Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
- James Paul
- Member
- Posts: 92
- Joined: 09 Sep 2016, 22:05
- Location: Scotland
Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Which works on the Third Reich/Nazism should I read?
Noakes did four volumes on Nazism and Evans did a trilogy of the Third Reich. Has anyone read these works and can tell me which they found to be better?
For what it's worth, Evans does seem to be used a source a lot more on Wikipedia.
Noakes did four volumes on Nazism and Evans did a trilogy of the Third Reich. Has anyone read these works and can tell me which they found to be better?
For what it's worth, Evans does seem to be used a source a lot more on Wikipedia.
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Well, the Noakes/Pridham volumes are printed documents with commentaries. Evans trilogy is narrative.
Boby
Boby
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Precisely: as Boby points out, they are works of a totally different nature; you might as well say, “I wish to understand Christianity: should I read the New Testament or Saint Augustine?”
Professor Noakes’ books are essential (especially if you do not read German fluently), because they contain a mass of original documents that help you understand Nazism “from the inside”; so to speak; these are organized thematically and chronologically, generally speaking, and the quality of the translations is extremely high. The commentaries help to provide the required background and context, as well as explaining the relevance or importance of these documents.
Professor Evans’ trilogy, on the other hand, offers an incredibly well-researched and detailed history of National Socialism and Germany from 1919 to 1945, and while it focuses on this period’s leading figures, it does not neglect its “little guys”.
Ideally, one would read Professor Evans’ books first, but with Professor Noakes books close at hand for occasional consultation; one would then go back to Professor Noakes’ books for a complete read-through.
(Sorry about the delay in answering: just came upon this thread accidentally today. I assume you have actually decided how you would proceed by now. Still…)
Professor Noakes’ books are essential (especially if you do not read German fluently), because they contain a mass of original documents that help you understand Nazism “from the inside”; so to speak; these are organized thematically and chronologically, generally speaking, and the quality of the translations is extremely high. The commentaries help to provide the required background and context, as well as explaining the relevance or importance of these documents.
Professor Evans’ trilogy, on the other hand, offers an incredibly well-researched and detailed history of National Socialism and Germany from 1919 to 1945, and while it focuses on this period’s leading figures, it does not neglect its “little guys”.
Ideally, one would read Professor Evans’ books first, but with Professor Noakes books close at hand for occasional consultation; one would then go back to Professor Noakes’ books for a complete read-through.
(Sorry about the delay in answering: just came upon this thread accidentally today. I assume you have actually decided how you would proceed by now. Still…)
-
- Member
- Posts: 3639
- Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
- Location: Malaysia
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
I am not sure if you had all his three books from his trilogy work on the history of the Third Reich and gave an honest review of his work or just regurgitating what other people said about his work but all I can say the last book of his trilogy, The Third Reich at War is a total shamblesProfessor Evans’ trilogy, on the other hand, offers an incredibly well-researched and detailed history of National Socialism and Germany from 1919 to 1945, and while it focuses on this period’s leading figures, it does not neglect its “little guys”.
https://www.feldgrau.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30470
PZM
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Your comparison to A. Beevor and D. Irving says it all: when you wrote that review 9 years ago, you utterly lacked the ability to tell a good book from a bad. And taking D.Irving as a reliable author is, well..., "surprising".Panzermahn wrote: ↑10 Oct 2018, 10:57The Third Reich at War is a total shambles
https://www.feldgrau.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30470
PZM
Besides, that your main critics are about minor translation details also exposes your limited capacity for analysis and synthesis.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3639
- Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 04:51
- Location: Malaysia
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
From your response I take it that you don't have the book. So please read it before making comments such as exposed your limited capacity of analysis and synthesis.Mori wrote: ↑10 Oct 2018, 11:21Your comparison to A. Beevor and D. Irving says it all: when you wrote that review 9 years ago, you utterly lacked the ability to tell a good book from a bad. And taking D.Irving as a reliable author is, well..., "surprising".Panzermahn wrote: ↑10 Oct 2018, 10:57The Third Reich at War is a total shambles
https://www.feldgrau.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30470
PZM
Besides, that your main critics are about minor translation details also exposes your limited capacity for analysis and synthesis.
And also apparently you didn't read the at the link which I had mentioned that Professor Evans book might be good for the layman who wanted to study the history of Germany during WW2 but for those who studied it more extensively, Evans book is nothing but mediocre in its content.
To say its magisterial work when Evans book did not even discuss the current historiography of Germany's role in WW2 and its numerous controversies (e.g. preventive war thesis, brutalization of eastern front etc) its nothing but self-glorification by myopic Evans' fan boys who thinks that everything written by Irving is nonsense.
