Archeology during the third Reich – Wikipedia

Posted on by
before-content-x4

Gustaf Kossinna, one of the archaeologists who had a strong influence on German archaeologists in the interwar period.

Like all scientific disciplines, the archeology knows its own evolution During the third Reich . Important political issue, control of archaeological research constitutes in the eyes of the Nazis a means of validating their own vision of history. Thus, the main political and ideological leaders of the Nazi movement, then of the Third Reich [ N 1 ] were led to define, with the complicity of archaeologists, their own vision of archeology. During the third Reich, the environments of research in archeology were the subject of multiple solicitations on the part of the ideologues and raciologists of the NSDAP and the SS. Based on the work of Gustaf Kossinna and the Manifesto of Hans Reinerth, written in 1932, the reform of archaeological research was launched from the first days of the third Reich and this transformation developed effects until the 1970s in the field of ‘West German university archeology. Built on a favorable soil, the activities of archaeologists during the Nazi period must, according to the ideologues of the NSDAP and the SS, demonstrate the European character of the installation of the Nordic Indogermanic people, and thus justify the merits of the Nazi expansionist policy on the European continent. Led first in the Reich, archaeological research experiences an increasingly important boom over the conquest of the European continent. However, if the end of the conflict sounds the death knell for European ambitions of German archaeological research, it does not seem to question the careers of the German researchers involved during the third Reich. Long ignored, the collusion between professional archaeologists and the institutions of the Nazi regime have been the subject, in recent years, of in -depth historical research. However, this collusion is neither total nor uniform.

after-content-x4

The influence of Pangermanism [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Strongly influenced by Gustaf Kossinna, German archaeologists of the period admit without discussing it the fact that one can, from the traces left by past civilizations, determine the cultural identity of this human group [ first ] . In addition, the main German archaeologists at the end of XIX It is century are impressed by the work of the cartographer ethnic Friedrich Wilhelm Putzger: It offers northern Europe, in its late configuration of the glaciation of Wurm IV as the cradle of the Nordic race [ N 2 ] , [ 2 ] .

In addition, in the years preceding the first world conflict, the Pangermanists are closely interested in proto-history [ 3 ] .

In a national context exacerbated by the defeat of 1918, the theses making Poland a land of Germanic colonization for centuries are experiencing a new boom; As such, the justification of a historic right in a territory by means of archaeological discoveries is used to consolidate the claims of the Reich on the regions ceded by the Reich to Poland in 1919 [ 4 ] .

Important career possibilities during III It is Reich [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Largely constituted by researchers who have reached thirty when setting up the Nazi regime, the middle of Nazi archaeologists is made up of active activists within the NSDAP, most of them who followed the normal curriculum of young Germans in the 1930s [ 5 ] .

after-content-x4

By providing them with significant means, the regime implemented from 1933 benefits from the sympathy of archaeologists, young and old [ 6 ] .

These young researchers perceived the advent of the Third Reich and the territorial boom of the late 1930s and the early 1940s as a means not only to access a university career, but also to conduct ambitious research in the European continent scale [ 5 ] . Hans Reinerth, for example, displays in May 1933, his political choices, used later as a springboard for his career: he thus obtained the referral of Gerhard Bersu [ N 3 ] and of Gero von Merhardt, supporters of a classic archeology [ 7 ] .

L’emblèm of l’ahnenerbe

As early as 1933, Hans Reinerth wished to organize the centralization of research on the Germanic past of Europe implemented in the Reich, in order to allow direct funding by the Reich, at the national level [ 8 ] . However, several organizations, or not from the NSDAP, compete within the Reich to control the archaeological policy of the new regime.

NSDAP institutes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Around the Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg, officially responsible from 1934 of research within the NSDAP, a criticism of classical archeology was set up, in favor of an archeology in accordance with the racial ideals of Nazism, directly inspired by the presuppositions of Kossina, promoter of settlement archeology [ 9 ] . As part of this approach, a branch of the Rosenberg office, the Reichsbund for German history [ T 1 ] , develops quickly, and sets up a series of actions for the general public such as Reich cultural institutions, offering on the banks of Lac de Constance an outdoor museum [ ten ] . Knowing rapid success, this structure is erected in official service from the Nazi Party [ 11 ] .

