This work demonstrates that resistance to occupation by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy during the Second World War has to be seen through a transnational, not a national, lens. It explores how people often resisted outside their country of origin because they were migrants, refugees or exiles who were already on the move. It traces their trajectories and encounters with other resisters and explores their experiences, including changes of beliefs, practices and identities. The book is a powerful, subtle and thought-provoking alternative to works on the Second World War that focus on single countries or on grand strategy. It is a ‘bottom up’ story of extraordinary individuals and groups who resisted oppression from Spain to the Soviet Union and the Balkans. It challenges the standard chronology of the war, beginning with the formation of the International Brigades in Spain and following through to the onset of the Cold War and the foundation of the state of Israel. This is a collective project by a team of international historians led by Robert Gildea, author of Fighters in the Shadows: A New History of the French Resistance (Faber & Faber, 2015). These have explored archives across Europe, the USA, Russia and Israel in order to unearth scores of fascinating individual stories which are woven together into themed chapters and a powerful new interpretation. The book is aimed at undergraduates and graduates working on twentieth-century Europe and the Second World War or interested in the possibilities of transnational history.
sinister, conspiratorial subversives. The latter are forever plotting to do down
the former. A case in point is the Leavers’ claim that the only way to keep the
United Kingdom out of a federal Europe is to stand aloof from the rest of the
continent to which we belong and whose civilisation we have shared since JuliusCaesar’s troops landed on the shores of Kent.
Is there an alternative? I think there is, but it is not easy to put into practice,
or even into words. As a Labour Member of Parliament, my dearest friend was
the ebullient, brilliant, courageous
democracy. Where Clodius and the Gracchi brothers failed, JuliusCaesar succeeded: born into a powerful and privileged family, Caesar’s populist appeal was instrumental to undermining the rule of law, culminating in his appointment as ‘dictator for life’.
Archibugi and Cellini suggest conceptualizing populism in terms of differences between ‘incumbents’ (elites) and ‘new entrants’ (excluded masses) in the political arena. I think they are right, but only partially. Yes, it is correct to conceptualize populism in terms of incumbents and new entrants, but it is wrong to
‘Mandate of Heaven’ bestowed instant
legitimacy upon successful rebel leaders. (Perry 2001: 163)
The first imperial dynasty was founded by Qin Shi Huang (We3)
who unified China in 221 BC and who, crucially for today’s nationalists, standardised the written language. Qin Shi Huang was a
monumental figure in many ways bringing major economic and
political reforms to China, starting with the Great Wall project
(Pingfang 2001) and leaving the iconic Terracotta Army.2 Former US
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger lists him, along with JuliusCaesar
and Peter the Great, as
for this agreement with
Rome (‘amicitiam et foedus petentibus’) and of the Senate and people of Rome
granting the treaty of friendship, when deserved (‘foedus et amicitia dabuntur,
cum meruerit’) (Sallust, The War with Jugurtha CIV, 4; also CXI, 1). Naturally, if
someone is in a position to accept requests and grant agreements, there should be
a possibility to reject friendship (‘repulsum ab amicitia’, ibid. CII, 13). Secondly,
the literature abounds in examples of contracted or formed amicitia. JuliusCaesar makes use of amicitia populi Romani in this way in his
legislative functions, which were transferred to the comitia centuriata. This body, which had previously served
the function of an kind of electoral college (it chose the consuls), was
now given legislative power. While these reforms were overturned after
Sulla’s death, the influence of the plebeians arguably continued to
decline until the introduction of dictatorship by Gaius JuliusCaesar and
his successors who concentrated more and more power in their own
hands, e.g. by having themselves elected to various magistracies for life.
The death of the Roman republic finally
From the Twin Plagues of European Locusts to Africa’s Triple Quest for Emancipation
You are from Africa,
I from these States.
We are brothers – you and I. 128
Tanzania’s philosopher-king, Julius Nyerere, famously translated Shakespeare’s JuliusCaesar into Swahili in 1963 to demonstrate that an African language could carry a classic Western tragedy. The post-independence era also produced six Nobel literature laureates: Nigeria’s Wole Soyinka, Egypt’s Naguib Mahfouz, and South Africa’s Nadine Gordimer and J.M. Coetzee, and
Politics , pp. 74–75. The extolled image of ʿUmar followed the line of early, mainly Egyptian, liberals in the first half of the twentieth century; see, for example, Muhammad Husayn Haykal, ʿAbbas Mahmud al-ʿAqqad and Khalid Muhammad Khalid. These writers sought to neutralize the Muslim sense of inferiority in modern times and stimulate greater social activism. Haykal further argued that the greatness of ʿUmar was no less than, and even exceeded, that of other world figures who left their mark on human history, such as JuliusCaesar, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan