Early on in my tenure as editor of Central European History (CEH), I published a piece that compared the development of the journal during the years before and after the so-called Wende of 1989–1990.1 The focus was on thematic, temporal, and geographic coverage, with an eye to changes that had taken place since the fall of the Berlin Wall—a happy event that, by chance, more or less coincided with the rise of the “new cultural history” in the late 1980s. It is only fitting that, in my last issue, I take stock once again, this time of the journal’s trajectory over the past five years. This will allow readers to judge for themselves whether it has continued to meet the goals that Douglas Unfug,CEH’s first editor, set forth a half century ago, namely, to “maintain a balance between works of broad synthesis and of specialized research, among studies of all periods from the Middle Ages to the present, and among studies using traditional approaches to history and those employing recent or experimental methodological approaches.”2 Since I took over the editorial reins in July 2014, with Julia Torrie intrepidly serving as associate editor responsible for book reviews, CEH has published 85 scholarly articles and review essays, more than 250 reviews and featured reviews, as well as dozens of contributions to almost a dozen special issues and discussion forums. The “recent and experimental” have long since become the “traditional,” of course, and it should come as no surprise that the vast majority of articles that have appeared over the past half-decade fall into the categories of social history and especially the (no longer quite so) new cultural history. Approximately 20 percent have dealt with gender and sexuality, with topics ranging from homosexuality and masculinity to abortion, female journalism, queer culture, and the Afro-German experience after 1945. Other noticeable Schwerpunkte have been nationalism and identity; religion, festivals, and celebrations; architecture and monuments; photography and the representation of power; memory and the media; colonialism and diplomacy; Jews and refugees; German division and the Cold War; 1968 and the New Left; (mental) health and illness; crime, language, and the law. There have also been a handful of articles as well on ur-traditional topics such as high-level politics, state-building, voting patterns, and economics. Falling evenly on either side of the 1945 caesura, almost two-thirds of the articles that have appeared since 2014 treated the period after WorldWar I. Approximately one-fifth dealt with the Kaiserreich and the First World War. Almost a dozen focused on the Middle Ages, the early modern period, and the Vormärz period; a half dozen on Austria and the Habsburg Empire. Much of this keeps with recent trends in the field. I had hoped to publish more articles on the period prior to the Kaiserreich, as well as on the German-speaking regions of Central Europe beyond Kleindeutschland. But a journal and its editor are ultimately dependent on manuscript submissions, and the most popular topics continue to be the Third Reich and

中文翻译：

---

致编辑的信：很久了，感谢所有的鱼

在我担任《中欧历史》（CEH）编辑的初期，我发表了一篇文章，比较了该期刊在所谓的1989-1990.1年文德前后的发展情况。重点是主题，时间和内容。考虑到柏林墙倒塌以来发生的变化，这是一个快乐的事件，偶然地，它与1980年代末的“新文化历史”的兴起或多或少同时发生。非常合适的是，在上一期中，我再次评估了该期刊过去五年的发展轨迹。这将使读者能够自己判断它是否继续实现了CEH的第一位编辑道格拉斯·恩福格（Douglas Unfug）在半个世纪前提出的目标，即“保持广泛的合成作品与专业研究之间的平衡，2从2014年7月我接任编辑职务以来，朱莉亚·托里（Julia Torrie）勇敢地担任副研究员，自中世纪到现在的各个时期的研究，以及使用传统的历史方法的研究以及采用最新方法或实验方法的方法的研究。作为负责书评的编辑，CEH已发表了85篇学术文章和评论文章，超过250篇评论和精选评论，以及对近十个特殊问题和讨论论坛的数十篇文稿。当然，“最近的和实验性的”早已成为“传统的”，过去半个世纪出现的绝大多数文章都属于社会历史的范畴，这尤其不足为奇。 （不再如此）新的文化历史。大约20％的人处理性别和性问题，主题从同性恋和男子气概到堕胎，女性新闻，酷儿文化以及1945年后的非裔德国人经历。其他显着的Schwerpunkte是民族主义和身份认同。宗教，节日和庆典；建筑和古迹；摄影和权力的表现；内存和媒体；殖民主义和外交；犹太人和难民；德国分裂和冷战；1968年和新左派；（精神）健康和疾病；犯罪，语言和法律。也有一些关于传统话题的文章，例如高层政治，国家建设，投票模式和经济学。均匀地落在1945年的caesura两侧，自2014年以来发表的文章中，几乎有三分之二是针对第一次世界大战之后的时期的。大约有五分之一是与皇帝战争和第一次世界大战有关的。几乎有十二种研究集中在中世纪，近代早期和伏尔玛兹时代；在奥地利和哈布斯堡帝国上打了半打。其中大部分与该领域的最新趋势保持一致。我曾希望在Kaiserreich之前的时期以及Kleindeutschland以外的中欧德语区发表更多文章。但是，期刊及其编辑最终取决于稿件的提交，最受欢迎的主题仍然是第三帝国和 在奥地利和哈布斯堡帝国上打了六打 其中大部分与该领域的最新趋势保持一致。我曾希望在Kaiserreich之前的时期以及Kleindeutschland以外的中欧德语区发表更多文章。但是，期刊及其编辑最终取决于稿件的提交，最受欢迎的主题仍然是第三帝国和 在奥地利和哈布斯堡帝国上打了半打。其中大部分与该领域的最新趋势保持一致。我曾希望在Kaiserreich之前的时期，以及在Kleindeutschland以外的中欧德语区发表更多文章。但是，期刊及其编辑最终取决于稿件的提交，最受欢迎的主题仍然是第三帝国和