Perpetrator Testimony and Historiography: The Case of Dieter Wisliceny and the Decision-Making Process on the “Final Solution”

D. Michman
{"title":"Perpetrator Testimony and Historiography: The Case of Dieter Wisliceny and the Decision-Making Process on the “Final Solution”","authors":"D. Michman","doi":"10.26613/jca/1.2.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historians, especially those of contemporary history, have debated the value of testimonies for the reconstruction of a historical picture. In Holocaust research, “testimonies” are usually understood as “survivor testimonies”; because of the traumatic character of the persecutions, many historians, especially in the field of so-called “perpetrator research,” have been reluctant to use them. The late Eberhard Jackel wrote in 1984 that many died before they could be interrogated, but “even those who were ready to talk were often not questioned precisely enough, for their interrogators were not interested in the kinds of details that historians would want to clarify.” This article examines Dieter Wisliceny’s written testimony from November 1946 and shows that, even though not asked to do so, he provided deep historical insights regarding the psychological atmosphere in which the Final Solution of the Jewish Question emerged, which was soaked with an apocalyptic antisemitic imagery, and regarding the timeline of the development of this program.","PeriodicalId":283546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26613/jca/1.2.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Historians, especially those of contemporary history, have debated the value of testimonies for the reconstruction of a historical picture. In Holocaust research, “testimonies” are usually understood as “survivor testimonies”; because of the traumatic character of the persecutions, many historians, especially in the field of so-called “perpetrator research,” have been reluctant to use them. The late Eberhard Jackel wrote in 1984 that many died before they could be interrogated, but “even those who were ready to talk were often not questioned precisely enough, for their interrogators were not interested in the kinds of details that historians would want to clarify.” This article examines Dieter Wisliceny’s written testimony from November 1946 and shows that, even though not asked to do so, he provided deep historical insights regarding the psychological atmosphere in which the Final Solution of the Jewish Question emerged, which was soaked with an apocalyptic antisemitic imagery, and regarding the timeline of the development of this program.
施暴者证言与史学:迪特尔·威斯利森案与“最终解决”的决策过程
历史学家,尤其是研究当代历史的历史学家,一直在争论证词对重建历史图景的价值。在大屠杀研究中,“证词”通常被理解为“幸存者证词”;由于这些迫害的创伤性,许多历史学家,特别是在所谓的“肇事者研究”领域,一直不愿使用它们。已故的埃伯哈德·杰克尔(Eberhard Jackel)在1984年写道,许多人在接受审讯之前就去世了,但“即使是那些准备好说话的人,也往往没有得到足够精确的讯问,因为审讯者对历史学家想要澄清的那些细节不感兴趣。”本文考察了Dieter Wisliceny从1946年11月开始的书面证词,并表明,即使没有被要求这样做,他也提供了深刻的历史见解,关于犹太人问题的最终解决方案出现的心理氛围,浸透了世界末日的反犹主义意象,以及关于该计划发展的时间表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信