Von der Wissenschaftsverwaltung zur Wissenschaftspolitik. Friedrich Althoff (19. 2. 1839-20. 10. 1908)

Friedrich Althoff (1839–1908) was one of Germany's three great administrators of science and humanities between Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767–1835) and Carl Heinrich Becker (1886–1933). He was perhaps the most prominent representative of Prussian bureaucratic liberalism and the first eminent politician of culture or — in the words of W. H. Dawson — “the most enlightened but also the most dictatorial Minister of Education Prussia has ever had”. Althoff dominated the state administration of higher education in Prussia between 1882 and 1907, serving as Ministerial director over higher educational affairs under at least four ministers. The so-called “Althoff system”, that he built pushed the development of German science and scholarship to a dominant position in the world, rationalized the universities and further subordinated them to state or ministerial policy through a rigid control of professional appointments, started the mobilization of private capital in support of German scientific hegemony (founding of Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft), and put forward the Prussian tradition — ultimately an unsustainable one — of strong personal administration, by which Althoff systematically manipulated or overrode the very bureaucratic apparatus he had helped to create. On the other hand his policy defended academic freedom, patronized Catholic and Jewish scholars against reactionary university faculties as well as the so-called Kathedersozialisten against the influences of big business and laissez-faire capitalism. As a creator of german cultural foreign policy he paved the way for more international understanding and peace policy, an alternative to the war-aims policy of Imperial Germany on the eve of the Great War.     

Countryside-versus-City in European Thought: German and British Anti-Urbanism between the Wars

The idea that the city is a place of sin and immorality is as old as urban civilization. But what does anti-urban thought mean in societies which are highly urbanized under the conditions of modern industrialism? Furthermore, is anti-urbanism in the interwar period a German völkisch phenomenon––one further stride on Germany's special path? And what does rural revival and the “back-to-the-land” cult mean in Great Britain, the first industrial nation? This article seeks to provide an answer to these questions by exploring anti-urbanist writing between the End of the First World War and 1933 in Germany, and 1939 in Britain. By examining two key themes it aims to show that the clear-cut distinction between German anti-urban radicalisation and the West's coming to terms with urbanisation cannot be maintained. Firstly, attention will be drawn to the ambiguity of perceptions of the city in the writings of “Conservative Revolutionary” authors in the Weimar Republic. In a second step, the British “back-to-the-land” movement, whose advocates developed comprehensive anti-urban third-way theories in the interwar period and were themselves part of a broader popular anti-industrial movement and a rural cult throughout the 1930s, will be examined.     

考尔雅典女神，雅典卫城682——尊希腊古典晚期雕塑的重建工作

在15世纪的意大利,人们发现了大量的古代雕塑遗存,基本上都是大理石雕塑残片。出于对大理石的迷恋、对雕刻工艺的欣赏、对人体雕塑生动表现的着迷,当时的贵族热衷于收集这些残片并试图拼对与重建这些残破的雕塑。但是几乎没有发现任何颜色的残存,他们甚至不会去探究彩绘他们更赞赏大理石洁白无瑕的表面。19世纪早期,建筑学家们考察了西西里一些古代庙宇的彩绘残存,随后有关一些著名希腊神庙（如帕台农神庙）彩绘的重构工作在全欧洲引发了热烈的讨论。但是对于这些雕塑涂施彩绘的强烈质疑声一直持续到十九世纪八十年代,直到雅典卫城发掘工作的开展才证实了古代大理石雕塑彩绘的事实。出土时,很多破碎的雕塑残片上都残存有鲜亮的彩绘,但通常在出土几个小时后就由于干燥而剥落了,只有依稀的彩绘痕迹残存,以及工作人员的描述和水彩模画。今天,翻开现代有关古代雕塑的书籍,你会发现大量彩色照片,但总是显现白色大理石表面。有关雕塑的工艺、功能和历史发展的意义的讨论已经很多了,但是很难得到一个完整的古代雕塑彩绘的例子。不仅仅是雅典卫城的雕塑曾经涂饰彩绘,经过重建工作这一时期有大量彩绘的例子。本次工作即是采用古代颜料与模具,尽可能完整的重建了一尊古代雕塑。