Search

This article explores changes in Alexander the Great's image in German historiography from the early nineteenth century until the middle of the twentieth century. During this period, Germany experienced the Anti-Napoleonic Wars, the foundation of the German Reich, and the rise and fall of the National Socialist Regime. It symbolized the historical process of the emergence, the fulfilling, the excessive ascent of German nationalism, and eventually its catastrophic downfall. Moreover, the professionalization of historical science also took place in this period, so that obsession with the concept of 'nation' and the emphasis on great men as the primary moving force of history were standard features of German historiography in this period. In this political and cultural context, Alexander's image went through several changes, such as an impetuous tyrant, a world-historical figure who opened up the Hellenistic Age, an insightful statesman, and a genius corrupted by excessive power. The study of these various images of Alexander not only shows diverse ways of handling historical figures, but also reveals the interrelationship between classical reception, historical consciousness, and present-mindedness in the German historiography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: About one third of stroke patients have renal dysfunction. Effect of renal dysfunction on outcome of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) has not been determined in Asia using patients without IVT as comparators. The aim of this study was to examine the interaction between renal dysfunction and IVT on the outcomes in AIS patients admitted within 4.5 hours of onset in a multicenter stroke registry of Taiwan. Methods: We identified all consecutive AIS patients admitted within 4.5 hours of onset between 2007 and 2013. Renal dysfunction was defined by an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/minute/1.73 m² on initial admission. Patients older than 80 years of age and a National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score less than 4 or greater than 25 were excluded. The primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score 3-6 at 3 months. We determined the effect of IVT and renal dysfunction on outcome in a multivariate analysis. Results: Of the 929 patients analyzed, 39% had renal dysfunction, and 51% received IVT. Primary outcomes occurred in 45% versus 41% of patients with and without renal dysfunction, respectively, (P = .197). In a multivariate analysis, the odds ratios (95% confidence interval; P value) of IVT and renal dysfunction for primary outcome were .70 (.51-.96; P = .029) and .97 (.71-1.33; P = .865), respectively. No significant interaction was noted between IVT and renal dysfunction (P = .218). Conclusions: Renal dysfunction did not modify the effect of IVT for AIS and should not be a reason for withholding treatment from otherwise-eligible patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]