Soviet treatment of German POWs

Jonathan Beard's picture

I have read on H-War that prestigious journals in history will not publish articles on military history. I think this is because military historians are methodologically backward (Foucault, anyone?) and ideologically suspect. So I was pleased today to get the TOC of the Journal of Modern History--Volume 88, Number 2 | June 2016--and notice this: "Take (No) Prisoners! The Red Army and German POWs, 1941–1943" by Mark Edele. Alas, the University of Chicago does not offer free fulltexts, but an abstract is here:

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/686155

My impression--I have not read this article, but will once I get to a university library--is that there has been a great deal written about German treatment of Red Army captives.  Jews, commissars and women were often shot at once. Millions were allowed to starve to death before the Nazis realized their utility as slave labor. But I think there has been much less written about what Edele discusses--on the spot killings of Germans. 

I also note that this issue of JMH also has a major review article on military history:

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/686203

 

Jonathan Beard

jb752@caa.columbia.edu

Interesting comment as I would have said the same about the history journals that will not publish military history articles. There is an ideological opposition to military history articles that are not inclusive of or exclusively written with race and gender as major themes. Also, I find other articles and books on history to have a somewhat poorer accountability in the realm of historiography. I will admit to a certain bias here being a military historian. A lot of what passes for "history" these days strikes me as "backward journalism" and selective "reporting" from a decidedly ideological caste.

Cliff Bullock
Norwich Univ. MMH 2010