A scholar gentleman in the old style; a northern non-conforming radical; an academic steeped in Oxford traditions; a late 20th-century media personality; one of the most outstanding historians of his age: A.J.P. Taylor was all of these. He wrote about traditional historical subjects in a traditional manner and took narrative history to new heights and was equally at home with a critical academic, as with a vast popular audience. This biographical study of A.J.P. Taylor includes details of Taylor's privileged and cosseted childhood, the effect of his close but combative and stimulating family, the dissenting and nonconformist tradition, and his time as teacher, broadcaster journalist and historian. It attempts to evaluate how far he fulfilled his aim and conviction as to the importance of history and its place at the heart of national consciousness.

Scientific Essay from the year 2011 in the subject English - Literature, Works, grade: 1, University of Vienna, language: English, abstract: A.J.P. Taylor's The Origins of the Second World War and his critics in Great Britain In 1961 A.J.P. Taylor, described as "an enfant terrible among historians" 1 by Ian F. D. Morrow, discombobulated peer historians with his publication The Origins of the Second World War. In this book Taylor disputed the orthodox school of war historiography. Taylor's thesis of the origins of the Second World War has received some support, but primarily critique. His thesis may be briefly stated. According to Taylor, Hitler was not a demonic warlord, who had plans of world conquest but was only an ordinary man "who was no more wicked and unscrupulous than many other contemporary statesman" . Hitler followed a foreign policy like "that of his predecessors, of the professional diplomats at the foreign ministry, and indeed of virtually all Germans". Adolf Hitler was not a "a system-maker, deliberately preparing from the first a great war which would destroy existing civilisation and make him master of the world" Hitler's purpose was to liberate Germany from the Treaty of Versailles that "lacked moral validity from the start" and "to make Germany the leading Power in Europe from her natural weight." In fulfilling his goals, Hitler was supported by appeasers such as Neville and Chamberlain, who believed that Hitler would become pacific if his demands were met. Hence, all Hitler had to do was waiting for concessions. Taylor presents Hitler as a passive Fuehrer, without clear intentions. Regarding Danzig and Poland, Hitler didn't intend its destruction. On the contrary "he had wished to solve the question of Danzig so that Germany and Poland could remain on good terms." [...]

Biografi om den amerikanske historiker, forfatter m.m. Alan Taylor (1906-1990)

In twelve essays, influential scholars in political science explore the meaning of political leadership from the kaleidoscopic perspectives of the leaders, institutions, goals, procedures, problems, and traditions involved. The approaches, as varied as the subject itself, coalesce around the central question of how leaders interact with, transform, or are controlled by the organizations they lead.

Throughout his presidency, Franklin Roosevelt was determined to pursue a peaceful accommodation with an increasingly powerful Soviet Union, an inclination reinforced by the onset of world war. Roosevelt knew that defeating the Axis powers would require major contributions by the Soviets and their Red Army, and so, despite his misgivings about Stalin's expansionist motives, he pushed for friendlier relations. Yet almost from the moment he was inaugurated, lower-level officials challenged FDR's ability to carry out this policy. Mary Glantz analyzes tensions shaping the policy stance of the United States toward the Soviet Union before, during, and immediately after World War II. Focusing on the conflicts between a president who sought close relations between the two nations and the diplomatic and military officers who opposed them, she shows how these career officers were able to resist and shape presidential policy-and how their critical views helped shape the parameters of the subsequent Cold War. Venturing into the largely uncharted waters of bureaucratic politics, Glantz examines overlooked aspects of wartime relations between Washington and Moscow to highlight the roles played by U.S. personnel in the U.S.S.R. in formulating and implementing policies governing the American-Soviet relationship. She takes readers into the American embassy in Moscow to show how individuals like Ambassadors Joseph Davies, Lawrence Steinhadt, and Averell Harriman and U.S. military attachs like Joseph Michela influenced policy, and reveals how private resistance sometimes turned into public dispute. She also presents new material on the controversial military attach/lend-lease director Phillip Faymonville, a largely neglected officer who understood the Soviet system and supported Roosevelt's policy. Deftly combining military with diplomatic history, Glantz traces these philosophical and policy battles to show how difficult it was for even a highly popular president like Roosevelt to overcome such entrenched and determined opposition. Although he reorganized federal offices and appointed ambassadors who shared his views, in the end he was unable to outlast his bureaucratic opponents or change their minds. With his death, anti-Soviet factions rushed into the policymaking vacuum to become the primary architects of Truman's Cold War "containment" policy. A case study in foreign relations, high-level policymaking, and civil-military relations, FDR and the Soviet Union enlarges our understanding of the ideologies and events that set the stage for the Cold War. It adds a new dimension to our understanding of Soviet-American relations as it sheds new light on the surprising power of those in low places.