In dieser Rubrik finden Sie Informationen über aktuelle Call for Papers/Contributions oder Websites, Projekte/Initiativen die auf der Suche nach Vernetzung sind:

Ältere Nachrichten können Sie im Archiv nachlesen.

CfP: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War
1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War is an English-language online reference work on World War I dedicated to publishing high quality peer-reviewed content. Each article in the encyclopedia is a self-contained publication and its author receives full recognition. All articles receive a distinct URL address as well as a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and are fully citable as scholarly publications. 1914-1918-online is an open access publication, which means that all articles are freely available online, ensuring maximum worldwide dissemination of content.
The editors invite academics to contribute articles on a select number of topics not yet covered by our invitation-only editorial process. The Call for Papers will be automatically updated. Authors who are interested in submitting a paper on any of the subjects listed should submit a short CV with a publication list, as well as an abstract (max.250 words) or a full-length paper. To submit an abstract/full-length paper, please click on a topic of your choice in the list of open articles. The submission will then be sent to the responsible section editor(s) for consideration, after which you will be contacted with a decision.
The Call for Papers can be found by navigating from our home page (https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net), or here: https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/call-for-papers/

CFP: A Holiday from War? "Resting" behind the Lines during the First World War
22.06.2018-23.06.2018, Paris, Université Paris III - Sorbonne Nouvelle - Sarah Montin (EA PRISMES) and Clémentine Tholas-Disset (EA CREW)
Deadline: 20.11.2017
Situated a few kilometers behind the front lines, the rear area is the space where soldiers rotated after several days burrowed at the front or in reserve lines, surfacing from the trenches to join rest stations, training installations, ammunition and food supply depots, hospitals, brothels, command headquarters or soldiers’ shelters. In that space in-between which is neither the site of combat nor that of civilian life, the soldiers were less exposed to danger and followed a barracks routine enlivened by relaxing activities which aimed to restore morale. If some soldiers found there a form of rest far from the fury of the guns, others suffered from the encroaching discipline, the imposition of training or the promiscuity with soldiers that were no longer brothers-in-arms in this buffer zone where they spent 3/5ths of their time. Both a place of abandonment and a place of control, the rear area merges at times with the civilian world as it occupies farms and villages and hosts non-combatants such as doctors, nurses or volunteers. With battles being waged close by, the “back of the front” (Paul Cazin) is a meeting place for soldiers of different armies and allied countries, as well as for officers and privates, soldiers and civilians, men and women, foreign troops and locals living in occupied zones. The rear area is not only a spatial concept but also a temporal one: it is a moment of reprieve, of passing forgetfulness and illusive freedom; a moment of “liberated time” (Thierry Hardier and Jean-François Jagielski) indicating a period of relative rest between combat and leave, a short-lived respite before returning to the front. If the combatant is entitled to repose and time to himself, military regulations demand that he never cease to be a soldier. As such we have to consider these moments of relaxation within the strict frame of military life at the front and the role played by civilian organizations such as the YMCA or the Salvation Army, who managed the shelters for soldiers on the Western Front.
 What do the soldiers do when they are not on the battlefield? The broadening of the definition of war experience in recent historiography has transformed our spatial and temporal understanding of the conflict, shifting the scope away from the front lines and the activities of combat. Beyond the battlefield and its traditional martial associations emerges another representation of the warrior and the soldier, along with another experience of the war. Though seemingly incompatible with war experience, certain recreational activities specific to civilian life make their way to the rear area with the approval of military command. Moments of relaxation and leisure are encouraged in order to maintain or restore the soldier’s physical and emotional well-being, thus sustaining the war effort. They also ensure that the soldier is not entirely cut off from “normal” life and bring comfort to those who are not granted leave. Liberated time is not free time, just as periods without war are not periods of peace. These “holidays from war” are not wholly synonymous with rest as the men are almost constantly occupied (review, training exercises, instruction) in order to fight idleness and ensure the soldiers stay fit for duty. The rear is thus also a place of heightened collective practices such as sports, hunting and fishing, walking, bathing, discussions, creation of trench journals, film projections, concert parties, theatre productions, religious services as well as individual activities such as reading, writing and artistic creation.