I may not subscribed to Irving's views but at least he definitely wrote better than Evans from a literary standpoint. Irving is very controversial with his negationist standpoint on Holocaust but even his detractors agreed that Irving is an expert on German military archives
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
You take it wrong: I have the book, I read the 3 volumes, and I think I even made a review. Is your intuition deficient too...?Panzermahn wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 12:10From your response I take it that you don't have the book. So please read it before making comments such as exposed your limited capacity of analysis and synthesis.
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
That's a lot of preconceived opinions in one sentence. Evans did not do a book on historiography (although he could have added a chapter to cover that, why not), so why bother.Panzermahn wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 12:10,
To say its magisterial work when Evans book did not even discuss the current historiography of Germany's role in WW2 and its numerous controversies (e.g. preventive war thesis, brutalization of eastern front etc) its nothing but self-glorification by myopic Evans' fan boys who thinks that everything written by Irving is nonsense.
I wonder what the "preventive war" thesis is... Something like "Germany was cornered into attacking the USSR preventively"?
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Well, I am yet to see anyone claiming that Irving was an expert on German military archives... Irving put all his primary material on a website: have you checked how many _German_ documents there were? You should, because it's all English.Panzermahn wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 12:10I may not subscribed to Irving's views but at least he definitely wrote better than Evans from a literary standpoint. Irving is very controversial with his negationist standpoint on Holocaust but even his detractors agreed that Irving is an expert on German military archives
If you know a little bit about archives, you will also realize how patchy and incomplete his sources were.
And I'm not even discussing the gigantic biais in using them, in his "Rommel" or in his "War between the Generals". Really: there is just *nothing* to save from Irving's work even before the negationist thesis.
-
- Member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 11 Oct 2018, 21:39
- Location: Pohjois-Savo
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Pfff... I studied that when I wrote a piece on Rommel 5 years ago. I realized there was nothing to be done with Irving's. It was way more relevant to either use Reuth's book or to go back to source documents.Trilisser, M. A. wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 21:43Care to provide say 3 examples of those biases in the Rommel book?
But at least you must have noted that Irving does not give his sources. (Let's admit some readers could be impressed by the numerous entries mentioned in the biblography - yet there's a difference between copying the NARA catalog and actually reading and using the documents. The difference is in the ability to read German and the ability to read and process not 20-30 pages but 20,000-30,0000).
I don't feel like getting back to this research right now, esp. as a reply to a first-time poster - no offense meant, just that why join the forum just to intervene in defense of a negationist?
But as a start, check again Irving's perspective on Rommel's role in the 20 July 1944 plot, how he states Rommel only realized the criminal nature of the regime like in June 1944 or how he strongly suggests Rommel had become an explicit oponent to Hitler by the time his car got strafed by an Allied aircraft.
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
This thread was made in 2016 but on a related note, Citino finished his series. I read Evans a decade ago and I liked his material. However, it's more generalist and entry level. It's good for beginners to get a grounding on a wide range of topics. Citino's coverage is much more military focused and is a good spiritual successor. It's also up to date with the latest sources:
https://www.amazon.com/Books-Robert-M-C ... .%20Citino
https://www.amazon.com/Books-Robert-M-C ... .%20Citino
-
- Member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: 11 Oct 2018, 21:39
- Location: Pohjois-Savo
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
Mori: I cannot check Irving's Rommel for the time being as I don't own the book, i.e. I need to check a library copy and the local library doesn't have one.
As for Reuth's book, I have read a review of it by a Finnish military historian and he notes that Reuth is extremely biased in his tone (=Reuth does not approach WW2 neutrally and dispassionately in the spirit of audiatur et altera pars, sine ira et studio and Wie es eigentlich gewesen).
As for Reuth's book, I have read a review of it by a Finnish military historian and he notes that Reuth is extremely biased in his tone (=Reuth does not approach WW2 neutrally and dispassionately in the spirit of audiatur et altera pars, sine ira et studio and Wie es eigentlich gewesen).
Re: Jeremy Noakes or Richard J. Evans
There is no such thing as "neutrality", unfortunately, and it's clear Reuth is not fascinated by Rommel. But his work is serious and well argumented. Reuth does take as an assumption that high ranking military officers were by and large in agreement with their state policy, and I can imagine it was disturbing to readers because Rommel, being lucky not to fight in the East, has the image of a clean soldier.Trilisser, M. A. wrote: ↑12 Oct 2018, 17:08As for Reuth's book, I have read a review of it by a Finnish military historian and he notes that Reuth is extremely biased in his tone (=Reuth does not approach WW2 neutrally and dispassionately in the spirit of audiatur et altera pars, sine ira et studio and Wie es eigentlich gewesen).
That said, I read Reuth some years ago. My expertise is deeper now and should i read it again I may see some limits that I didn't perceive then.