Competitor of Rosenberg for control of the party ideology, Himmler, supporter of the Renord of the German people, wishes to give their vision of German antiquity a scientific varnish [ twelfth ] . For this, he also develops his own research organization, the Study Society for Special Department of German ancestral heritage [ T 2 ] initially integrated into the rusha [ 13 ] . His rapid boom and his reputation for serious scientific attracts many archaeologists to him, in particular some initially members of the Amt Rosenberg [ 14 ] .

Founded around the NSDAP Northerners, the research of the Institute is aimed at highlighting Pangermanism on the European continent [ 15 ] . First, Himmler relies on doubtful reputation personalities, Wilhelm Teudt (of) or Hermann Wirth, chosen according to their ideological proximity to the Reichsführer; Quickly, however, the institute was quickly entrusted to recognized researchers [ 16 ] : departments are thus entrusted to German renowned German researchers, providing SS with a scientific deposit to racist theories developed by Himmler and his loved ones [ 17 ] : Parmi EUI, Alexander LangSDORFIFF, HANS LIAG (of) or Herbert Jankuhn [ 16 ] . In 1938, the various archaeological research centers dependent on the SS were reorganized and systematically placed under the control of the Ahneenerbe [ 18 ] .

Institutional actors [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Besides these newcomers, the organizations governing the archeology of the Reich remain but their actions are quickly taken over by Nazi officials, and directed according to the political objectives of the Reich.

The German Archaeological Institute, a venerable institution founded in 1829, had to face, from May 1933, shortly after the May 10 autodafé, the Reinerth wrath is thus quickly populated by archaeologists members of the NSDAP; It is nevertheless taken to task by the managers of the AMT Rosenberg, and its leaders decide, to maintain the management of their area of ​​competence, to get closer to Himmler and the SS Institute [ 19 ] . This rapprochement provides archaeologists with the means to carry out excavations: certainly, they must search external, but have means for more valid projects, like Haithabu [ 20 ] .

At the same time, university archaeologists are experiencing splendid years; Indeed, there are seven pulpit of non-classic archeology in 1933, 15 in 1936, and 25 in 1942, creating an air call for students (3 doctoral students in pre- and protohistory in 1934, 19 in 1944), promising The latter to leading university careers. At the same time, archeology departments are created in the universities of annexed territories, in Strasbourg, in Posen in Wartheland, and in Prague in the Protectorate [ 21 ] .

Following the conquest of western Europe, in the spring of 1940, archaeological sections within the military administration were set up, especially in France [ 22 ] . They work under the control of the German Archaeological Institute, as part of a vast research program validated by the Reich Ministry in Education [ 23 ] . In the annexed departments, in Alsace-Moselle, of the competent Gauliter ordinances, Robert Wagner in Alsace and Josef Bürckel in Moselle, define by ordinances, in January and in the archaeological heritage of their respective GAU as “Archives of the history of the German people” Then set up competent services: in Alsace, attached to the GAU of the country of Baden, the archaeological service sees Archaeologists from Baders arrive faithful to the regime; In Moselle, others close to the regimes organize the Local Archeology Service [ 24 ] . In this legal framework, regional archeology experiences an unprecedented boom and tends to professionalize, while a form of preventive archeology is put in place and encouraged [ 25 ] .

Competition between institutes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Quickly, the diversity of actors with archaeological skills creates the conditions for fierce competition between them.

In the 1930s and early 1940s, the two organizations constituted the breeding ground for university archeology; Indeed, the appointments of the holders of archeology chairs are also the subject of a selection based on ideological criteria. However, the Himmler organism quickly supplants the Reichsbund In this area: the Ministry of Research giving priority in recruitment to members of Ahnenerbe. However, this preference is sometimes established, as in Strasbourg during the appointment of Joachim Werner, specialist in migration to the High Middle Ages, supported by the director of the Ahneenerbe in person, then other candidates, enjoying a better scientific reputation and supported by the Reichsbund , were dismissed [ 26 ] .

In countries occupied by the Reich, this competition takes the form of a race to launch a maximum of archaeological projects. This competition is also manifested by an emulation between institutes, each trying to extend the field and the extent of their research themes as much as possible [ 27 ] : in September 1940, Friedrich Holste and Kurt Tackenberg, archaeologists of the Ahneenerbe , supported by Himmler, try to obtain the monopoly, for their teams, of the organization of excavations in the west of the Reich [ 28 ] While Herbert Jankuhn, close to Himmler, plans to implement excavations intended to highlight the astrological alignment of Carnac megaliths, reserved area of ​​the reserved area Reichsbund , depending on the Amt Rosenberg [ 27 ] . However, during the year 1941, the German Archaeological Institute, allied for the occasion at the Ahneenerbe obtains control over archaeological projects in France and Belgium occupied by the Reich, thus evolving the institutes close to the Leader [ 29 ] . In occupied Soviet territories, the Reichsbund Rapatrious in the Reich the equipment of the museums of kyiv and Karkhov, while the SS seizes the funds of the museums of Rostov-sur-le-Don or Vorochilovsk [ 30 ] .

