The historical profession is nowhere famous for its tolerance, but there are not many countries where historians can expect to pay for their opinions with penal servitude or the firing squad.
Norman DaviesRead
Nowadays, it is no longer possible to maintain that the Nazi-Soviet pact of 23 August 1939 was a fiction invented by bourgeois-imperialist enemies. Everyone has seen the film clips of Herr Ribbentrop landing in Moscow, and of Stalin smiling broadly as Ribbentrop and Molotov signed up side by side.
Interpretation
The quote emphasizes the historical reality of the Nazi-Soviet pact and dispels myths surrounding it.
Norman Davies highlights the undeniable evidence of the Nazi-Soviet pact, which was established in 1939 and reveals a critical moment in history where two ideologically opposed regimes came together. By referencing the film clips of key figures involved in the signing, he underscores the importance of recognizing this pact as a real event rather than a fictitious narrative created by those who oppose both regimes.
In practice
In a history class discussing World War II, this quote can highlight the significance of the Nazi-Soviet pact.
The historical profession is nowhere famous for its tolerance, but there are not many countries where historians can expect to pay for their opinions with penal servitude or the firing squad.
Transience is one of the fundamental characteristics both of the human condition and of the political order.
Why are some things remembered and others forgotten? That is the theme I want to pursue about the Second World War.
Our mental maps are distorted by who are the 'winners' of history and who are the powers of today.
One might have thought that 70 years was time enough to work out what really happened in 1939. It isn't the case. Misunderstandings and misinformation abound.
I wanted to produce a book that would demonstrate not only the rich diversity of people who answered to Anders's command but also the extraordinary variety of their experiences and emotions: from death to despair, fear and longings and eventually to hope.
I was 10 years old when my father was assassinated in 1968. Then, I had some sense of the sacrifices and hardships required of the families of a leader who was constantly in the news.
Can any one be so indifferent or idle as not to care to know by what means, and under what kind of polity, almost the whole inhabited world was conquered and_x000D_ brought under the dominion of the single city of Rome, and that too within a period of not quite fifty-three years?
The study of history reveals that human progress has not been continuous and regular, but intermittent and spasmodic, often depending upon apparently accidental causes. It is difficult to get a cross-section view of society at any given stage.
The Great War was nobody's fault - or everybody's.
You can't write about history without writing about politics at some point. History is about movements of people. 'What is criminality and what is government' is a theme that runs through every history.
When I first read Barbara Tuchman's 'The Guns of August' in the autumn of 1963, it was as though history went from black and white to Technicolor.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.