 Between communion with the group and meditative isolation, experiences vary from one soldier to another, depending on social origins, level of education and rank, all of which take on a new meaning at the rear where the egalitarian spirit fostered during combat is often put to the test. Sociability differs in periods of fighting and periods of recovery and is not always considered positively by the soldiers. However, despite the tensions induced by life at the rear, these “holidays from war” and spells of idleness are often represented as idyllic “pastoral moments” (Paul Fussell) in the visual and written productions of the combatants. The enchanted interlude sandwiched between two bouts of war becomes thus a literary and artistic trope, evoking, by contrast, a fleeting yet exhilarating return to life, innocence and harmony, a rediscovery of the pleasures of the body following its alienation and humiliation during combat.
 In order to further our understanding of the historical, political and aesthetic concerns of life at the rear, long considered a parenthesis in the experience of war, this interdisciplinary conference will address, but will not be limited to, the following themes:
- The ideological, medical and administrative construction of the notion of “rest” in the First World War (as it applied to combatants but also auxiliary corps and personnel);
- Paramilitary, recreational and artistic activities at the rear; the organization of activities in particular leisure and entertainment, the role of the army and independent contractors (civilian organizations, etc.);
- Sociability between soldiers (hierarchy, tensions, camaraderie); the rear area as meeting place with the other (between soldiers/auxiliary personnel, combatants, locals, men/women, foreign troops, etc.), site of passage, exploration, initiation or “return to the norm” (“rest huts” built to offer a “home away from home”), testimonies from inhabitants of the occupied zones;
- Articulations and dissonances between community life and time to oneself, collective experience and individual experience;
- The historic and artistic conceptualization of the rear area, specific artistic and literary modes at the rear by contrast with writings at the front;
- Staging life at the rear: scenes of country-life, idyllic representations of non-combat as farniente or hellscapes, bathing parties or penitentiary universes, the figure of the soldier as dilettante, flâneur and solitary rambler, in the productions (memoirs, accounts, correspondence, novels, poetry, visual arts, etc.) of combatants and non-combatants;
- Cultural, political and media (re)construction of the figure of the “soldier at rest” (war photography, postcards, songs, etc.); representations of the male and female body at rest, constructions of a new model of masculinity (sexuality and sport), and their place in war production.
 In order to foster dialogue between the Anglophone, Francophone and Germanophone areas of study, the conference will mainly focus on the Western Front. However, proposals dealing with other fronts will be examined. Presentations will preferably be in English.
 Please send a 250-word proposal and a short bio before November 20, 2017, to montin.sarah@gmail.com and clementine.tholas@univ-paris3.fr
Notification of decision: December 15, 2017
CfP: The Break-Up of the K.U.K. “Contract” in Austria-Hungary during WWI: Clues and Signs
Maison de la Recherche, Université Paris IV Paris-Sorbonne, 22-23 March 2018
Organizers: UMR-SIRICE (CNRS, Paris I-IV, Sorbonne), CREE-Inalco, LABEX EHNE.
Deadline: 30.11.2017
Project: This conference is the third and last part of a cycle entitled “Writing at War, writing the War. Austria-Hungary’s Soldiers and Civilians in WWI”. It aims to contribute to a reflexion “from below”, mostly through non- governmental and private sources. It favours a local or regional approach and intends to take into account the diverse situations the local populations faced, as soldiers or as civilians at the rear. The first conference (October 2016, Inalco, Paris) was devoted to the eve of war, the second (June 2017, Inalco and Paris-IV Sorbonne) to k.u.k. solidarities and their evolutions.