Archaeologists themselves try to take advantage of this competition, approaching, according to their affinities or the career prospects offered, from one or the other institute [ thirty first ] .

Finally, observing this competition, Hitler would have turned ridiculous before Speer the archaeological lubies of the Reichsführer and the Reichsleiter, comparing the traces left by the Germanic peoples in Germania and the Greek and Roman ruins [ 21 ] .

Research by German archaeologists during the Nazi period is carried out in order to legitimize not only the hegemonic ambitions of the Reich on the European continent [ 32 ] , but also the racial projects developed in the 1920s and experiencing the beginning of implementation from 1939 [ 33 ] . From the conquest of France, the proto-historians Friedrich Holste and Wolfgang Kimmig are supporters of large searches of excavation and research extended to the maximum of possibilities in occupied countries and more particularly in France [ 34 ] .

Despite the draft nature of excavation campaigns, the results obtained by research institutes in the field of archeology are, according to Peter Longarich, “Remarkable” , but, did not allow the validation of Nazi historical theories [ 35 ] .

Research and ideology themes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Quickly, there is a political archeology designed to, not only, justify the hegemonic claims of the Reich on the European continent by highlighting a cultural kinship between the peoples who occupied neighboring spaces of the Reich, but also to pursue chimeras of some leaders, notably Himmler.

Thus, under the influence of Kossinna, archaeologist specializing in prehistory, but having led no excavation himself, German archaeologists only seek validating a hypothesis based on ethnic Pangermanists or nationalist postulates [ 36 ] . Thus, the publication of a study by Wilhelm Sieglin, anthropologist at the University of Berlin, provides German archaeologists with the pretext for studying archaeological material in the light of raciology, the science implemented in the line of Hans Günther, The Master to think of Nazi racial science, who embarks on a lost body in the hunt for the Germanic characters of the Greek and Roman statutes [ 37 ] .

Thus, proto-history is one of the two main fields of investigation of Nazi research institutes [ 3 ] .

From the 1930s, Himmler, the most fond, among the Nazi leaders, of theories on the origin of European civilization, ordered the realization of research on its fogs. Thus, during these years, under the influence of Albert Hermann, the only one among German archaeologists to defend the existence of Atlantis [ 38 ] , he launched teams of researchers in search of Atlantis whom he believes to have located in the North Sea, in the Heligoland archipelago, on the basis of deductions allowed by the etymology of the name of this archipelago [ 39 ] , but the defeat calls into question this excavation campaign [ 40 ] . The Reichsführer SS multiplies in the 1930s visits to the excavation fields, and is more particularly interested in runes [ 41 ] .

The occupation of large territories in Western Europe allows Nazi archaeologists to launch large excavation programs intended to attest to the presence of populations “Aryan racial origin” Over a period between bronze age and German invasions, in the north of France [ 23 ] , in Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria or Greece [ 30 ] ; Thus, the work on the furniture of the culture of the fields of urns, on protohistoric enclosures of the Iron Age or on the urban and road networks of the Roman period are supposed to lead to the development of the undoubtedly Germanic character of the populations having succeeded in the territory of Gaul [ 23 ] .

But the immediately border regions are not the only ones to arouse the interest of German archaeologists; More distant geographic spaces also interest these, in order to determine, for example the border between the Reich and France. The past of Burgundy is thus brought to the clouds, the Franche-Comté being placed in the prohibited zone; Research, announced for the post-war period, in the event of a German victory, must allow the highlighting of a Germanic past erased by the successive annexions in the Kingdom of France [ 42 ] .

Excavations in the Reich [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

From the 1930s, large excavation programs were planned, funded and undertaken.

