Hans Mommsen

Hans Mommsen (November 5, 1930-) is a left-wing German historian and twin brother of Wolfgang Mommsen. He was born in Marburg, the son of the historian Wilhelm Mommsen. He studied German, history and philosophy at the University of Heidelberg, the University of Tübingen and the University of Marburg. Mommsen served as professor at Tübingen (1960-1961), Heidelberg (1963-1968) and at the University of Bochum (1968-). He married Margaretha Reindel in 1966. He has been a member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany since 1960.

Related Topics:
November 5 - 1930 - Left-wing - Wolfgang Mommsen - Marburg - University of Heidelberg - University of Tübingen - University of Marburg - University of Bochum - 1966 - Social Democratic Party of Germany - 1960

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Mommsen is an leading expert on Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. Mommsen is a functionalist in regards to the origins of the Holocaust question, seeing the Final Solution as a result of the "cumulative radicalization" of the German state as opposed to being the result of an long-term plan of the part of Hitler. In Mommsen's view, Hitler was an anti-semite, but one who lacked a real idea of what he wanted to do with the Jews. Furthermore, for Mommsen, Hitler played little or no real role in the development of the Holocaust. The Holocaust was caused primarly by the German bureaucracy who as the result of bureaucratic turf wars, started to compete with one another by engaging in every more radical anti-semitic steps between 1933 and 1941.

Related Topics:
Nazi Germany - The Holocaust - Functionalist - Final Solution - Anti-semite

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Mommsen is best known for arguing that Hitler was a "weak dictator" who rather then acting, reacted to various social pressures. Mommsen is opposed to the notion of seeing against Nazi Germany as an totalitarian state. In Mommsen's view, the Nazis were far too disorganized to ever be an totalitarian dictatorship. The reason why the Nazis stayed in power was that the average German either supported the Nazis or were indifferent to the regime. In Mommsen's view, the fact that the majority of the German people supported or were indifferent to Nazism is what enabled the Nazis to stay in power.

Related Topics:
Hitler - Totalitarian

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In this regard, it is important to note that Mommsen was the first historian in the early 1960s to accept the conclusions of the journalist Fritz Tobias who argued in a 1961 book The Reichstag fire that the Reichstag fire of 1933 was not set by the Nazis, and that Marinus van der Lubbe had acted alone. Until the publication of Tobias's book, it generally accepted both in West Germany and abroad that the Reichstag Fire was set by the Nazis as part of a plot to abolish democracy. The Nazi Machtergreifung (Seizure of Power) had generally represented as part of well-planned, totalitarian assault on democracy with the German people as hapless bystanders. The significance of the conclusion that the Nazis did not set the Reichstag on fire is that it suggests that the Machtergreifung was more of a series of ad hoc responses to events rather the workings of some master plan of the part of Adolf Hitler, and thus the German people were not just bystanders to their fate.

Related Topics:
Reichstag fire - 1933 - Marinus van der Lubbe - West Germany - Democracy - Adolf Hitler

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Together with his friend Martin Broszat, Mommsen developed the structuralist interpretation of the Third Reich, that saw the Nazi state as chaotic collection of rival bureaucracies locked into a endless power struggles with one another. In Mommsen's view, it was these power struggles that provided the dynamism that drove the German state into a spiral of taking ever more radical measures, leading to what Mommsen has often called the "Realization of the Unthinkable." More recently, Mommsen has revised his "weak dictator" thesis to some extent, conceding that Hitler possessed more power than he, Mommsen, had originally credited the dictator as holding. But Mommsen still argues that Hitler played little role in the daily administration of Nazi Germany.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Mommsen has faced criticism in the following areas:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Intentionist historians such as Andreas Hillgruber, Eberhard Jäckel, Klaus Hildebrand and Karl Dietrich Bracher have criticized Mommsen for underestimating the importance of Hitler and Nazi ideology.
• Along the same lines, these same historians have criticized Mommsen for focusing too much on initiatives coming from below in the ranks of the German bureaucracy and not enough on initiatives coming from above in the leadership in Berlin.
• Mommsen's friend Yehuda Bauer has criticized Mommsen for stressing too much the similarities in values between the traditional German state bureaucracy and the Nazi Party's bureaucracy, while paying insufficient attention to the differences.

In the Historikerstreit debate, Mommsen argued that the Holocaust was an uniquely evil event which should not compared to the other horrors of the 20th century. Mommsen has written well regarded books and essays on the fall of the Weimar Republic, blaming the downfall of the Republic on German conservatives. Like his brother Wolfgang, Mommsen is a champion of the Sonderweg (Special Path) interpretation of German history that sees the ways German society, culture and politics developed in the 19th century as having made the emergence of Nazi Germany in the 20th century virtually inevitable.

Related Topics:
Historikerstreit - Weimar Republic

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Another area of interest for Mommsen is dissent, opposition, and resistance in the Third Reich. Mommsen has drawn unfavorable comparisons between what he sees as conservative opposition and Social Democratic and Communist resistence to the Nazis. Mommsen is also an expert on social history and often writes about working-class life in the Weimar and Nazi eras.

Related Topics:
Third Reich - Conservative - Social Democratic - Communist - Nazis - Social history - Working-class

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A major figure in his home country, Mommsen often takes stands on the great issues of the day. A cranky individual, Mommsen believes that the responsibility for ensuring the mistakes of the past are never repeated rests upon an engaged and historically-conscious citzenry.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 
Hans Mommsen: Work ►