Carl Schmitt, Reinhart Koselleck and the foundations of history and politics
2011; Routledge; Volume: 37; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2010.11.012
ISSN1873-541X
Autores ResumoAbstract This article explores the intellectual relations between Carl Schmitt and the German historian Reinhart Koselleck with a focus on the inspiration that Koselleck found in Schmitt's work in the early 1950s. The article goes beyond earlier contributions in the field by illuminating how the most important discursive features that Koselleck drew from Schmitt were utilized toward a very independent intellectual project. This project concerned an attempt to revise modern political thought by means of outlining a new concept of history. Koselleck's concept of history was to depart from all utopian notions of history as a singular, unified and goal-directed process. Instead, it aimed to outline certain fundamental existential structures of the human condition and to take account of the social relations existing among human beings in order to understand (historically) and contain (politically) the potential conflict in human societies. Hence Koselleck believed that his new concept of history would lead to a more responsible foundation of political order and decision making. Following an analysis of how Koselleck developed his project in a dialogue with the work of Schmitt and a number of other scholars, first of all Friedrich Meinecke and Martin Heidegger, the article presents a brief perspective on how his new concept of history was received in the 1950s and on how it came to provide his work with a certain analytical, thematic and argumentative unity. Keywords: HistoryPoliticsConceptsSociologyHistoricism Notes 1 R. Koselleck, Kritik und Krise. Ein Beitrag zur Pathogenese der bürgerlichen Welt (Freiburg, 1959). The dissertation had been accepted at the University of Heidelberg already in 1954. The original version had a different subtitle – R. Koselleck, Kritik und Krise. Eine Untersuchung der politischen Funktion des dualistischen Weltbildes im 18. Jahrhundert (unpublished, Heidelberg, 1954). 2 For exceptions that in excellent ways analyze the intellectual relations between Schmitt and Koselleck from different perspectives, see R. Mehring, 'Begriffsgeschichte mit Carl Schmitt', in: Begriffene Geschichte: Beiträge zum Werk Reinhart Kosellecks, ed. H. Joas, P. Vogt (Frankfurt am Main, 2010), 138–168. R. Mehring, 'Begriffssoziologie, Begriffsgeschichte, Begriffspolitik. Zur Form der Ideengeschichtsschreibung nach Carl Schmitt und Reinhart Koselleck', in: Politische Ideengeschichte im 20. Jahrhundert. Konzepte und Kritik, ed. H. Bluhm, J. Gebhardt (Baden-Baden, 2006), 31–50. For the latest discussions of Koselleck's use of Schmitt's work in Kritik und Krise – and for references to the most important discussions of the issue – see T. Pankakoski, 'Conflict, Context, Concreteness: Koselleck and Schmitt on Concepts', Political Theory 38 (2010), 749–779 and J.-F. Missfelder, 'Die Gegenkraft und ihre Geschichte. Carl Schmitt, Reinhart Koselleck und der Bürgerkrieg', Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte, 58 (2006), 310–36. 3 Further elaborations and contextualizations of the interpretations that will be put forward in this article are found in N. Olsen, Beyond utopianism and relativism: History in the plural in the work of Reinhart Koselleck (New York, forthcoming). This article – as well as the book – has profited extensively from critical comments by Henning Trüper. 4 Schmitt's reason to spend time in Heidelberg in the early 1950s was that his wife received special treatment for cancer there. For Schmitt's activities in various academic and political discussion groups at universities and in more private settings – and for Schmitt's relations to the young generation of students in Heidelberg – in this period, see R. Mehring, Carl Schmitt: Aufstieg und Fall (Munich, 2009), 463–504; J.-W. Müller, A dangerous mind: Carl Schmitt in postwar European thought (New Haven, 2003), 104–15; D. van Laak, Gespräche in der Sicherheit des Schweigens. Carl Schmitt in der politischen Geschichte der frühen Bundesrepublik (Berlin, 1993). 5 R. Koselleck, 'Formen der Bürgerlichkeit: Reinhart Koselleck im Gespräch mit Manfred Hettling und Bernd Ulrich', Mittelweg 36, Zeitschrift des Hamburger Instituts für Sozialforschung, 12 (2003), 76. Here and elsewhere, translations of German texts have been provided by the author. 