68 research outputs found
Panel 8: Perpetrators and “Bystanders” of the Holocaust
No full textPanel 8: Perpetrators and “Bystanders” of the Holocaust
Rachel Century, University of London, United Kingdom: Secretaries, Secrets and Genocide: Evidence from the Post-war Investigations of the Female Secretaries of the RSHA” Download paper (login required)
Istvan Pal Adam, Bristol University, United Kingdom: Bystanders to Genocide? The Role of Building Managers in the Hungarian Holocaust Download paper (login required)
Antonio Munoz, St. John\u27s University: “Murderers in Field Grey: Crimes of the Wehrmacht in the Region of the Army Group South, 1941-1942” Download paper (login required)
David Deutsch, Ben-Gurion University, Israel: Goebbels Close Enemies: Intimacy as an Analytic Tool for the Understanding of Genocidal Rhetoric in Goebbels Diaries Download paper (login required)
Chair:Stefan Ionescu and Hannah Schmidt Hollaender, Clark University
Comment: Thomas Kühne, Clark Universit
Gypsies – A Description by Andrzej Wojtas
No full textAdam Bartosz provided an introduction to Andrzej Wojtas’ document. The author of the notes on the Gypsy people was one of the “social experts” for ethnography students doing their field research in Spisz (the Carpathians) in the 1970’s. They asked him to write down his memories and reflections on Carpathian Gypsies (Bergitka Roma) who settled down in his village. The text is both a document of Gypsy life in the first half of the 20th century, and a record of opinions and judgments about them, expressed by the local village communities. Apart from being informative it shows great literary value.E Adam Bartośesqëro tèksto si jekh padmad, savi liʒal dr-o dokumènto e Andrzej Wojtasesqëro. Akada avtòro, savo lekhlǎs pal-o Rroma, sas e etnografiaqëre studentěnqe Krakowosθe jekh „sociàlo ekspèrti”, kana keren sas rodlǎripen p-o terèni dr-e Karpatenqëro Spiśo dr-o berśa ’70 e nakhle seliberśesqëre. Pala so sar mangle jone lesθar, lekhlǎs pesqëre serimàta aj godidimàta pal-o beślǎrde karpatika (ja „bergìtka”) Rroma, save beśen sas dre lesqëro gav. Akada tèksto si vipalvaxte jekh dokumènto pala akala Rromenqëro ʒivipen dr-o angluno dopaś e XX-tone śeliberśesqëro thaj kidipen opìnie aj dikhimàta pala lenθe, sar athòska dikhen sas len e gavesqëre gaʒe. Khrigal śaj te uśardǒl lesqëri ahor sar literàro kreàcia.Natalia Gancar
Building Managers Caught in the Middle: The Social History of Budapest Concierges Until 1943
No full text
Calling the Building Manager to Account: The Colourful Palette of Retribution in Early Post-War Budapest from People’s Court to Justificatory Committee
No full text
Following Sextus: Demonstrative Argument in Gorgias’ Peri tou mē ontos
No full textThe two extant versions of Gorgias’ Peri tou mē ontos (PTMO) have been preserved by an anonymous author (MXG) and by Sextus Empiricus (S.E.). Both versions have been differently interpreted by scholars who examine either the doctrine or the rhetorical-communicational dimension (the first option being dominant). When comparing the PTMO with the rest of Gorgias’ works, the present paper aims to demonstrate that S.E. offers a more precise account of Gorgias’ modus argumentandi. Thus, S.E. shows the following, typical features of Gorgias’ demonstrative reasoning: 1) application of demonstrandum and quod erat demonstrandum, 2) continuous employment of reductio ad absurdum and 3) a refined formulation of the principle of non-contradiction (similar to the one in Pal. 25). The MXG, on the other hand, is accurate in the discussion of particular arguments (e.g. the third kephalaion), but presents an interpreter who is more interested in questioning Gorgias rather than doing justice to his thought. Hence, this article concludes that it was S.E., who had the text or at least a relatively accurate summary of the PTMO
- …
