The discipline of gymnastics has its roots in ancient Greek physical exercises, but the father of modern gymnastics is widely acknowledged to be the nineteenth-century German gymnastics educator Friedrich Ludwig Jahn. Jahn is credited with the invention of number of gymnastic apparatuses (the vaulting horse, parallel bars, balance beam, and rings), the founding of the first open-air gymnasium in Germany, and the popularization of gymnastics as a competitive sport.[1] [2] He became a national hero in Germany, where there are many statues and monuments dedicated to him and more streets named after him than even Friedrich Schiller.[2] [3] Nonetheless his legacy remains controversial because he was an ardent German nationalist and influenced the National Socialists.
Jahn was the son of a Lutheran pastor and studied theology and philology at the Universities of Halle, Göttingen, and Greifswald with the intent of becoming a teacher. But his rebellious nature brought him into conflict with authority figures, and he abandoned an academic career.[3] [4] At the age of 28 he joined the Prussian army following Prussia’s humiliating defeat at the twin battles of Jena and Auerstädt in 1806. A year later the second Treaty of Tilsit forced King Frederick William III to cede half of Prussia’s territory. Jahn attributed Prussia’s military annihilation to its isolation from its German neighbors and to the lack of national consciousness among German states compared to the nationalistic fervor that energized the French. Thus he came to advocate German unification.
During Napoleon’s German Campaign of 1813, Jahn fought with the well-known Lützow Free Corps (known as the “Schwarze Jäger”), a volunteer force of the Prussian army consisting of three to four thousand members.[4] [5] The unit was formed after the king issued a proclamation summoning Prussia to war against the French. Most famous among its members was the poet Theodor Körner, whose patriotic verse and death in battle rose him to the status of a national hero. Jahn was also noted for his courage and was later decorated with the Iron Cross.[5] [6]
Jahn promoted gymnastics (Turnen) both as something that would physically prepare young German men for battle as well as strengthen the spirit and restore dignity to the German people. He sought to form a people’s militia composed of civilians from all levels of society united in their desire to fight for the nation. Thus he disliked the term Soldat due to its association with the word Sold, referring to wages paid to mercenary soldiers.[6] [7]
In 1811 he built the first open-air gymnasium in Germany (in the Hasenheide park in Berlin) and founded a gymnastics school toward this end. Five hundred boys participated in the first gymnastics demonstration.[7] [8] This launched a broader movement that led to the founding of dozens of gymnastics schools and clubs (Turnvereine), which also functioned as nationalist organizations. Five years later Jahn published Deutsche Turnkunst, a treatise containing instructions for physical exercises that influenced the development of modern gymnastics.[8] [9] Gymnastics became a part of the curriculum in Prussian schools.
Jahn believed that physical exercises should be practiced outdoors in order to cultivate a connection to the land. He also promoted sports such as swimming, hiking, fencing, etc. He was known to lead the Turners on long walks through the countryside during which he would regale them with legends about heroic deeds from past eras.[9] [10] Jahn’s Turnbewegung espoused a “back-to-nature” ethos that prefigured the Wandervogel movement, which was to emerge about a century later and in turn influenced the Hitler Youth.
The völkisch populism of the Wandervogel movement can also be traced back to Jahn, who championed the common man and promoted physical activity as something in which all Germans could take part. All Turners wore the same uniforms and addressed each other with the informal “du.”[10] [11] Jahn was considered a liberal revolutionary in his day. His movement symbolized a populist revolt against the old order and the conservative establishment, as he sought to weaken class hierarchies and subject the ruling dynastic houses to the state. He lent support to the reforms of Baron vom Stein, who abolished the institution of serfdom, implemented land reform, and restructured Prussia along republican lines. Indeed Baron vom Stein appealed to him personally for cooperation, as well as to Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Heinrich von Kleist.[11] [12]
A few decades later, the young Wagner was to participate in the May Uprising in Dresden alongside Bakunin similarly in the name of German nationalism.
Idealistic young men joined Jahn’s movement in the thousands. His charismatic personality contributed to the movement’s popularity. He was known for his fiery orations and frankness in speech, eschewing “French” politeness. He had long, uncombed hair and in his university years had a penchant for living in a cave that today bears his name. At a dinner hosted by Staatsminister von Hardenberg (who with Baron vom Stein was the architect of the Prussian Reform Movement), he showed up in athletic clothes and boots but fascinated the other guests, who were eager to meet him.[12] [13]
His ideas caught on among many university students, who organized themselves into nationalist fraternities (Burschenschaften) inspired by Jahn’s organizations. Their slogan was “Honor, Liberty, and Fatherland.”[13] [14] The first Burschenschaft was founded in June 1815, directly following the Congress of Vienna and subsequent creation of the German Confederation.[14] [15] A number of its original members had taken part in the recent War of the Sixth Coalition and were associated with Jahn’s Turnbewegung.
On October 18, 1817, 500 Burschenschaft members convened at the Wartburg in order to hold a festival in honor of German nationalism and to protest the reactionary opposition to German unification.[15] [16] The Wartburg was chosen due to its significance as the site where Martin Luther found refuge after the Diet of Worms and translated the New Testament into German. The date commemorated the fourth anniversary of the Battle of Leipzig (in which Napoleon was decisively defeated) and also approximated the 300th anniversary that Martin Luther is said to have nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. Martin Luther was a hero to German nationalists on account of his rejection of papal power and foreign influence. Jahn also saw Luther as a national symbol whose translation of the Bible into German paved the way for German unification:
Thus Luther became for the entire German people one who shows the way, awakens, renews life, and provides the most noble defence of the spirit, the herald of a future form of literature and the patriarch of a one day great German nation. … Through the German language he gave his people a unifying spirit, which later on inspired all the great pioneers who immortalized exemplary German in their works.[16] [17]
After the festival ceremonies, Jahn’s followers organized a book burning in which copies of anti-German, anti-nationalist books were destroyed. For instance, among them was a book entitled Germanomanie by the Jewish writer Saul Ascher, who singled out Jahn’s gymnastic movement in his criticism of anti-foreign and anti-Jewish prejudice (German Jews were nearly unanimously pro-French).[17] [18] This was the first modern book burning in Germany and inspired the book burnings of the National Socialists.
Also among the books burnt was one by the popular dramatist August von Kotzebue, who was thought to be a Russian spy and an enemy of German nationalism. Kotzebue was later assassinated by Karl Ludwig Sand, a member of a nationalist student fraternity.[18] [19] This provided a pretext for Metternich to enact the Carlsbad Decrees, which were passed in 1819 as an attempt to suppress nationalist sentiment. Nationalist student organizations such as the Turnvereine and associated fraternities were banned. Jahn was sentenced to six years in prison and his gymnastics schools were shut down. Many of his followers were placed under supervision.[19] [20] The rise of restorationist tendencies also put an end to the Prussian Reform Movement.
Jahn lived under police surveillance until his death. The ban on gymnastics was not lifted until 1842.[20] [21] Nonetheless by the 1830s gymnastics had been revived underground and later contributed to the growth of German nationalism leading up to the 1848 Revolution.
Jahn’s political views are outlined in his most notable work, Deutsches Volkstum (published in 1810), in which he describes his vision for Germany and his argument for German unity. The text involves detailed discussion of administrative matters such as issues of jurisprudence, where border lines should be drawn, how taxes should work, where Germany’s capital should be (calculated with mathematical exactness), etc., as well as the role of culture, ideology, and education in the formation of a German state.
The term Volkstum was his own coinage and could be translated as that which encompasses the defining characteristics of a given people: language, ethnicity, folklore, etc. Jahn described it in almost poetic terms: “It is that which is shared in common, the inner essence of the Volk, its rain and life, its regenerative power, its reproductive ability.”[21] [22] His definition of the German Volkstum had an implicitly ethnic dimension, and in Deutsches Volkstum he condemned miscegenation.[22] [23] Jews were excluded from his definition of the German Volk.
Jahn strongly believed that the Volk must become one with the state and vice versa: “A state is nothing without a Volk, a soulless piece of art; a Volk is nothing without a state, a lifeless, airy ghost, like the nomadic Gypsies and Jews. The state and the Volk united thus yield the Reich. …”[23] [24]
Germany under the Holy Roman Empire consisted of over 300 autonomous German-speaking states, the majority of which Napoleon consolidated into 16 larger client states following the Empire’s demise in 1806, forming a loose military alliance known as the Confederation of the Rhine. The Confederation grew to include 36 states. Napoleon’s eventual defeat then paved the way for the Congress of Vienna, whose objective was to ensure stability by bolstering the power of European monarchies and weakening nationalist movements. This led to the creation of the German Confederation in 1815, a similarly weak collection of states that lacked centralized power. German unification did not become a reality until 1871, when Kleinstaaterei came to an end with the founding of the German Empire.
Jahn was one of the most influential early proponents of German national unity, along with Ernst Moritz Arndt and Johann Gottlieb Fichte. Jahn’s Deutsches Volkstum and Fichte’s Addresses to the German Nation were thought to be the most significant German nationalist texts at the time.[24] [25] Jahn’s works are less intellectually complex than Fichte’s, but the two held similar political views. Jahn adopted Fichte’s belief that German unity must be achieved through a program of national education, though he amended this to focus on physical education in particular.
Like Fichte, Jahn ardently defended the German language. At the time French was considered a fashionable language among the nobility and the aspiring middle classes, while German was considered common. Jahn condemned this and sought to restore German as the language of culture and politics in Germany. He believed that language was integral to national identity:
Every people dignifies itself through its mother tongue, in which the documents of its cultural history are recorded. … A people that forgets its own language gives up its right to have a say among humanity and is given a silent role on the world stage.[25] [26]
Jahn was fanatical in his linguistic purism and rejected all foreign loan words. He and his followers devised German terms for physical exercises and equipment as alternatives to the standard French terminology that was used at the time to describe the sporting pastimes of the aristocracy. Thus “rapier” became “Fechtel,” “croisé” (a fencing term) became “Scheere,” “balancer” became “schweben,” etc. They also introduced German words commonly used by hunters, sailors, carpenters and other tradesmen into the terminology of gymnastics.[26] [27]
Both Jahn and Fichte also were influenced by the ideas of the Swiss pedagogue Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, who sought to give the poor access to education and was responsible for raising literacy rates in Switzerland. Pestalozzi’s approach emphasized the importance of giving children a holistic education that strengthened the mind, character, and body rather than simply administering rote learning techniques to them. Thus Jahn proposed teaching artisanal skills in schools (as did Fichte), since he believed that engaging in physical labor would prevent students from becoming cut off from everyday life.[27] [28]
Jahn focused on physical education but also proposed reforms to education and schooling in general. Many of his followers were university students and academics (as were many members of the Lützow Free Corps). He envisioned that schools could serve as breeding-grounds for nationalist sentiment, stating that “public educational institutions are a means through which a volkstümlich public spirit and a patriotic way of thinking can be conveyed.”[28] [29] For this purpose he proposed the creation of anthologies of German songs and myths and legends that would be studied in schools and universities.[29] [30] He also argued that all children should be granted access to state-sponsored elementary school education.[30] [31]
For decades the only English-language study of Jahn was a chapter in Peter Viereck’s Metapolitics: From Wagner and the German Romantics to Hitler. The book provoked debate upon its publication in 1941 because Viereck traced the philosophical and ideological roots of National Socialism to German Romanticism rather than equating it with Prussian militarism or considering it a reaction to purely economic phenomena. As a moderate conservative and son of the German-American writer and Nazi sympathizer George Sylvester Viereck, whom he denounced, Viereck perhaps had an agenda in linking National Socialism to German Romanticism and the liberal nationalism that arose from it. However, the general thrust of his argument is correct.