Under the Himmler, excavation programs from Germanic sites are systematically carried out, in the Reich as abroad. Thus, in 1935, Himmler ordered the realization of excavations throughout the Reich: the Viking site of Haitabu, in the north of Germany was carefully searched under the direction of Herbert Jankuhn, a model of the genre, which allows him to develop the concept of Settlement archaeolgia , an archeology of housing [ 20 ] . From the same year, Himmler, admirer of the Duke of Saxe Henri Le Lion, searches the medieval site of Alt Christburg in Prussia-Orientale [ 43 ] .

At the end of the 1930s, the externsteine ​​site, located near Wewelsburg, a SS spiritual center wanted by Himmler, was searched on the personal order of the Reichsführer SS, Himmler being indeed convinced that the externsteine ​​sheltered the saxon sanctuary of Irminsul, destroyed by Charlemagne; Thus, in 1934, 1935, then in April 1937, Himmler ordered the realization of fairly precise excavations on the site, giving as instructions, for the excavation campaign of 1937, to study in detail a medieval low relief painted on one of the walls of the site, in order to determine whether the Christian reasons represented do not mask a pagan representation [ 44 ] .

The halftone results of archaeological research carried out at the express request of the Reichsführer, arouse a strong skepticism on the part of German archaeologists, in particular the excavations intended to uncover the remains of Henri I is [ 18 ] ; The results of these excavations, the updating of the remains of this king of Germania, are nevertheless announced triumphantly in the press of the SS, the Black corps notably [ 45 ] .

The 1940 conquests facilitate the implementation of excavation programs coordinated by the Ahneenerbe Centered on the High Middle Ages and the period of major invasions, in order to highlight the Germanic character of the populations located on a large part of France and in Belgium [ 28 ] .

These excavation programs are then adapted to local realities by the archaeological offices of the German occupation authorities, as in Belgium, for example [ N 4 ] , [ forty six ] .

Excavations in Europe [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Excavation campaigns were sponsored throughout Europe, from the 1930s. However, from 1940 and the conquest of Europe, these campaigns took on a systematic aspect, facilitated by the annexation of the regions concerned, the case needed.

Thus, the Olympia site is thus systematically excavated by German archaeologists, then benefiting from massive support from the German state [ 3 ] .

Thus, from 1939, vast projects, then available locally, as in Bavay [ forty six ] are developed, in order to facilitate the obtaining of permits for German researchers, either within the framework of excavation campaigns, or within the framework of fortuitous discoveries, carried out following work intended for the German army [ 47 ] . However, in many cases, these excavation projects, masked by projects designed to be systematic, are called into question by the poor will of the officials of German military administrations in the occupied territories [ 48 ] .

Made on behalf of AMT Rosenberg, the excavations of the Carnac site, entrusted to Werner Hülle (of) allow, with the help of the Luftwaffe (which carries out aerial shots), the realization of precise topographic surveys on all the Breton megaliths [ 34 ] , or the Roman road network in the Bavay region in June 1941 [ 49 ] .

Proto-history is the subject of all the attention of German researchers; the prohibited area and the annexed area are thus systematically excavated [ 50 ] . Thus, the bronze age specialist Wolfgang Kimmig engages in a systematic census of the furniture of the culture of the fields of ballot boxes exhumed in France [ 23 ] . The Iron Age is entrusted to the German Archaeological Institute which inventory, with the material means made available to it by the Luftwaffe, speakers with ramparts with wooden beams in an area from Lorraine to Normandy, on 257 sites in France and Belgium; From 1942, air shots ceased, researchers contenting themselves with a counting of the available bibliography and occasional visits to the sites [ 51 ] .

The Roman period is entrusted to the University of Strasbourg. This focuses on the installations of the Roman period in Champagne, Alsace, in the north of France and Belgium. Arcs and monumental doors of Roman cities in eastern France are abundantly studied [ 51 ] ; The installation of lists, Germanic auxiliaries of the Roman army, also constitutes a privileged field of research [ 52 ] . The Argentorate site was thus searched for the first time in 1941, as part of preventive archeology measures. In this context, construction works in the city of Strasbourg are bringing to day many Gallo-Roman and medieval sites, meticulously searched [ 53 ] ; Likewise, the quarries dispersed in Alsace are strictly monitored, allowing the discovery of a Neolithic necropolis in Hönheim, or a tomb of Campaniform culture in Kunheim [ 54 ] .

In the north of France, promised to integrate the Reich, and entrusted to the occupation authorities in Belgium based in Brussels, German archaeological projects benefit from the institutional vacuum specific to the French territories entrusted to the German military administration in Belgium [ 49 ] , as well as projects to develop the road network, intended to be connected to that of the Reich [ forty six ] .

