment of the Holy Roman Empire onwards. He was writing at the close of the Second World War, when the horrific events of the Holocaust were just coming to light. What might now be considered German xenophobia was then a moral outrage; the historian's job was to explain 'why'.

Whether or not you agree with his analysis what I loved about this book is that there is a cheekiness between the solemn content. Lines about the wavering popularity of communism as dependent on how much beer there is left in the pub tap had me hooting out loud. He seems to have had quite an amusing outlook on the world. He certainly seems to think England and France were the height of civilisation, while Germany was a barbarian nation which 'aped' others without understanding the sophistication required for a mature democracy. Details of Bismarck's ranting, raving and throwing beer jars across the room when he didn't get his way illuminated what 19th Century German politics was like behind the scenes!

Prejudiced, maybe, but I enjoyed the fact he was bold in his assertions. He never loses sight of standards of basic decency. Relativistic this is not.

Rarely is reading history this engaging, even fun.

[David Myles · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the peculiarities of History is that it can become dated, AJP Taylors Course of German History is one of those books. It's genesis was a pamphlet on recent for officers of the British and American forces entering Germany in 1945. This pamphlet was expanded in to a a more general course and the book written, in 1945, shortly after the war is heavy on militarism of Germany and reflects the mores and views of it's day. There is little time given to a different more liberal view of German history other than that of militarism with which Bismark forged Germany from 1849-1870 and Kaiser Wilhelm and Hitler reduced Germany in 1918 and 1945. The one pertinent argument in the book does come from that original pamphlet which is that countries left alone outside of international agreements and pressures, tend to spin to extremes.
We are now further from 1945 than 1945 was from 1871 and the foundation of that Germany and new and more enlightened views of German History are widely accepted in academic circles if not on the football terraces.

[Simon Mee · Rating 4 out of 5]

A J P Taylor, a historian who ascended to the godhood of three initials, was not a humble man. The Course of German History was sharp enough when he first wrote it, but for him to add a preface 16 years later about how good he was at writing another country’s modern history:

It is an advantage, and a rare one, for a writer on German history to be an Englishman, not educated in Germany; this advantage at any rate I possess.

…is to wave your waxen wings at the sun.

Is Taylor right about the Germans that one looks in vain in their history for just milieu, for common sense? I do not know, but it is sure compelling reading.

The Vibes

It is a common canard that Wedgwood’s The Thirty Years War was impacted by the appeasement of the times in which it was written. This must surely must be doubly so for 1945’s The Course of German History, with Taylor painting the German people as, well…

But no other people has pursued extermination as a permanent policy from generation to generation for a thousand years; and it is foolish to suppose that they have done so without adding something permanent to their national tradition.

I wonder what about 1945 gave him such a negative view.

The Course of German History is also “of its time” in that it is not rigorous with its citations, mainly in that they don’t exist. Going out on a limb here, I assume that the doyen of British historians did do a significant amount of research. However, Taylor is still a real “vibes” guy, and if the vibe isn’t good, such as during the 1848 revolutionary period:

For the first time since 1521, the German people stepped on to the centre of the German stage only to miss their cues once more.

…Taylor will let you know, and you just have to assume he’s reading those vibes correctly.

You can write a history on vibes, and most histories do have a “vibe” of some sort. However, the issue with vibes is that they change. Taylor changed his views on Hitler and Bismarck in later books – not massively, but notably. It is not unreasonable in principle for one’s views to change with the evidence, rather it is a sign of emotional maturity. The problem here is that it is hard to get past the impression that Taylor’s views changed according to “vibes” rather than a careful review of new evidence. Would Wedgwood have written a different narrative history at a different time in her life? I’m willing to say: Yes! But it feels like she is stung more for it more than Taylor, who is far more sweeping with his judgments – Wedgwood was snippish towards individuals, whereas Taylor calls the German people exterminating barbarians.

Taylor does ride those vibes like few other authors could, defying 80 years of time with memorable, if not pithy, judgments:

Like a rich parvenu, Germany, lacking nothing but self-possession, cried out for the possessions of others; convinced that if she could but ruin and destroy her neighbours she would be at last stable and contented.

The Details

To be fairer to Taylor than his own introduction is to him, he does, particularly in the latter part, write at length about the industrialists in the Ruhr pairing up with the Prussian Junkers to dominate different aspects of German life:

How could the German people be persuaded to accept indefinitely the political monopoly of the Junkers and the economic monopoly of the great landowners and capitalists?

…and there’s a prolonged (and interesting discussion) about how their demands drove internal and external German policy. Again, it is not overly detailed and I would want to be careful with the assertion that the colossal Germany Navy was bait to content heavy industry - even if one was good for the other, was that correlation or causation?