There are some differences between Jahn and the National Socialists: Jahn’s gymnastics unions were loosely organized and lacked hierarchies of authority, whereas the Hitler Youth was highly regulated and its program of physical education was more regimented and militaristic. Nonetheless both upheld a völkisch “blood and soil” worldview. For both the purpose of physical exercise was twofold: to prepare youths for combat by strengthening the body and mind and to instill in them a sense of national unity and purpose. Furthermore Jahn’s movement and National Socialism were both populist in nature (unlike the conservatism of the Prussian Junkers, as Viereck points out). Jahn endorsed classless communitarianism and likewise National Socialism was a mass movement that transcended class lines.
Physical exericse was a core element of National Socialist ideology. Turnen was a component of the 25-Point Programme of the NSDAP and German boys and girls alike took part in physical conditioning. The synchronized gymnastic demonstrations in the Third Reich would have resembled the demonstrations of Jahn’s gymnasts on the Turnplatz in Berlin. The Turners’ demonstrations were ceremonial spectacles that made use of bonfires and torch-lit processions, not unlike National Socialist rallies.[31] [32] Gymnasts in Jahn’s day also performed in national festivals celebrating German folklore and tradition.
Both Jahn and the National Socialists rejected the idea that physical education should emphasize individual results as ends in themselves; instead they saw physical exercise as a national activity. German Leibesübungen (as in the Nationalsozialistischer Reichsbund für Leibesübungen) were contrasted with Anglo-Saxon Sport, which focused more on personal results and mechanized individual training. The German approach focused less on quantifiable individual achievements; physical exercises instead served to strengthen the Volk as a whole.
The term Leib was used in contrast to Körper, as the latter has a purely biological connotation, whereas the former (a term for which there is no English equivalent) connotes the idea of the body as a living being encompassing the soul and mind as well as the physical body. This reflected both Jahn’s and the National Socialists’ belief that the mind could not be divorced from the body and that a healthy body was a prerequisite for a healthy mind.
Jahn was revived during the Third Reich era by the German philosopher Alfred Bäumler, best known for his writings on Nietzsche, who argued that he was a forerunner of National Socialism. He saw Jahn’s vision of a single state that united the German Volk as having anticipated the National Socialist conception of nationhood: “Jahn was the first to use the word ‘Reich’ for the ideal unity of people and state, thus in the sense that we use it today.”[32] [33]
Bäumler’s worldview was founded on his belief in the importance of the common good over the individual. He believed that the individual must be subordinate to the Volk and that each person was the property of the nation. Therefore he believed that physical education must be state-controlled. Like Jahn, he saw physical education as a political tool:
German physical activities could not be created from the needs and habits of the bourgeois society. They developed as a result of the political movements of the time of the struggles for liberation and they will be renewed by the political movement of our day. … German physical activities are in a comprehensive meaning of the word, political.[33] [34]
Jahn’s gymnastic movement is relevant to the modern struggle in a number of ways. The natural radicalism of the young has the potential to pose a significant threat to the system. Most modern youth subcultures diffuse this by trapping youthful rebelliousness within subcultural ghettos that are alienated from society at large. By contrast Jahn’s movement channeled the natural idealism and rebelliousness of young people toward direct political ends. His movement can serve as a model for modern Rightist youth movements.
His movement is also notable for its combination of free-spirited spontaneity and love of nature with physical strength and discipline. The youth movements of the 1960s embraced the former of the set but lacked the latter. But the two do not pose a contradiction: both represent manifestations of a vitalist worldview that places life and health at the center.
Jahn’s model of physical education represents an alternative to the highly commercialized and specialized world of modern organized sport. His belief that the mind, soul, and body were interconnected and interdepedent stands in stark opposition to the spirit of Cartesian dualism that characterizes the modern West. Furthermore a völkisch conception of physical education would counter the valorization of blacks prevalent in the modern sports world.
Lastly Jahn realized that in order to achieve German unification it was first necessary to raise the morale of the German people (“im Herzen das neue Deutschland aufzubauen”)[34] [35]. Today Europeans as a whole are likewise a conquered people, albeit in a different sense. When whites regain a sense of purpose as a race, political change will follow.