Looting across Europe [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Quickly, the territorial boom of the Reich and its conquests pushed the various actors of Nazi archeology to extend the field of their action to all the territories controlled by the Reich, implementing the looting of cultural goods, presented as a ” secured ” [ 11 ] .

This looting concerns all the territories occupied by the Wehrmacht, from the Atlantic to the Caucasus, Special commands Specially mandated by the archaeological institutes operating on a large scale in the museums of conquered cities, while certain renowned German archaeologists, Herbert Jankuhn in particular, put pressure on their colleagues in occupied countries, in order to offer to officials or German archaeological institutions , some of their most spectacular pieces [ 55 ] . These archaeologists systematically visit public and private collections, as well as the main sites in order to list the items to transport in the Reich [ N 5 ] , [ 56 ] .

In France and occupied Belgium, the ” secured ” Archaeological discoveries are adorned with scientific concerns: indeed, designed at the start to protect the fights and army army arrangements during excavation campaigns [ 57 ] . In May 1941, the Art protection , office of the Ahneenerbe Responsible for this field, has the occupation authorities drawn up the list of museums damaged by the 1940 operations in France, but fails to effectively protect the sites uncovered by the building fortification work [ 58 ] .

In other occupied regions, in Crimea in particular, the objects uncovered by the AMT Rosenberg teams are evacuated, “Safety” In the Reich, in the fall of 1943 with regard to Crimea discoveries, when this region was directly threatened by the Soviet advance [ 59 ] .

Quickly, there is talk of “Repatrite” In the Reich the “Germanic discoveries” Present in Belgian and French museums or exhumed during excavation campaigns, after a rigorous inventory of the pieces to be transported in the Reich [ 60 ] .

A propaganda tool [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

Not content with looting European archaeological treasures, German archaeologists put themselves at the service of propaganda aimed at justifying the territorial claims of the Reich on all European territories.

In the annexed departments of Alsace and Moselle, the excavations aims both to persuade local populations of their Germanic character, but also to demonstrate that the Rhine has never constituted a border for the Germanic populations. For Georg Kraft (of) , Responsible for the establishment of an archeology service in Alsace, its teams must participate in the racial reunification of the two banks of the Rhine, in particular by the demonstration of the prevalence of the Alaman population on the left bank of the Rhine, the period Roman has only a parenthesis in the history of this region [ 14 ] . Thus, spectacular excavation programs in Alsace and Moselle set up in 1940-1941 must demonstrate not only the negligence of the French authorities, but also and above all the fact that the occupation of portions of French territory by Germanic populations during the High Middle Ages largely overflows the spatial framework of the contemporary linguistic border [ sixty one ] .

In addition, many popularization actions are carried out in order to underline the Germanic origins of the annexed territories, in particular France. The Strasbourg Fair-exhibition constitutes, in the eyes of the Nazi propagandists, the main moment to raise awareness of the Alsatians of their Germanic past. At the end of the summer of 1941, the archaeological services presented, in this context, elements aimed at attesting to the Germanic character of the organization of the communication channels: according to the thesis presented on this occasion, the Romans would only have inherited from Germanic populations of communication networks in the region [ 62 ] . A year later, in June 1942, another exhibition, named German big [ T 3 ] , offers, one last time during the conflict on this scale, a vision of the Germanic character of Alsace and the Rhine [ 63 ] .

Competition exacerbated between those close to Reichsbund and relatives of the Ahneenerbe extends after the defeat of the Reich; Indeed, it was then common to oppose the political archeology of the relatives of Alfred Rosenberg and the Reichsbund for prehistory and the scientific archeology of universities and Ahneenerbe [ sixty four ] .

Denazification [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

After the end of the war, archaeologists have not been the subject of a process of denazification, in particular because of the low priority, in the eyes of the allies, of this task [ 65 ] . However, after the end of the conflict, German archaeologists stage an opposition between the “Idealists” And the regime profiteers, supposedly close to the Institute of Rosenberg [ 55 ] .

In March 1946, one of the main players in the establishment and development of a Nazi vision of archaeological discipline, the “Arivist” Hans Reinerth [ N 6 ] , [ 55 ] , is denounced and arrested by the French authorities, is brought before a tribunal of denazification, then was sentenced to two years of imprisonment. In 1948, at the end of his sentence, he returned to his post but was considered by his colleagues as a pestified [ 66 ] . Other trials are organized, in order to also denazify archeology, but they remain limited to archaeologists established in the GDR [ sixty seven ] .

