A History of the Anglo-German Relationship, 1807-1952

1950年7月，英国政府在议会接受质询，询问是否应该将北海小岛黑尔戈兰岛归还给德国。答案是响亮的‘不’。正如负责的部长所说，这个岛屿代表了两国之间出了问题的一切：如果有什么传统值得打破，如果有什么情绪值得改变，那么德国人对黑尔戈兰岛的情绪就是这样的。我的项目将黑尔戈兰岛作为重新评估英德关系的棱镜。在过去的两个世纪里，该岛一直是接触和冲突的象征。当它是英国殖民地时，德国移民S和作家经常光顾这里。正是从这里，民族自由主义者宣传了统一德国的思想。当英国在1890年割让黑尔戈兰岛时，双方本打算将其作为友谊的象征，但后来却成为竞争的象征。战后，它被英国军队占领。在纳粹统治下，该岛被重新军事化，并再次被设计为国家象征。对于希特勒和戈培尔来说，它代表了德国过去的软弱和对英国大胆的需要；对希姆莱来说，它是雅利安人起源的神秘岛屿。1945年的猛烈轰炸把它变成了一片废墟。1952年，德国总理阿登纳宣布：位于英国和德国之间海域的黑尔戈兰岛将是我们之间和平与友谊的象征。从北海的这个遗址重新审视英德关系，我们有必要走出两个平行国家史学的传统模式。在过去两个世纪的大部分时间里，英国和德国的历史在黑尔戈兰岛交汇，这表明两个国家的边界比公认的国家历史所允许的更模糊和更具渗透性。我的研究详细研究了该岛在两国之间的位置，以及它在多种形式的英德接触和冲突中所扮演的角色。但这不会仅仅是两国纠缠的微观历史。以黑尔戈兰岛为例，该项目将重新评估英国和德国历史学中的关键问题。它将重点关注三个相关问题。首先是研究英德关系的历史学家之间出现的分歧。一方面，有一些学者从战略和经济的角度解释了英国和德国之间的竞争，创造了一种必然性：德国的崛起迟早会导致与英国的冲突。另一方面，也有一些人探索了两国的文化交流和转移。在他们的分析中，英国和德国之间的战争似乎是一场意外，而不是长期趋势的合乎逻辑的结果。我的项目将超越这些相互冲突的思想流派，将政治和文化方法结合在一起，提供一个既不是决定论也不是相对论的描述。其次，我的研究将提出一种处理英国与欧洲关系的新方法。太久以来，研究英国对外关系的历史学家要么把欧洲大陆作为影响的主要来源，要么强调英国历史有别于欧洲，在帝国的背景下得到最好的理解。我的研究将证明，这两个视角需要在一个背景下考虑。尽管许多人都在夸耀“绝妙的孤立”，但在整个19世纪，英国都与欧洲大陆紧密相连--在某种程度上，英国没有被归类为“帝国”或“欧洲人”。第三，该项目将为了解德国民族主义的历史提供新的视角。它将特别分析追求国家统一与海军扩张思想之间的联系，这种联系可以在整个19世纪和20世纪找到。这将导致关于德国关于国家地位和海洋的思考的连续性和破碎性的新发现。

In July 1950, the British government was questioned in Parliament as to whether it should give Heligoland, a small island in the North Sea, back to Germany. The answer was a resounding 'no'. As the minister responsible put it, the island represented everything that had gone wrong between the two countries: 'If any tradition was worth breaking, and if any sentiment was worth changing, then the German sentiment about Heligoland was such a one'.My project takes Heligoland as a prism through which to re-assess the Anglo-German relationship. Throughout the past two centuries the island has been a symbol of contact and conflict. While a British colony, it was frequented by German émigrés and writers. It was from here that national liberals propagated the idea of a unified Germany. When the UK ceded Heligoland in 1890, it was intended by both sides as a token of friendship, but became a symbol of rivalry. After the war, it was occupied by British forces. Under the Nazis the island was re-militarised and again styled as a national symbol. For Hitler and Goebbels it represented past German weakness and the need to be bold with Britain; for Himmler it was the mystic island from which the Aryan race had originated. Heavy bombardment in 1945 reduced it to ruins. When it was finally given to Western Germany in 1952, Chancellor Adenauer proclaimed: 'Set in the seas between Britain and Germany, Heligoland will be a token of peace and friendship between us.'Re-visiting the Anglo-German relationship from this site in the North Sea makes it necessary for us to step outside the traditional pattern of two parallel national historiographies. The British and German pasts have intersected in Heligoland for much of the past two centuries, suggesting that the two nations' boundaries were more blurred and permeable than the received national histories allow for. My research studies in detail the island's position between the two nations and its role in the many forms of Anglo-German contact and conflict.However, this will not be a mere microhistory of the two nations' entanglement. Using Heligoland as a case study, the project will re-assess key questions in British and German historiography. It will focus on three related issues. The first is the schism that has opened amongst historians of the Anglo-German relationship. On the one hand there are those scholars who have explained the rivalry between Britain and Germany in strategic and economic terms, creating a sense of inevitability: the rise of Germany was bound to lead, sooner or later, to conflict with Britain. On the other hand there are those who have explored the two countries' cultural exchange and transfer. In their analysis war between Britain and Germany appears as an accident rather than the logical outcome of long-term trends. My project will go beyond these conflicting schools of thought by bringing together political and cultural approaches, offering an account that is neither deterministic nor relativistic. Second, my research will suggest a fresh approach to the relationship between Britain and Europe. For too long, historians studying Britain's external relations have either focussed on the Continent as the main source of influence or emphasized British history as distinct from Europe and best understood in an imperial context. My research will demonstrate that the two perspetives need to be thought of in one context. Despite much rhetoric about 'splendid isolation', Britain was bound up with the Continent throughout the 19th century - in ways that escape categorisation as either 'imperial' or 'European'. Third, the project will offer new insight into the history of German nationalism. It will analyse, in particular, the link between the quest for national unity and ideas of naval expansion, which can be found throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. This will lead to new findings about the continuities and ruptures in German thinking about nationhood and the sea.