Notes
[1] [36] Encyclopaedia Britannica, 8th ed., s.v. “Friedrich Ludwig Jahn” (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2009).
[2] [37] Karoline Weller, “Der ‘Turnvater’ in Bewegung: Die Rezeption Friedrich Ludwig Jahns zwischen 1933 und 1990,” (Diss., Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 2008), 5.
[3] [38] Christian Werth, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn und seine Ideologie (GRIN Verlag, 2009).
[4] [39] Rolland Ray Lutz, “‘Father’ Jahn and his Teacher-Revolutionaries from the German Student Movement,” The Journal of Modern History, vol. 48, no. 2, (June 1976): 5.
[5] [40] Werth.
[6] [41] Christopher Clark, Iron Kingdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600-1947 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006), 351.
[7] [42] Richard Holt, J. A. Mangan, and Pierre Lanfranchi (eds.), European Heroes: Myth, Identity, Sport (New York: Routledge, 2013), 19.
[8] [43] Werth.
[9] [44] Holt et al., 22.
[10] [45] Ibid., 21.
[11] [46] Ibid., 17.
[12] [47] Ibid., 22.
[13] [48] Jürgen Schwab, “Die Deutsche Burschenschaft – zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit” (Haus der Alten Breslauer Burschenschaft der Raczeks, Bonn, September 3, 2004). https://sachedesvolkes.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/die-deuts... [49]
[14] [50] Ibid.
[15] [51] Ibid.
[16] [52] Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, Deutsches Volkstum, 109. There is no English edition of Deutsches Volkstum. The excerpts quoted in this article represent my rough attempts at rendering his old-fashioned German diction into English.
[17] [53] Shlomo Avineri, “Where They Have Burned Books, They Will End Up Burning People” (Jewish Review of Books, Fall 2017). https://jewishreviewofbooks.com/articles/2788/burned-book... [54]
[18] [55] Ibid.
[19] [56] Werth.
[20] [57] Ibid.
[21] [58] Jahn, 30.
[22] [59] Matthias Rittner, “Theorien und Konzepte nationaler Erziehung von der Deutschen Romantik bis zum Nationalsozialismus,” (Diss., Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, 2012), 152.
[23] [60]Jahn, 36.
[24] [61] Rittner, 78.
[25] [62] Jahn, 213.
[26] [63] Holt et al., 20.
[27] [64] Lutz, 20.
[28] [65] Jahn, 72.
[29] [66] Peter Viereck, Metapolitics: From Wagner and the German Romantics to Hitler (New York: Routledge, 2017), 78.
[30] [67] Ibid., 77.
[31] [68] Clark, 384.
[32] [69] Weller, 41.
[33] [70] Tara Magdalinski, “Beyond Hitler: Alfred Baeumler, Ideology and Physical Education in the Third Reich,” Sporting Traditions, vol. 11, no. 2. (May 1995): 64.
[34] [71] Carl Euler, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn: Sein Leben und Wirken (Stuttgart: Verlag von Carl Krabbe, 1881), 511.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Le baron Ungern-Sternberg a été rendu célèbre par la description qu’en fit Ossendowski dans son fameux « Bêtes, hommes et Dieux », récit de ses voyages à travers la Mongolie. La figure du baron n’est d’ailleurs pas étrangère au succès du livre tant il semble concentrer en sa personne toutes les qualités qui font le charme si mystérieux de l’ouvrage, à commencer par le titre. « Bête, homme et Dieu » : il est tout à la fois. Au demeurant, il plane autour de lui comme un halo de légende qui, comme pour le récit d’Ossendowski, rend difficile de faire la part entre l’histoire et le mythe. Mais, si l’histoire d’Ossendowski, à l’image de celle d’Ungern, est pleine d’épisodes fabuleux très probablement inventés, il faut rappeler qu’elle fut accrédité pour l’essentiel par René Guénon, y compris des éléments parmi les plus merveilleux, lorsqu’il fit paraître, en réponse aux détracteurs d’Ossendowski, Le Roi du Monde, qui replace certains éléments du récit sur un plan initiatique.
Les éditions Allia ont fait paraître il y a quelques mois, dans la paisible tiédeur d’une fin d’été, une nouvelle traduction de La Guerre de Jugurtha écrite par Salluste peu de temps après l’assassinat politique de César. L’excellent travail philologique mené par Nicolas 
De fait, cette guerre se prolongea bien jusqu’en 1922 ; mais en 1920, la dernière armée de Russes blancs, celle de Wrangel, est battue et quitte la Crimée. Il reste certes des bandes armées mais plus d’armées. Les puissances étrangères qui soutiennent les Russes blancs l’ont compris, à commencer par la France et la Grande-Bretagne qui aident les forces de Wrangel à fuir avant d’abandonner le terrain et de remplacer sans tarder la pression militaire par la pression économique. Les techniques de combat sont rudimentaires et le grand nombre de victimes (environ quatre millions cinq cent mille) est beaucoup plus le fait des épidémies de typhus et de choléra, sans compter l’absence presque totale de soins pour les blessés, que des combats eux-mêmes. Il faudrait par ailleurs évoquer le rôle de la Légion tchécoslovaque (entre trente et quarante mille hommes), d’anciens prisonniers de guerre de l’armée austro-hongroise.