Archaeologists in the face of their past [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

The superficial nature of this denazification process has not encouraged these researchers to systematically look at the Nazi past of their corporation, the maintenance of archaeologists in their post having contributed to put in place a sort of general amnesia on this period. The latter presented the research carried out during the Nazi period as a space spared by totalitarianism set up from 1933 [ 33 ] .

In 1949, during the first meeting of the whole community of German prehistorians from the west and southern country, in Ratisbon, not only Hans Reinerth was rejected by his colleagues, but also the rejection of Nazism by archaeologists is reaffirmed [ 68 ] .

In the 1970s, however, some archaeologist teaching in the Federal Republic of Germany continued to affirm that Germany had a right to occupy territories in Poland, under the presence of many Germanic vestiges in this region [ sixty seven ] .

Translations [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

  1. ↑ Federation of the Reich for German Prehistory.
  2. ↑ Society for the study of the spiritual history of the German ancestral heritage.
  3. ↑ German size.

Notes [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

  1. ↑ From 1871 to 1945, the official name of the German State was Deutsches Reich . Out of convenience, it will be designated simply by the term Reich afterwards.
  2. ↑ Putzger’s work is used in the 1930s as propaganda tools in the Reich.
  3. ↑ This dismissal is facilitated by the Jewish origin of Bersu.
  4. ↑ The competent services with the military command in Brussels set up excavation programs intended to attest to the Germanic presence in 700 of. J.-C.
  5. ↑ These items are thus placed at the disposal of German researchers.
  6. ↑ Selon Le Mot the Alain’s Shepp

References [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

  1. ↑ DEMOULLE 2015, p. 173.
  2. ↑ François 2014, p. 185.
  3. ↑ A B and C Schnapp 2003, p. 102.
  4. ↑ Millotte 1978, p. 390.
  5. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 48.
  6. ↑ Schnapp 2003, p. 103.
  7. ↑ DEMOULLE 2015, p. 194.
  8. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 78.
  9. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 80.
  10. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 81.
  11. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 82.
  12. ↑ François 2015, p. 21.
  13. ↑ Longerich 2010, p. 270.
  14. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 97.
  15. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 83.
  16. ↑ a et b DEMOULLE 2015, p. 197.
  17. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 84.
  18. ↑ a et b Longerich 2010, p. 271.
  19. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 88.
  20. ↑ a et b DEMOULLE 2015, p. 198.
  21. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 89.
  22. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 123.
  23. ↑ A B C and D Olivier 2012, p. 134.
  24. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 98.
  25. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 99.
  26. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 90.
  27. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 127.
  28. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 126.
  29. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 128.
  30. ↑ a et b DEMOULLE 2015, p. 199.
  31. ↑ Schnapp 2003, p. 104.
  32. ↑ François 2015, p. 48.
  33. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. forty six.
  34. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 125.
  35. ↑ Longerich 2010, p. 273.
  36. ↑ DEMOULLE 2015, p. 175.
  37. ↑ Chapoutot 2008, p. 80.
  38. ↑ Chapoutot 2008, p. forty six.
  39. ↑ François 2015, p. forty six.
  40. ↑ Chapoutot 2008, p. 47.
  41. ↑ Longerich 2010, p.  IV.
  42. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 183.
  43. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. eighty six.
  44. ↑ Longerich 2010, p. 290.
  45. ↑ Longerich 2010, p. 269.
  46. ↑ A B and C Hanoune 2004, p. 202.
  47. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 124.
  48. ↑ Hanoune 2004, p. 204.
  49. ↑ a et b Hanoune 2004, p. 203.
  50. ↑ Hurel 2010, p. 77.
  51. ↑ a et b Olivier 2012, p. 135.
  52. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 136.
  53. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 101.
  54. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 102.
  55. ↑ A B and C Schnapp 2003, p. 106.
  56. ↑ Hurel 2010, p. 78.
  57. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 130.
  58. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 133.
  59. ↑ Baechler 2012, p. 326.
  60. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 131.
  61. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 104.
  62. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 106.
  63. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 107.
  64. ↑ Schnapp 2003, p. 105.
  65. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 45.
  66. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 221.
  67. ↑ a et b Millotte 1978, p. 394.
  68. ↑ Olivier 2012, p. 222.

