Torsten Riotte – författare

For more than 120 years (1714-1837) Great Britain was linked to the German Electorate, later Kingdom, of Hanover through Personal Union. This made Britain a continental European state in many respects, and diluted her sense of insular apartness. The geopolitical focus of Britain was now as much on Germany, on the Elbe and the Weser as it was on the Channel or overseas. At the same time, the Hanoverian connection was a major and highly controversial factor in British high politics and popular political debate. This volume was the first systematically to explore the subject by a team of experts drawn from the UK, US and Germany. They integrate the burgeoning specialist literature on aspects of the Personal Union into the broader history of eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Britain. Never before had the impact of the Hanoverian connection on British politics, monarchy and the public sphere, been so thoroughly investigated.

For more than 120 years (1714-1837) Great Britain was linked to the German Electorate, later Kingdom, of Hanover through Personal Union. This made Britain a continental European state in many respects, and diluted her sense of insular apartness. The geopolitical focus of Britain was now as much on Germany, on the Elbe and the Weser as it was on the Channel or overseas. At the same time, the Hanoverian connection was a major and highly controversial factor in British high politics and popular political debate. This volume was the first systematically to explore the subject by a team of experts drawn from the UK, US and Germany. They integrate the burgeoning specialist literature on aspects of the Personal Union into the broader history of eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Britain. Never before had the impact of the Hanoverian connection on British politics, monarchy and the public sphere, been so thoroughly investigated.

The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 was done mainly, if one is to believe US policy at the time, to liberate the people of Iraq from an oppressive dictator. However, the many protests in London, New York, and other cities imply that the policy of making the world safe for democracyA" was not shared by millions of people in many western countries. Thinking about this controversy inspired the present volume, which takes a closer look at how society responded to the outbreaks and conclusions of the First and Second World Wars. In order to examine this relationship between the conduct of wars and public opinion, leading scholars trace the moods and attitudes of the people of four Western countries (Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy) before, during, and after the crucial moments of the two major conflicts of the twentieth century. Focusing less on politics and more on how people experienced the wars, this volume shows how the distinction between enthusiasm for war, and concern about its consequences, is rarely clear cut.

The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 was done mainly, if one is to believe US policy at the time, to liberate the people of Iraq from an oppressive dictator. However, the many protests in London, New York, and other cities imply that the policy of “making the world safe for democracy” was not shared by millions of people in many Western countries. Thinking about this controversy inspired the present volume, which takes a closer look at how society responded to the outbreaks and conclusions of the First and Second World Wars. In order to examine this relationship between the conduct of wars and public opinion, leading scholars trace the moods and attitudes of the people of four Western countries (Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy) before, during and after the crucial moments of the two major conflicts of the twentieth century. Focusing less on politics and more on how people experienced the wars, this volume shows how the distinction between enthusiasm for war and concern about its consequences is rarely clear-cut.