Peu après sa nomination en 1904 comme gouverneur de la province de Saratov, le ministre de l’Intérieur Viatcheslav Plehve (photo) est assassiné. L’année suivante le général Viktor Sakharov est victime d’un attentat chez Stolypine, Stolypine qui a déjà échappé à trois tentatives d’assassinat, sans compter les courriers anonymes menaçant jusqu’à ses enfants.
L’impératrice devint peu à peu implacablement hostile à Stolypine, une hostilité sur fond d’hémophilie, celle de son fils, un secret qui ne sortait pas du cercle étroit de la famille impériale et dont Stolypine ne sut jamais rien, ce qui lui rendit incompréhensible et insupportable la présence de Raspoutine au Palais, Raspoutine dont il ignorait les pouvoirs de thaumaturge. L’eût-il su, il aurait sans doute agi autrement. Il se montrait avant tout soucieux de la réputation de la famille impériale, une réputation qui se dégradait avec la présence de Raspoutine considéré comme un débauché, une rumeur dont le bien-fondé n’a pas été établi. Quoiqu’il en soit, Stolypine était sensible à cette rumeur qui se répandait, et il chargea le colonel Guérassimov, responsable de l’Okhrana, de lui faire un rapport sur ce personnage, un rapport peu favorable qu’il présenta au tsar qui en prit connaissance sans lui donner suite et en continuant à taire la maladie de son fils. Stolypine prit alors la décision de faire éloigner Raspoutine de Saint-Pétersbourg, une mission qu’il confia au colonel Guérassimov. L’impératrice protesta mais le tsar refusa de désavouer son ministre ; et elle se mit à haïr Stolypine en qui elle vit celui privait son fils ce qui le maintenait en vie.
Soirée du 14 septembre. Dmitri Bogrov prétexte un attentat en préparation dont il démasquera sur place les suspects, un coup de bluff. Ainsi obtient-il une invitation délivrée par l’Okhrana. Il atteint Stolypine sans peine, d’une balle dans la poitrine. Il mourra quatre jours plus tard, le 18. Dmitri Bogrov venait d’assassiner un homme qui s’était employé à alléger la législation contraignante qui pesait sur les Juifs de l’Empire.
The poor hapless people of Münster were now doomed totally. The bishop kept firing leaflets into the town promising a general amnesty if the people would only revolt and depose King Bockelson and his court and hand them over. To guard against such a threat, Bockelson stepped up his reign of terror still further. In early May, he divided the town into 12 sections, and placed a “duke” over each one with an armed force of 24 men. The dukes were foreigners like himself; as Dutch immigrants they were likely to be loyal to Bockelson. Each duke was strictly forbidden to leave his section, and the dukes, in turn, prohibited any meetings whatsoever of even a few people. No one was allowed to leave town, and any caught plotting to leave, helping anyone else to leave, or criticizing the king, was instantly beheaded, usually by King Bockelson himself. By mid-June such deeds were occurring daily, with the body often quartered and nailed up as a warning to the masses.
Les républicains comme les nationalistes tentent de rallier les différents pays européens à leur cause respective. En France, les élections du 3 mai 1936 ont porté au pouvoir une coalition de partis de gauche. Le Front populaire répond, d’abord dans un premier temps, favorablement à la demande de son homologue espagnol avant de faire machine arrière devant la forte opposition de droite qui oscille du côté des nationalistes conduit par le général Francisco Bahamonde y Franco. Parmi les partisans de ce général entré en sédition, le mouvement monarchiste Action française (AF) de Charles Maurras. Son organe de presse éponyme lance une virulente attaque dans ses colonnes contre les républicains et lance des appels aux dons.
Si d’autres officiers marquent la vie de cette brigade de volontaires monarchistes, tel que le général (cagoulard) Lavigne-Delville (1866-1957), elle n’échappe aux dissensions internes. Chaque groupe nationaliste tentant de s’approprier un leadership à peine reconnu par l’état-major franquiste, quelque peu agacé par l’esprit gaulois de ces volontaires qui s’entendent que trop avec les requetés carlistes. Si ces « légitimistes espagnols » ont rallié le général Franco c’est autant par haine de la république qu’ils entendent restaurer la monarchie au profit du prince Charles –Alphonse de Bourbon. Franco se méfie de ces monarchistes traditionalistes mais ne peut « se payer le luxe » de s’en séparer. Le prétendant carliste est aussi un roi de France (Charles XII) pour la minorité légitimiste française présente au sein de ces volontaires. Face aux camelots du roi, ceux que l’on surnomme les « aplhonsistes » se distinguent par le port du béret vert que l’on retrouve chez les monarchistes de la Rénovation espagnole. Un soutien logique attendu quand on sait que légitimistes français et carlistes partageaient les mêmes convictions et que ces deux groupes s’étaient retrouvés sur les mêmes champs de batailles lors des 3 guerres carlistes qui mèneront un de leur champion (don Carlos VII ou Charles XI) sur un éphémère trône d’Espagne à la fin du XIXème siècle.