Call for papers: It is now generally accepted that the weakening of Austria-Hungary’s State legitimacy cannot be reduced to the “national question” or shortages. Our hypothesis is that the cautious scrutiny of the relationship between the main political centres – Vienna and Budapest – and the different components of the mobilized society in the overall organization of the “war society”, more specifically during the second part of the war, is of great relevance to map the cracks that appeared bit by bit in the imperial and royal consensus and in consent to the explicit and implicit rules of what John Horne called the specific “wartime social morality”. This “contract” involves the responsibility of the citizens and its total devotion to the Austrian fatherland as well as the responsibility of the State itself. This morality seemed to weaken from summer 1916 onwards. We will identify some of the clues and signs of this weakening and analyse some of its diverse aspects.
We will focus mostly on three points:
o    How was the Austrian administrative war governance blamed for the growing difficul2es and malfunctioning of the everyday life at the rear? How, and to what extent, were its strategies as to the economic structure in general or to specific issues and categories of population contested (children, refugees and POWs, for instance)?
o    What impact and consequences did the tightening of the prescriptive frame (either moral or legal) have? What are the main strategies that arose to bypass or sidestep it, and how should they be analysed?
o    How, and using which clues is it possible to observe a slackening of the link between the front line and the rear, the limits of donation campaigns, and the gradual “nationalization” of support commi]ees? Local and regional consequences of these reconfigurations will be the priority.
Practical information:
o    Accommodation (2 nights) and meals are at the organizers’ expense.
o    The organizers do not cover travel expenses.
o    Proposals are to be sent before 30 November 2018. They should be within the 300-500 words range (in English or French) and sent to Étienne Boisserie – e2enne.boisserie@inalco.fr and Catherine Horel – horel.c@orange.fr.
o    Presentations of accepted papers (in English or French) should not last more than 20 minutes.Étienne Boisserie, CREE, Inalco
Catherine Horel, CNRS, UMR SIRICE, Université Paris-Sorbonne

CfP: The Local and the Regional Dimensions of 1918/19. A Comparison
Organisation: Boris Barth, Ota Konrád (Charles University, Prague), Oswald Ueberegger (Free University of Bozen-Bolzano), Rudolf Kučera (Masaryk Institute and Archives of the CAS, Prague)
Place: Prague, Villa Lanna
Date: 4.-6. 10. 2018
Deadline: 31. 1. 2018
After the end of the Great War 1918 and the Paris peace conferences that followed, a new but unstable international political system was established in Europe. Especially in Central and Eastern Europe, historians have often analyzed this system in the context of the new nation-states that emerged. The transition from an imperial order to one based on nations has been at the center of attention as well. For the past few years, however, a new tendency can be found in historical research, which more strongly than before highlights the local and/or regional dimensions of these processes. This trend may be a counter-reaction to the rise of global studies and global history. This trend in European comparative history studies will be addressed at an upcoming conference now being prepared in Prague.
After the War, in many regions and among rather different social groups, the state lost its legitimacy as an institution. In other countries, governmental authority had ceased to exist altogether. All governments were confronted with the problem of reestablishing their authority or, if they had acquired new territories, of creating new loyalties. For the victorious powers, this process was obviously easier than for those that were defeated. Recent research has clearly shown that after 1918–19, regional and local identities, which were not always tied to a certain nation-state, continued to exist or were revitalized. It is still an open question how the new order was accepted in the European regions, taking into account national, governmental, political, social, religious, and economic factors. Local actors displayed a high degree of self-organization, especially in territories where the authority of the state was weak or had collapsed at the end of the War. Units of paramilitary volunteers were formed, which tried to guarantee “law and order’” (whatever that may mean), but also distribution of food and the general organization of daily life. A local and regional perspective will allow a new view of the processes through which the new nation-states were created "from below”. An additional question might deal with the problem of whether conflicts were really rooted in national divergences, or whether the term “national” only served to cover up other, deeper problems and conflicts.
