Resumen Convencido de la superioridad de la cultura alemana y de la necesidad de su misión en el mundo, el gobierno alemán descubrió las medidas de política cultural como complemento importante y no solo como un elemento marginal de los instrumentos tradicionales de política exterior tras la Primera Guerra Mundial. Debido al resultado de la guerra y a la conclusión de la paz, la política exterior cultural se convirtió en uno de los pocos campos en los que la República de Weimar podía dirigir su política exterior con relativa libertad. La pérdida de poder mundial debía compensarse con la difusión promocional de los bienes culturales alemanes y preparar así la regeneración económica. ¿Cuáles fueron los motivos y el contenido de la política cultural alemana hacia México? ¿Hubo acercamientos hacia un intercambio equitativo? ¿Quiénes fueron los actores de estas relaciones? Este artículo aborda estas cuestiones desde la perspectiva alemana, principalmente, recurriendo a diversas fuentes de diferentes archivos y bibliotecas.

Abstract Convinced of the superiority of German culture and the necessity of its mission in the world, the German government discovered cultural policy measures as a complement to traditional foreign policy instruments after World War I. During the war, this level became an element of the propaganda struggle for the public opinion of the neutral states. Due to the outcome of the war and the conclusion of peace, cultural foreign policy became one of the few fields in which the Weimar Republic could conduct its foreign policy with relative freedom. The loss of world power was to be compensated for by the promotional dissemination of German cultural goods and thus prepare for economic regeneration. What were the motives and content of German cultural policy towards Mexico? Were there approaches to an equitable exchange? Who were the actors in these relations? This article addresses these questions mainly from the German perspective by drawing on various sources from different archives and libraries.

Resumen Para el público culto de principios del siglo XIX, el dirigente paraguayo José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia era una figura tan misteriosa como desconcertante. Los pocos viajeros que llegaron a conocerlo se expresaron de forma ambivalente sobre Francia y calificaron su gobierno a veces de forma admirable y más a menudo de forma despectiva como una dictadura. Al principio de la modernidad, para los que escribieron sobre el problema de la dictadura, Francia se erigió en símbolo del cambio de significado del término “dictador”, que pasó de ser un gobernante legítimo, temporal y, por tanto, positivo en una emergencia, a un tirano ilegítimo. ¿Cómo percibieron los observadores europeos a Francia? ¿Qué importancia tenía el hecho de que Francia gobernara en una región que acababa de separarse del dominio colonial español y se había declarado república? ¿Cuáles fueron los motivos de la evaluación de Francia y qué generalizaciones se asociaron con ella para toda la región y con la dictadura en general? El artículo aborda esta cuestión basándose en las fuentes publicadas al respecto, desde Rengger y Robertson hasta Caldcleugh y otros.

Abstract To the educated public of the early 19th century, Paraguayan leader José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia was a figure as mysterious as he was puzzling. The few travelers who came to know him expressed themselves ambivalently about Francia and described his government sometimes admiringly and more often disparagingly as a dictatorship. At the beginning of modernity, for those who dealt with the problem of dictatorship, Francia stood as a symbol of the change in meaning of the term "dictator" from a legitimate, temporary, and therefore positive ruler in an emergency to an illegitimate tyrant. How did European observers perceive Francia? What was the significance of Francia ruling in a region that had just broken away from Spanish colonial rule and declared itself a republic? What were the reasons for the assessment of Francia and what generalizations were associated with it for the entire region and with the dictatorship in general? This paper addresses this question based on published sources on the subject, from Rengger and Robertson to Caldcleugh and others.

Acadêmico que se dedica a pensar o desenvolvimento histórico da América Latina levando em consideração sua inserção no concerto internacional, o historiador alemão Stefan Rinke, da Universidade Livre de Berlim, é entrevistado por alunos e ex-alunos da Casa de Oswaldo Cruz/Fiocruz. Dimensões diversas como as relações econômicas e diplomáticas, os fluxos migratórios e os conflitos étnicos constituem, nos trabalhos de Rinke, meios de análise das redes de interdependência que ataram a América Latina à Europa e aos EUA. Suas reflexões extrapolam o âmbito do continente latino-americano e permitem pensar a globalização como processo histórico, situando contextos nacionais e regionais num quadro geral. Na entrevista Rinke fala sobre sua trajetória acadêmica, história global/transnacional e projetos conjuntos entre a Alemanha e a América Latina.

Current and former students of the Casa de Oswaldo Cruz/Fiocruz interviewed German historian Stefan Rinke, of the Freie Universität Berlin, who specializes in examining the historical development of Latin America as it fits into the international context. Rinke’s work uses dimensions such as economic and diplomatic relations, migratory flows, and ethnic conflict as tools in his analyses of the networks of interdependence that have tied Latin America to Europe and the USA. His lens goes beyond the Latin American continent to approach globalization as a historical process, with national and regional contexts placed within a general framework. In this interview, Rinke talks about his academic career, global and transnational history, and joint projects between Germany and Latin America.

As relações entre Alemanha e Brasil foram influenciadas por diferentes ordens espaciais que coexistiram e se influenciaram, no período de 1870 a 1945. O artigo discute a ideia de viver em mundos diferentes, muito distantes entre si. Argumenta-se que o conceito de distância mudou lenta e regularmente com o aparecimento de modernas tecnologias de comunicação. Ordens espaciais hierarquicamente estruturadas em centros e periferias dominaram as relações nesse período. Os alemães consideravam seu espaço maior e superior ao brasileiro, situação com a qual muitos brasileiros, naquela época, concordavam, entretanto, desde a Primeira Guerra Mundial, não mais quiseram aceitar essa suposta ordem natural.

Relations between Germany and Brazil were influenced by different spatial orders which co-existed and influenced each other between 1870 and 1945. The article discusses the idea of living in different worlds, and being worlds apart. It argues that the concept of distance changed slowly, but surely, with the rise of modern communication technologies. Hierarchically structured spatial orders of centers and peripheries dominated the relationship in this period. Not only the Germans considered their own space superior, and on a higher level than the Brazilian, many Brazilians of the time agreed with this point of view, but also, since the First World War, were not willing to accept this allegedly natural order of the globe any longer.