Less than a year ago, I read and reviewed the book The fall of France British historian Julian Jackson. The book was published in England in 2003 and in Romania in 2021, in a relatively new publishing house Publisol. Recall that Jackson is a lover of studies related to the modern history of France, his list of works includes, among other things, serious studies about the so controversial (today) May 1968 or about General Charles de Gaulle.

Two years before the appearance The fall of FranceJulian Jackson has published a book that is an exemplary, thorough study of the political, military and geopolitical motivations and Franco-British relations that would explain one of the most bizarre and surprising episodes in the history of the Second World War. France. Dark years-1940-1944. The book was revised and edited in 2020 and this version was made available to Romanian readers in 2022 by the same publisher Publisol. Translated by Lygia Kercisian.

We are dealing with an impressive historical investigation, primarily in terms of size (in the Romanian edition, the volume has almost 950 pages), based on a huge bibliography. The author notes that it is primarily French. Actually, historical sources, archival documents, adding others of a cultural nature. Mostly literary or cinematographic. And this is for at least two reasons. First, because the years 1940-1944 are more relevant for the involvement of intellectuals in the life of society, an involvement that continued even after liberation, when the question arose of clarifying the dimensions of collaborationism and the way of understanding it. and apply purification in practice. Second, because the views of the population, and especially intellectuals, on the Vichy government, and on the relationship between Marshal Pétain and Laval, or their culpability, have evolved over the years. There were several such stages black years they had their own dynamics. Both historical and image. Reviewed with exquisite attention to detail by Julian Jackson.

France. Dark years. 1940-1944 years consists of five parts. Anticipation, Regime: National Revolution and Collaboration, Vichy Germans and French, Resistance, Liberation and After. Each side benefits from very welcome introduction in which the author explains his intentions in detail and is divided into several sections.

The analysis begins with a generous return to history. The evolution of Franco-German relations is analyzed, the significance of the First World War and the way it ended are analyzed, various aspects of the interwar period are explored, with a special emphasis on the attitude of the French to the Third Republic. , insisting – on Maurasian momentit is shown that over time it becomes more and more skeptical, they talk about a sharp decrease in the population (the so-called dThis issobbedThis is). Why all this? Because, according to Julian Jackson, they explain why the armistice decision was made relatively quickly and easily. Was it necessary? Could there be another way? And if?

It then analyzes the differences (how many there were) between occupied France and France under the jurisdiction of the Vichy government. The relationship between Pétain and Laval, often acrimonious, the reasons for the landing, as well as the latter’s return to command, the relationship between Vichy and the Reich, the differences in the attitude of the Germans to the two human peaks of power are described in detail. . How was economic, political, social, intellectual life in both Frances? How did the attitude of the French to the Germans change? How popular was Pétain over time and what were the dynamics of that popularity? What was the attitude of the Vichy government towards the Jews, what was the attitude of the French towards successive strata of the population that suffered racial persecution? Were there any differences in the treatment of local Jews and those who found refuge in France before June 1940? How and to what extent did such personalities as Paul Moran, Brazilak, Pierre Drieux la Rochelle, Celine cooperate? Like others. How and to what extent did the press cooperate (remember that in its newspaper articles published in fight and grouped in that ActuatorAlbert Camus qualified the attitude of the press under the occupation as the shame of France), which newspapers preferred to suspend their publication rather than play the game of the Germans and become the mouthpiece of the occupier?

In my opinion, the most interesting parts of the book are those devoted to the difficult history of the Resistance movement. Julian Jackson gives consistent, truthful answers to a consistent set of questions. I remember only a small part of them. How many types of resistance did France know? How important and massive was the communist resistance? From what moment did she start asserting herself? How dependent was it on Moscow? What was the role of Maurice Thorez, who was known to be hiding in Moscow during the dark years? What was the contribution of the so-called free french and, in particular, General Charles de Gaulle, who is not very fond of the British historian. What support did she have from the British and Americans? How has France’s view of the Resistance changed over the years? How was this perspective reflected in cinematography? On the topic of cinema. How they left their mark dark years on the post-war history of France, what is their fate resistors, what punishments were applied to collaborators? Read the entire article and leave comments on Contributors.ro