There’s also the interesting interplay between Prussia and Austria for the stewardship of the German people, along with the concepts of “Greater Germany” and “Little Germany”. The interactions with the Poles and Bohemia also loom large in this history, along with the lack of direction that led to the First World War – while Kaiser Wilhem II is unflatteringly portrayed, Taylor does not seem him as the driver of Germany’s problems. The rise of Hitler also significantly differs from the popular view of a decadent German “redirected” by a force of nature – elements of rearmament and irredentism well predating him.

As a criticism, The Course of German History is a negative history, with Taylor strongly expressing his preference for a divided form of Germany (and presumably a separate Austria). I see the flaws portrayed in the German people reflected at times in the recent history of other countries, such as Britain’s Brexit travails – suggesting that at least some of the vibes might be universal at time.

But what is the Judgement of History?

I can’t tell you whether Taylor is right, but he creates coherent narratives of cause and effect, which is important. Not because Taylor is right about the causes, or the effects, even that the effects flowed from causes, but because it provides a yardstick to judge, criticise, test the hypothesis. The Course of German History is not “one damn thing after another.”

It is best to read The Course of German History as an example of the vibrancy of historiography. Read it not because it is right (and perhaps no history book ever is), read it for what Taylor thinks is right.

[GreyAtlas · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was not written for beginners. I knew nothing except the basics of German History and I was completely lost. I don't think it was a bad book but I'd need to research alot while re-reading to fully understand what was happening. It's a shame the author didn't explain it more. I liked the last page though, it resolved nicely.

This was not the edition I read, as mine wasn't available. Oh well. That's what I get for reading my mom's old dusty books.

[laurentiu]

0

[John Davie · Rating 4 out of 5]

What it lacks in impartiality it gains succeeds in veracity of style.

[Keir R · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the most part a decent overview of German history. Taylor takes a somewhat polemical approach to his writing to keep you engaged. I think this stems from the fact that it was published not long after WW2. Describing Germany as a nation of opposites does not seem all that far-fetched no matter how unoriginal it seems now to say that about other nations. I hope to work through some of the recommendations listed in the bibliography.

[David Sutherland · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply a brilliant history book for those students of German history and for those wishing to read a superb summary of nineteenth and twentieth century German history up to July 1945. The preface sets the tone of Taylor's critical assessment of Germany and the Germans. For those accusing Taylor of holding brutal anti-German views, he reminds the reader that "the facts made it for themselves" - facts which indeed stand before us all to see, to learn, and to try and understand.

The first chapter sets the scene with a summation of German history from the time of Charlemagne in the year 800 to the outbreak of the French revolution in 1789. This summary of nearly 1,000 years of German history in just twenty-four pages must stand alone as one of the greatest accomplishments in historical writing of any age. Taylor's lucid and evocative style may unsettle some readers, but it does stimulate the mind to ask questions, and lays the scene for the rest of the book. Of course, no one wishes to be described or labelled as a 'barbarian', even a 'barbarian of genius'. But I rather suspect those who express concern at this language may not have learnt all the facts, or who may not wish to admit their own German heritage.

Of the following chapters, I would highly recommend the chapter on the failed liberal revolution of 1848, which of course laid many of the seeds for the future troubles of Germany. Also, Taylor's analysis of Bismarck in the following chapters, and the way in which this German statesman balanced the aims of achieving 'Little Germany', whilst keeping those happy craving for 'Greater Germany', is another tremendous achievement in this book, and is highly recommended.

Also, the final chapters on the failure of the Weimar Republic and the rise of National Socialism are of particular value. Those looking for in-depth details of the blatant anti-Semitism of the Third German Reich may be surprised by the lack of details of the barbarity of this episode in human history. Instead, Taylor focuses on the continuing 'balancing act' of Hitler's aim of achieving both 'Little' and 'Greater' German objectives, all focused ultimately in achieving the age-long German dream of 'Mitteleuropa'.

Finally, it is a shame the book ends with the meeting at Potsdam in July 1945. Having begun the book with a 'Divided' Germany, the post-war settlement of a once-more divided Germany would have been useful, and would have perhaps represented another 'squaring of the circle'. Taylor does allude to this divided state in the Preface of 1961. It appears Germany has always been the most stable when divided, and certainly in the case of West Germany up to 1989, the most happy as well. Whether this trend continues with the current 'Little German' state within the context of the European Union, remains to be seen.

