On September 25th, scholars from the German Historical Institute in Washington and the Leibniz Center for Contemporary History in Potsdam convened for an online panel discussion on the future of Zeitgeschichte, contemporary German history, in the growing field of German historiography. The panel was moderated by Professor Isabella Löhr from Freie Universität Berlin and Carolin Leibisch-Gümüs from the German Historical Institute. There were 20 participants in attendance.
The discussion opened with a focus on how scholars can better integrate Zeitgeschichte and global history. This segment was led by Professor Frank Biess from UC San Diego who commented on how German history has been traditionally viewed through a lens of specificities and singularities, resulting in a lack of comparative analysis between Zeitgeschichte and global history. However, Biess suggested that demographic changes, such as an increase in women as well as migrants, in the traditionally male-dominated field might introduce new perspectives, particularly a heightened sense of where to place Zeitgeschichte on a global scale. Professor Franziska Exeler from Freie Universität Berlin also commented on the potential for situating German history within the broader context of fascist history, emphasizing the increasing efforts to study it from a less Eurocentric perspective.
Löhr contributed to this with insights on the importance of German colonial history; she focused on aspects of German historiography in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Germany’s removal from the colonial world placed the state in a position in which its neighbors were all still colonial powers, making Germany an outlier in Europe for decades after. Löhr contextualized the pause in German global history after the end of its colonial period post WWI, which some scholars interpret as an attempt to remove Germany from other imperialist states and position it as a state of colonial neutrality. She underscored the need for modern historians to recognize Germany’s colonial past to better understand its transnational role. Biess agreed, highlighting that post-colonial Germany’s interactions with a still-colonial world warrants greater attention in global historical contexts.
Multiple panelists also noted how contemporary German culture and geopolitics have shaped the construction of Zeitgeschichte. Exeler commented on the significant impact of migration within the region and how it now shapes German historiography as people continue to bring diverse backgrounds to the field. There was also a discussion on the reluctance among many scholars to place the Holocaust and Nazi Party within a broader global framework, most likely due to close ties with the era which can be explained by the demographics generally associated with the field.
The panel concluded with an overall agreement that the future of Zeitgeschichte is deeply interlinked with an increasing emphasis on global history and shifts within the scholarship community.