Recent historiography has been more positive about the Wilhelmine German Empire, which long had a poor reputation. This might be partly due to the trend towards transnational history with a specific focus on transfer and exchange. This article argues that from such a perspective the re-evaluation of the German Empire may easily overshoot the mark. Focusing on a comparative study of Hamburg and London, it analyses a classic topic of transnational history—the field of science and social reform. However, by approaching it in the context of a history of security, the article provides a valuable corrective in the debate on the German Empire. It thereby also opens a new path for the history of security. Although security and knowledge are closely interrelated, this relationship has been rather neglected in the historiography. It is argued here that security concerns related to social unrest were a major factor that gave rise to the emergence of the social sciences at the turn of the 20th century. Social reformers and social scientists believed that supposedly neutral scientific knowledge was a prerequisite for resolving social conflicts. However, public acceptance of their expert status in security matters was far from self-evident. While they met fierce opposition in Hamburg, liberal and democratic traditions facilitated its acceptance in London.

中文翻译：

---

作为安全演员的社会科学家

最近的史学对长期以来名声不佳的威廉德意志帝国更加积极。这可能部分是由于跨国历史的趋势，特别关注转移和交换。本文认为，从这样的角度来看，对德意志帝国的重新评估可能很容易过分。以汉堡和伦敦的比较研究为重点，分析了跨国历史的一个经典话题——科学与社会改革领域。然而，通过在安全史的背景下接近它，这篇文章为关于德意志帝国的辩论提供了一个有价值的纠正。从而也为安全史开辟了一条新的道路。尽管安全和知识密切相关，但这种关系在史学中却被忽视了。这里有人认为，与社会动荡有关的安全问题是导致 20 世纪之交社会科学出现的主要因素。社会改革者和社会科学家认为，所谓中立的科学知识是解决社会冲突的先决条件。然而，公众对他们在安全事务方面的专家地位的认可远非不言而喻。虽然他们在汉堡遇到了激烈的反对，但自由和民主的传统促进了它在伦敦的接受。公众对他们在安全事务方面的专家地位的认可远非不言而喻。虽然他们在汉堡遇到了激烈的反对，但自由和民主的传统促进了它在伦敦的接受。公众对他们在安全事务方面的专家地位的认可远非不言而喻。虽然他们在汉堡遇到了激烈的反对，但自由和民主的传统促进了它在伦敦的接受。