Some historians have argued that after 1918, a new era of “total” nation states (cf. Lutz Raffael) began. However, the establishment of exclusive national identities sometimes faced resistance among the majority of people who spoke the same language and shared the same religion. Against this background, it makes sense to study not only the larger “national” frame, but to analyze single regions, territories and towns as well in order to find out how the radical changes of 1918–19 were accepted and internalized. Such studies need not be limited to the successor states of the great empires. It also can be useful to add perspective on other powers, whether victorious, defeated, or neutral, in order to draw useful comparisons.
Recent research has clearly shown that local identities survived the Great War. After 1918–19 these identities collided directly with official attempts to create homogenous nation states. In Upper Silesia in 1921, a great number of “ethnic” Poles voted for union with Germany—but hardly anything is known about their motives. In the Southern parts of East Prussia, the so-called “Staropruski,” a Polish-speaking Protestant minority, also voted for Germany because they did not want to live in a Catholic country. In the Polish-speaking parts of Poland, different mentalities and identities could be found as well. In the national census of 1931, in some regions of Eastern Poland, a large part of the population refused to choose any national or ethnic category at all and identified with the term “hiesige” (“from here”). Many other examples of similar attitudes, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, the Iberian peninsula and Italy are well known.
This new context also allows for new interpretations of the challenges and the effects of the Bolshevik revolution. Historians have hardly discussed this topic since 1989–90. Interest in early communism has been widely replaced by themes which are more oriented toward the nation-state. However, immediately after the War, many local and regional actors developed and followed up on a positive attitude toward the socialist vision, aiming at a radical change in their society. Others were horrified by the rise of communism. It is both an open and a challenging question whether and how much political, social, and economic decisions—at the local and regional level—were influenced or determined by those attitudes. That question will be discussed in each case.
We are especially interested in papers that touch upon some of the following topics:
- 1918 in daily life and daily experience, with a focus on the local and regional contexts. Attention could be paid to the experience of the end of the war and the specific interpretations of victory and defeat associated with various visions of the coming political and social order. What characterized the local and regional dimensions of the revolutionary and/or counter-revolutionary movements?
- Continuity and change in the loyalties, identities and treatment of old and new minorities.
- Research on regional violence: what motives and factors were responsible for the emergence of violence and in what situations was it possible to limit or prevent the outbreak of violent conflict? Who were the main actors in those contexts?
- Research on the specific situations of border regions and border societies, with attention to the problems of minorities, refugees and expellees.
- Questions of legitimacy and local interpretations of radical change in the early inter-war years. Historical arguments and historical discourses were often used to create common political identities. Did tensions exist between local or regional interpretations and the official national narratives?
Prof. Joern Leonhard (University of Freiburg) will give the key-note speech.
At the moment we are able to cover accommodation and parts of the travel costs, we are still looking for funds for travel costs.
Please send your abstracts of about 500 to 700 words by 31 January 2018 to: boris.barth@uni-konstanz.de
CfP: The Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and the Challenge of a New World Order
Deutsches Historisches Institut Paris (DHIP), LABEX EHNE, Commission d'histoire des relations internationales, 05.06.2019-08.06.2019, Paris
Deadline: 01.06.2018
The Peace Conference held in Paris in the aftermath of the Great War remains among the most important yet also most controversial events in modern history. Although it is often considered to have made a second global war all but inevitable, it has also been praised for providing the basis for an enduring peace that was squandered recklessly by poor international leadership during the 1930s.
A major international conference will take place in Paris in June 2019 to commemorate the centenary of the 1919 Conference from a global perspective. The purpose of this event is to re-examine the history of the Peace Conference through a thematic focus on the different approaches to order in world politics in the aftermath of the First World War. A remarkably wide range of actors in Paris – from political leaders, soldiers and diplomats to colonial nationalist envoys and trade unionists, economists, women's associations and ordinary citizens – produced a wide array of proposals for a future international and, indeed, global order. These proposals were often based on vastly different understandings of world politics. They went beyond the articulation of specific national security interests to make claims about the construction and maintenance of peace and the need for new norms and new institutions to achieve this aim. To what extent the treaties and their subsequent implementation represented a coherent order remains a question of debate.