Lo de ser o no un «arabista» es una cuestión de perspectiva y de lo que queramos indicar con la palabra. En la actualidad, cualquier licenciado al que un periódico encarga un comentario ya se considera tal y arabista era don Emilio García Gómez que dedicó toda su larga vida a los estudios árabes. Si no se utiliza como una condecoración o signo distintivo especialísimo, sino como lo que debe ser, una mera descripción, sí creo que soy bastante arabista, aunque no le otorgue mayor importancia a esta clase de catalogaciones. Sí rechazo algo que se está haciendo mucho ahora y es afirmar «los arabistas dicen esto o aquello» sobre el tema que sea. Ni hay opiniones unánimes ni es deseable que las haya. Bien es cierto que no faltan quienes pretenden pastorearnos de un modo más bien ridículo enviándonos –sobre todo por emilio– comunicados, condenas y declaraciones retóricas contra Israel, Estados Unidos o José Mª Aznar para que manifestemos nuestra fervorosa adhesión a las tonterías que se les ocurren, tonterías –además– nada inocentes ni desinteresadas.
No voy a exponer aquí el contenido de ese capítulo dedicado a los moriscos en América: es excesivamente largo. Pero sí puedo aclarar que mis conclusiones, después de dos años de trabajo (para un solo capítulo) son difíciles de modificar. La presencia de moriscos es irrelevante, aunque las comunidades árabes de América y los siempre temibles divulgadores se apliquen a repetir lo contrario por tierra, mar y aire. Sin probar nada, claro. Como «se sabe que fue así» no hay que demostrar nada.
«Islam» en árabe significa «sumisión». Pertenece a la misma raíz verbal de «paz», pero significa sumisión. Contar otra cosa es salirse por peteneras. «Yihad» significa, sobre todo y antes que nada, «guerra santa o combate por la fe», como se prefiera. También vale lo de las peteneras.
La même constatation d’une situation de relative déshérence historiographique et surtout de la priorité donnée au choix de coupures par périodes (Renaissance, XVIIe siècle) peut être constatée pour ce qui est de la recherche anglo-saxonne, après les deux volumes de l’History of Europe de H. A. L. Fisher (Londres, 1935). Citons l’exemple de la Short Oxford History of Europe qui, si elle est récente, n’en est pas moins très traditionnelle dans sa conception clivant le passé en grandes séquences classiques si ce n’est anachronisantes, à commencer par « Classical Greece » ou « Roman Europe » ; citons aussi, plus originales, les New Approaches to European History de Cambridge Uni- versity Press et les Fontana History of Europe Series qui reposent sur un projet thématico-chronologique. À quoi s’ajoute The Penguin History of Europe, de J. M. Roberts (1996), fort heureusement renouvelée dans les Penguin History of Europe Series grâce aux contributions de grands spécialistes comme Chris Wickham ou Mark Greengrass. Là est le paradoxe, c’est la Grande-Bretagne du Brexit d’aujourd’hui qui a donné récemment les ouvrages scientifiques les plus parachevés sur une Europe désanachronisée et pensée comme une totalité d’histoire ayant fonctionné plus sur des connexions que sur des spécificités ou sur des collections de particularités. Pour aller dans cette direction, l’histoire de l’Europe se trouve travaillée outre-Manche surtout systématiquement sur le plan de l’histoire économique, avec The Cambridge Economic History of Europe et The Fontana Economic History of Europe. Un peu à part, original, et soupçonné aujourd’hui d’européo-centrisme parce que donnant le primat à la question de l’exceptionnalité du continent désormais passé de mode, il y a le livre important d’Eric Jones, The European Miracle (Cambridge, 1981) à l’inverse du plus superficiel Europe. A History, de Norman Davies (Oxford, 1996). Il faudrait signaler encore Eugen Weber et Une histoire de l’Europe, Paris (2 vol., Paris, 1986-1987), qui insiste sur le concept postromantique d’héritage légué au monde mais noie le lecteur sous une avalanche factuelle donnant une certaine invisibilité à l’objet même Europe.
On peut, entre autres travaux individuels ou collectifs, ajouter à cette sphère d’écriture Krzysztof Pomian, L’Europe et ses nations (Paris, 1990), puis Jacques Le Goff, La Vieille Europe et la nôtre (Paris, 1994) ou L’Europe est-elle née au Moyen Âge ? (Paris, Seuil, 2003). L’ouvrage de Denis de Rougemont, Vingt-huit siècles de l’Europe, la conscience européenne à travers les textes d’Hésiode à nos jours (Paris, 1961), est un produit militant issu de la réflexion de l’un des fondateurs du projet européen de l’après-1945. Notons encore Identités nationales et conscience européenne, sous la direction de Joseph Rovan et Gilbert Krebs (Paris, 1992). Et encore, L’Europe dans son histoire. La vision d’Alphonse Dupront, publié par François Crouzet et François Furet (Paris, 1998). Ou Penser l’Europe, d’Edgar Morin (Paris, 1987), qui met l’accent sur la complexité européenne, et sur le dialogue des pluralités ou l’interculturalité étant le moteur interne de l’histoire de l’Europe, « unitas multiplex ».