[Edmund O'Connor · Rating 3 out of 5]

Taylor's prose, especially here, is always laced with a flair for the dramatic and eye-catching. It is difficult to imagine a historian with a less clear-cut view of the subject at hand, which is refreshing in a field where so many hedges and qualifications can be offered up as to obscure whatever point is hesitantly being made.

However, the reverse of that is that Taylor brusquely dismisses or ignores any fact and trend that does not fit his thesis. While it is understandable that he had very good reason to be caustic about the Germans (city centres throughout the UK weren't being flattened by themselves at that point in time), his invective often gets out of hand, and he often lets himself be seduced by a witty bon mot, whether it is true or not. The 'bad boy' of post-war British historiography is perhaps being wilfully contrary, daring you think, "steady on, old chap", and is simply delighted when you do. Throw his book across the room in disgust, and he would be thrilled.

Despite these big caveats, Taylor efficiently and crisply covers a lot of ground in a field which readers of history in English are more than a little unfamiliar with. Keep your cool, and wryly raise your eyebrow when his typewriter runs away with him. You'll learn a thing or two.

[Corey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Beware, this author assumes his reader is fairly well versed in the history of the period. Refreshingly frank account of rise of Germany from 1815. Showing Hitler as not so much an aberration, but a continuation of expansionist German policy. I found some of the descriptions of the internal politics of Germany in the 1877-1914 period especially enlightening in better understanding the origins of WWI and the ineptitude really of German government, a truly great power in the hands of an immature, archaic government. The book was written by an eminent British scholar in the closing days of WWII. There's a little bitterness evident, but he has his facts straight. And Germany clearly had a problem. Another noteworthy observation concerns German hatred towards the Treaty of Versailles, which is usually thought to focus on reparations and the infamous war guilt clause. Taylor makes a good case though that German ire, across the whole spectrum of German society, was more directed to their being treated as an equal to the slavic states. It was this equality which every German wished to repudiate as history ordained that Germany was to be the master of the region.

[David Lowther · Rating 3 out of 5]

AJP Taylor was one of the finest popular historians of the Twentieth Century. Much, but not all, of his writing was aimed at people interested in history rather than students of it.
The Course of German History was written during the final months of the Second World War. The closing chapters, covering the period from the fall of Bismarck to the defeat of Hitler, are superb and would help anyone trying to figure out why there were two such devastating wars in the Twentieth Century.
I found the rest of the book a bit stuffy and rather too scholarly for my liking.
Well worth a read, however.

David Lowther. Author of The Blue Pencil, Liberating Belsen and Two Families at War, all published by Sacristy Press

[David Nichols · Rating 3 out of 5]

A great book for German-haters, written by an Englishman at the very end of World War Two. It contains two of Taylor's most famous quotes: one on the 1848 Revolutions - "German history reached its turning point and failed to turn" - and the other on Hitler, whose only flaw, according to the author, was that he was a German.

[David Warwick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating, deeply provocative book by one of Britain's most famous and celebrated historians.

Deeply scathing about certain perceived "tendencies" in German history, most of which would be rejected by more considered historians, but very thought provoking and extremely readable all the same.

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

College textbook for German history course.

[David Thornber · Rating 5 out of 5]

AJP Taylor's opinion. But he has been there and seen a lot. Worth reading.

[Madeeha Maqbool · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written in 1945, this was bound to be biased against the Germans. Even so, it's an excellent way to get started and does have some invaluable insights. Just don't take it as the last word.

[Ben Craik · Rating 2 out of 5]

Taylor's book is a product of its time. To my mind - with its twenty-first century sensibilities - it is too concerned with high politics and far too polemical.

[Mt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Taylor's work, even with its considerable bias, is necessary and important. As a man who lived through two world wars where the lives of countrymen--and friends and family members--were ended or upended by Germany, one must understand his biases for what they are: a dire message to future generations on how one of the most cultured peoples on earth can commit evil.

This theme is not new to German history, and Taylor expertly demonstrates a throughline from the medieval German states to Hitler. Germany, according to Taylor, was fertile ground for Nazism. It allowed for Hitler, more than he co-opted it.

Of particular note is Taylor's deliberation on how German taxation policy--not WWI reparations, per se--caused economic downturns during the interwar years and, thus, the rise in influence of the Nazis:
"Instead of taxing the rich, Germany paid her way and paid off all the costs of the war by destroying the savings of the poor and middle classes....it stripped the middle classes of their savings and made the industrial magnates absolute dictators of German economic life. The saving, investing middle class, everywhere the pillar of stability and respectability...was now utterly destroyed, and Germany thus deprived of her solid, cautious keel" (p. 196).

In 2017 America, these warnings of are particular note.