By ‘order’, we mean in the first instance, the articulation and development of systematic ideas, institutions and practices aimed at promoting a durable peace that would deliver security, economic recovery and social justice. This
distinguishes thinking about ‘order’ from discussions of ‘national interests’ - though there was of course overlap between these two modes of thinking about future international relations. Second, we are interested in ‘order’ as an analytical concept in its own right. This encourages historians to identify, as Paul Schroeder has urged, the shared rules, assumptions, and understandings about a particular set of political relations and to show how specific decisions reflect the norms of the order.
Emphasising the preoccupation of peace-makers with the problem of world order broadens the scope of the familiar questions and debates that have dominated the literature on the Peace Conference. It also opens the way for posing new questions and for thinking about more familiar questions in new ways. We therefore invite papers addressing the following questions:
  1) What were the different conceptions of political, economic and social order advocated at the Paris Conference? What was the relationship between different ideas about the international order, such as a system based on national self-determination and one based on the rule of law? Were there broad overarching conceptions of an international order, such as liberal or socialist internationalism, that could accommodate more narrowly focused ideas such as free trade or labour rights? How did people conceive of the relationships between self-interest and order? What role did power politics play in conceptions of international order? Were the absentees from Paris – notably the Germans and the Bolsheviks – able to shape the debate about the emerging international order?
  2) What were the origins of these different ideas about order? Why was there such an interest in the systematic development of particular orders both during and after the war? Who produced ideas about order, and why?
What was in particular the role of NGOs and ordinary citizens? Can an approach based on different ‘generations’ of international actors illuminate this problem in new ways? Was the idea of ‘order’ a reaction to international politics before and during the war? Or did it represent a continuity with certain strands of thinking about international politics that pre-dated the outbreak of war in 1914? What was the relationship between the articulation of war aims and ideas about post-war order?
  3) To what extent did contending visions of an international order shape the peace treaties? Did the organization and proceedings of the Conference reflect tensions between the national, the regional and the global? What
was the role of regional orders in shaping broader conceptions of a new world order? To what extent did discourses concerning new regional orders reflect fundamental changes in the conceptualization of world politics? To what extent were they a repackaging of the more familiar themes of empire or spheres of influence?
  4) How were the peace treaties legitimated to domestic and international audiences? Were subsequent negotiations on the implementation and revision of the peace treaties shaped by the profound debates about international politics that took place before and during the Peace Conference? Were conceptions of international order systematically subordinated to concerns about national security? Conversely, to what extent can it be argued that the Paris Peace Conference produced or contributed to a disorder in European politics that led ultimately to the Second World War?
  5) What was the impact of the Paris Peace Conference on views of world order based on gender, class and race? How did women, workers and colonial subjects respond to the peace conference and what was its impact on the emergence of alternative voices in international affairs? Whose voices were heard at Paris in 1919 and whose remained silent or were silenced?
  6) What political and diplomatic practices were implied in these various conceptions of international order? To what extent did these practices shape the course of international relations after 1919? Did the intellectual debate and political experience of the Paris Peace Conference play a role in shaping a future generation of leaders (such as Jean Monnet and John Foster Dulles)?
  The Conference organizers aim to ensure the conference provides a global perspective on the Paris Peace Conference. We are therefore particularly keen to receive proposals from scholars working on topics pertaining to the non-western world. The organisers anticipate securing limited financial resources to support delegates' participation in the conference.
The conference languages will be English and French. Regardless of language, all proposals will receive serious consideration

 Kontakt: Axel Dröber, Deutsches Historisches Institut,8 rue du Parc Royal, F-75003 Paris