On pourrait encore évoquer le centrage sur la démographie, avec l’Histoire des populations de l’Europe éditée par Jean-Pierre Bardet et Jacques Dupaquier (3 vol., Paris, 1997), sur l’histoire de l’écosystème, avec l’Histoire de l’environnement européen de Robert Delort (préface de Jacques Le Goff, Paris, 2001). L’Europe peut encore s’écrire dans la longue durée de son histoire économique tendant vers une « unité organique » malgré ses « diversités », avec L’Histoire de l’économie européenne 1000-2000 de François Crouzet (Paris, 2000) : « On essaiera constamment de considérer l’Europe comme un ensemble, et de prêter attention aux relations entre ses diverses parties : au commerce intra-européen, qui s’est développé de bonne heure, notamment sur la base des dotations différentes en ressources de l’Europe du Nord et de celle du Sud ; à la diffusion des institutions, des organisations et des technologies, aux migrations de main-d’œuvre et de capitaux. On recherchera les forces qui ont rapproché les régions européennes et contribué à créer une économie européenne intégrée – même si ce ne fut que de façon lâche. Cependant, ni les forces centrifuges, ni les rapports avec le monde extérieur ne seront négligés… ». D’autres enquêtes se sont fixées dans la problématique de Les Racines de l’identité européenne, de Francis Dumont (Paris, 1999) ou de La Conscience européenne au XVIe siècle de Françoise Autrand et Nicole Cazauran (éd.) (Paris, 1983) ; ou dans le champ de l’histoire des relations internationales avec L’Ordre européen du XVIe au XXe siècle, dirigé par Georges-Henri Soutou (Paris, 1998) ou La Société des princes (Paris, 1999), de Lucien Bély.
On peut poursuivre avec Ernst Kantorowicz et son parcours qui le mène tout d’abord de Frédéric II, empereur-sauveur, et d’un attachement à un Reich imaginé régénérateur, de la foi dans le génie de la nation allemande, au boycott de ses cours par les étudiants nazis, puis à son exfiltration d’Allemagne. Parvenu aux USA et nommé à Berkeley, il doit affronter le maccarthysme en se faisant le défenseur d’une conception européenne de l’université à laquelle il reste attaché. Et son œuvre, qui est alimentée de multiples sources puisées dans des espaces et des temps différents, Gérald Chaix l’écrit, dépasse les évidences dans un paradoxe apparent : parce que sa « perspective est d’emblée européenne, même si, dans sa lecture impériale, il attribue à une Allemagne imprégnée de romanité un destin privilégié. Elle le demeure lorsque les circonstances, mais aussi ses propres choix, l’en éloignent. Elle se précise lorsque étudiant la conception anglaise des deux corps du roi, il situe explicitement celle-ci dans la construction chronologique et géographique d’une histoire européenne nullement close sur elle-même. » Kantorowicz pense par l’Europe. L’Europe conditionne sa pensée et son inventivité d’historien.
Penser par l’Europe, mais aussi penser pour l’Europe. La seconde partie du livre s’attache à une autre modalité de mise en problème historique de l’Europe. Avec en ouverture bien sûr, Johan Huizinga qui traduit une volonté d’écrire une histoire de l’Europe dans la perspective d’une fin de durée, un « automne » du Moyen Âge d’abord franco-bourguignon caractérisé par une exacerbation d’affects contradictoires, l’exubérance d’une vie contrastée mais commune. Et ensuite, après les idéaux chevaleresques, il y eut les idéaux renaissants qui transcendèrent la diversité des hommes et des nations. Et Jean-Baptiste Delzant d’insister sur un point : l’Europe de Huizinga est d’abord un « esprit » transhistorique qui en appelle à un « besoin d’unité civilisatrice » et donc à une exigence morale partagée et conceptualisée, entre autres, par Érasme. L’histoire apparaît tel un bouclier, une mise en défense contre les idéologies négatives ultranationalistes, contre les ruines qui en adviennent et en sont advenues au cours du XXe siècle, et pour Huyzinga, de ce fait, elle a un avenir et un présent : « donner corps à une unité désirée… ».
„Das preußische Schwert fand kein fruchtbares Verhältnis zum Geiste“, so verkündet der Autor der Deutschen Daseinsverfehlung sein Urteil gleich zu Beginn seiner Abhandlung. Das Bürgertum war die Quelle von Ideen, welche die althergebrachten und gottgewollt geglaubten Ordnungen ins Wanken bringen sollte – nur in den deutschen Territorien nicht. Jedenfalls nicht auf diese Länder und ihre Herren, die Landesfürsten, bezogen. Die Reformation als theologisch-politische Befreiung vom supranationalen Joch Roms übertrug sich nicht auf die deutschen Territorialfürsten.
Su molti dei nomi studiati da Colombo grava ancora una damnatio memoriae non scalfita dal tempo, su altri il pregiudizio è caduto lasciando spazio ad analisi più riflessive e distaccate. Del resto, come avverte l’autore, gli stessi intellettuali che avevano creduto nel sogno nazionalrivoluzionario di Hitler e Mussolini scelsero destini diversi nel dopoguerra: “C’è chi fuggirà da quel sogno diventato incubo, e tenterà di nascondere per tutta la vita le sue simpatie giovanili, come Lorenz. Chi invece, come Evola, non rinuncerà alle sue idee neanche dopo il 1945… Pound, infine, negli anni della vecchiaia si chiuderà in un mutismo enigmatico. Un tempus tacendi che segnerà la fine definitiva del tragico sogno“.
Schleiermacher thought that the Romantics’ criticism of religion applied only to external factors such as dogmas, opinions, and practices, which determine the social and historical form of religions. Religion was about the source of the external factors. He noted that, “as the childhood images of God and immortality vanished before my doubting eyes, piety remained.”
The dialogue begins with the historical criticism of the Enlightenment, claiming that although the Christmas celebration is a powerful and vital present reality, it is hardly based on historical fact. The birth of Christ is only a legend. Schleiermacher rejects the historical empiricism of the Enlightenment since it results only in the discovery of insignificant causes for important events and the outcome of history becomes accidental. This is not good enough, “for history derives from epic and mythology, and these clearly lead to the identity of appearance and idea.” Therefore, he says, “it is precisely the task of history to make the particular immortal. Thus, the particular first gets its position and distinct existence in history by means of a higher treatment.”
Schleiermacher and Fichte based their idea of university on the transcendental idealist philosophy and its new conception of science. A mere technical academy could not represent the totality of knowledge. According to Schleiermacher, “the totality of knowledge should be shown by perceiving the principles as well as the outline of all learning in such a way that one develops the ability to pursue each sphere of knowledge on his own.” All genuine and creative scholarly work must be rooted in the scientific spirit as expressed in philosophy.
Le mot mentionne ensuite une communauté ethno-religieuse surtout présente en Syrie et au Liban. Abdallah Naaman étudie ce groupe peu connu pour lequel il remplace les lettres o et u par un w : Les Alawites. Histoire mouvementée d’une communauté mystérieuse (Éditions Érick Bonnier, coll. « Encre d’Orient », 359 p., 20 €). L’ouvrage se compose de deux parties inégales. L’une revient longuement sur le déclenchement de la guerre civile syrienne. Démocrate et laïque, l’auteur récuse les supposés rebelles et vrais terroristes islamistes sans pour autant soutenir le gouvernement légitime du président Bachar al-Assad. Très critique envers Israël et l’Arabie Saoudite, il n’hésite pas à qualifier Nicolas Sarkozy de « burlesque », Laurent Fabius de « mouche du coche (p. 200) » et à dénoncer le philosophe botulien Bernard-Henri Lévy qu’il considère comme un « affabulateur (p. 201) » et un « malhonnête homme à la chemise blanche immaculée que d’aucuns traitent d’imposteur intellectuel de la nouvelle philosophie (p. 201) ». Cependant, hors de ces quelques vérités très incorrectes, l’autre partie s’attache à découvrir un peuple mystérieux.
O germanista norte-americano Anton H. Richter, em seu trabalho sobre o pensamento de Friedrich-Georg Jünger, ressalta quatro temas essenciais em nosso autor: a antiguidade clássica, a essência cíclica da existência, a técnica e o poder de o irracional. Em seus escritos sobre antiguidade grega, Friedrich-Georg Jünger reflete sobre a dicotomia dionisíaca/titânica. Como dionisismo, abrange o apolíneo e o pânico, numa frente unida de forças organizacionais intactas contra as distorções, a fragmentação e a unidimensionalidade do titanismo e do mecanicismo de nossos tempos. A atenção de Friedrich-Georg Jünger centra-se essencialmente nos elementos ctônicos e orgânicos da antiguidade clássica. Desta perspectiva, os motivos recorrentes de seus poemas são a luz, o fogo e a água, forças elementares às quais ele homenageia profundamente. Friedrich-Georg Jünger zomba da razão calculadora, da sua ineficiência fundamental exaltando, em contraste, o poder do vinho, da exuberância do festivo, do sublime que se aninha na dança e nas forças carnavalescas. A verdadeira compreensão da realidade é alcançada pela intuição das forças, dos poderes da natureza, do ctônico, do biológico, do somático e do sangue, que são armas muito mais efetivas do que a razão, que o verbo plano e unidimensional, desmembrado, purgado, decapitado, despojado: de tudo o que torna o homem moderno um ser de esquemas incompletos. Apolo traz a ordem clara e a serenidade imutável; Dionísio traz as forças lúdicas do vinho e das frutas, entendidos como uma dádiva, um êxtase, uma embriaguez reveladora, mas nunca uma inconsciência; Pan, guardião da natureza, traz a fertilidade. Diante desses doadores generosos e desinteressados, os titãs são usurpadores, acumuladores de riqueza, guerreiros cruéis e antiéticos que enfrentam os deuses da profusão e da abundância que às vezes conseguem matá-los, lacerando seus corpos, devorando-os.
A mobilidade absoluta que inaugura a automação total se volta contra tudo tudo que pode significar duração e estabilidade, especificamente contra a propriedade (Eigentum). Friedrich-Georg Jünger, ao meditar sobre essa afirmação, define a propriedade de uma maneira original e particular. A existência de máquinas depende de uma concepção exclusivamente temporal, a existência da propriedade é devida a uma concepção espacial. A propriedade implica limites, definições, cercas, paredes e paredes, "clausuras" em suma. A eliminação dessas delimitações é uma razão de ser para o coletivismo técnico. A propriedade é sinônimo de um campo de ação limitado, circunscrito, fechado em um espaço específico e preciso. Para progredir de forma vetorial, a automação precisa pular os bloqueios da propriedade, um obstáculo para a instalação de seus onipresentes meios de controle, comunicação e conexão. Uma humanidade privada de todas as formas de propriedade não pode escapar da conexão total. O socialismo, na medida em que nega a propriedade, na medida em que rejeita o mundo das "zonas enclausuradas", facilita precisamente a conexão absoluta, que é sinônimo de manipulação absoluta. Segue-se que o proprietário de máquinas não é proprietário; o capitalismo mecanicista mina a ordem das propriedades, caracterizada por duração e estabilidade, em preferência de um dinamismo omnidisolvente. A independência da pessoa é uma impossibilidade nessa conexão aos fatos e ao modo de pensar próprio do instrumentalismo e do organizacionismo técnicos.