Bibliography [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

  • (in) Bettina Arnold , ‘ The past as propaganda : totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany » , Antiquity , vol. sixty four, n O 244, , p. 464-478 (DOI  10.1017/S0003598X00078376 ) .
  • (in) Bettina Arnold , ‘ « Arierdämmerung » : Race and Archaeology in Nazi Germany » , World Archaeology , vol. 38, n O first « Race, Racism and Archaeology » , , p. 8-31 (JSTOR  40023592 ) .
  • Chistian Baechler , War and extermination to the east: Hitler and the conquest of vital space. 1933-1945 , Paris, Tallandier, , 524 p. (ISBN  978-2-84734-906-1 , BNF  42610550 ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • Johann Chapoutot , Nazism and Antiquity , Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, coll. “Quadrige”, , 643 p. (ISBN  978-2-13-060899-8 , BNF  42751038 ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • Jean Paul Demolite , But where did the Indo-European people go? : The original myth of the West , Paris, Seuil, coll. “The bibrairie du XXI It is century “, , 742 p. (ISBN  978-2-02-029691-5 , BNF  44216981 ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • (in) James R. Dow , ‘ In Search of All Things Nordic, in South Tyrol (Italy) : The SS Ancestral Inheritance’s Cultural Commission 1940-1943 » , The Journal of American Folklore , University of Illinois Press, vol. 127, n O 506, , p. 365-399 ( read online ) .
  • Stéphane Francis , Beyond the northern winds: the French extreme right, the North Pole and the Indo-Europeans , Lyon, Lyon University Presses, , 319 p. (ISBN  978-2-7297-0874-0 , BNF  43789244 ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • Stéphane Francis , The mysteries of Nazism: to the sources of a contemporary fantasy , Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, , 195 p. (ISBN  978-2-13-062457-8 , BNF  44302923 , Online presentation ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article.
  • Roger Hanoune « Archeology in Bavay during the Second World War: the German archives », North Review , vol. 5, n O 358, , p. 201-204 (DOI  10.3917/rdn.358.0201 ) . Ouvrage utilisé pour la rédaction de l'article
  • Arnaud Hurel « Prehistory, prehistorians and public authorities in France: the late emergence of a specific heritage conscience », History, Economy & Society , vol. 2, n O 78, , p. 65-79 (DOI  10.3917/hes.102.0065 ) . Ouvrage utilisé pour la rédaction de l'article
  • Christian Groin , Believe and destroy: intellectuals in the SS war machine , Paris, Fayard, , 703 p. (ISBN  978-2-8185-0168-9 , BNF  42567898 ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • Jean Pierre Legendre ( you. ), Laurent Olivier ( you. ) and Bernadette Schnitzler ( you. ), National-socialist archeology in occupied countries west of the Reich: acts of the Blut und Boden International Round Table , Gollion, Infolio, , 496 p. (ISBN  978-2-88474-804-9 , BNF  41052921 ) .
  • Peter Longerich ( trad. German by Raymond Clarinard), Himmler: the daily hatching of an ordinary monster , Paris, Héloïse d’Ormesson, , 917 p. (ISBN  978-2-35087-137-0 , BNF  42315520 , Online presentation ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article.
  • Jacques-Pierre Millotte « Archeology, racism and nationalism: with regard to the interpretation of archaeological vestiges », Ancient history dialogues , vol. 4, , p. 377-402 (DOI  10.3406/dha.1978.2957 , read online ) . Ouvrage utilisé pour la rédaction de l'article
  • Laurent Olivier , Our ancestors The Germans: French and German archaeologists at the service of Nazism , Paris, Tallandier, , 320 p. (ISBN  978-2-84734-960-3 , BNF  42738797 , Online presentation ) . Document utilisé pour la rédaction de l’article
  • Reena Perschke « The megaliths of Morbihan Littoral under German occupation (1940-1944) », Morbihan Bulletin and Memoirs , Polymatic Society of Morbihan, t. Exxxix; , p. 63–89 .
  • Alain Snap « Self -destruction of German archeology under the Nazi regime », Twentieth century: History Review , vol. 2, n O 78, , p. 101-109 (DOI  10.3917/ving.078.0101 ) . Ouvrage utilisé pour la rédaction de l'article

Related articles [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

external links [ modifier | Modifier and code ]

after-content-x4