6 C. Schmitt, Ex Captivitate Salus (Cologne, 1950), 25. 7 See Olsen, Beyond utopianism and relativism. See also M. Jeismann, 'Wer bleibt, der schreibt. Reinhart Koselleck, das Überleben und die Ethik der Historikers', Zeitschrift für Ideengeschichte, III/4 (2009), 69–81. 8 I. Nagel, 'Der Kritiker der Krise', in: Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006): Reden zum 50. Jahrestag seiner Promotion in Heidelberg, ed. S. Weinfurter (Heidelberg, 2006), 27. 9 Reinhart Koselleck, 'Erfahrungswandel und Methodenwechsel. Eine historisch-anthropologische Skizze' in: Historische Methode, ed. C. Meier, J. Rüsen (Munich, 1988), 27–57. 10 See N. Sombart, 'Rendezvous mit dem Weltgeist'. Heidelberger Reminiszenzen 1945–1951 (Frankfurt am Main, 2000), 268–76. The notion of Raumordnung plays an important role in several texts that Koselleck wrote in the wake of Kritik und Krise, where he attempted to conceptualize a project dealing with the temporal structures of the Congress of Vienna in 1814. However, Koselleck abandoned the project in favor of his Habilitation on Prussian Vormärz – R. Koselleck, Preußen zwischen Reform und Revolution. Allgemeines Landrecht, Verwaltung und soziale Bewegung von 1791 bis 1848 (Stuttgart, 1967). Neither his work on Raumordnung or on Prussia will be explored in this article. 11 Sombart, 'Rendezvous mit dem Weltgeist', 268–76. 12 Sombart, 'Rendezvous mit dem Weltgeist', 271–2. Whereas Sombart and Kesting submitted their dissertations at the department of sociology, Koselleck submitted his at the department of history, but – as we shall return to – viewed his study as a sociologically framed analysis of history. 13 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise. Ein Beitrag, 'Vorwort'. Koselleck also thanked Johannes Kühn, his father, and his friends Gerhard Hegt, Hanno Kesting and Nicolaus Sombart. 14 For a focused perspective on how, after co-translating Löwith's Meaning in History: the theological implications of the philosophy of history (Chicago, 1949), Koselleck took over Löwith's idea of modern historical philosophy as secularized eschatology in his analysis of the roots of modern political thought, see N. Olsen, 'Reinhart Koselleck, Karl Löwith und der Geschichtsbegriff', in: Reinhart Koselleck: Sprache und Geschichte, ed. C. Dutt, R. Laube (Göttingen, forthcoming). 15 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise. Eine Untersuchung, I. The opening passage is phrased slightly different in the published version of the dissertation, but the basic content and message remained the same. Here and elsewhere, translations of German texts have been provided by the author. 16 J. Edwards, 'Critique and Crisis Today, Koselleck, Enlightenment and the Concept of Politics', Contemporary Political Theory, 5 (2006), 428. 17 See W. Steinmetz, 'Nachruf auf Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006)', Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 32 (2006), 417. 18 See Jürgen Habermas's famous double review of Kritik und Krise and Hanno Kesting's dissertation Geschichtsphilosophie und Weltbürgerkrieg. Deutungen der Geschichte von der Französischen Revolution bis zum Ost-West-Konflikt (Heidelberg, 1959) (in which Kesting analyzed the role of historical philosophy in modern politics from the French Revolution until the Cold War) – J. Habermas, 'Verrufener Fortschritt – Verkanntes Jahrhundert. Zur Kritik an der Geschichtsphilosophie', Merkur, 14 (1960), 468–77. 19 The letters are located in Schmitt's archive in Hauptstaatsarchiv Düsseldorf (registration number: RW265). The letter at issue carries the number 8131. So far, only Reinhard Mehring has used this correspondence in his biography. Mehring, Carl Schmitt: Aufstieg und Fall and in 'Begriffsgeschichte mit Carl Schmitt'. 20 Since its coinage at the end of the eighteenth century, the notion 'historicism' (Historismus) has been assigned many different meanings in the German cultural science disciplines. As to be elaborated on in the following, Koselleck (and many of his contemporaries) understood 'historicism' as an approach that combined a seemingly anti-normative attitude toward history, based on the idea that the past can only be considered historically on its own terms and according to its own unique development, with an overtly positive belief in the idea that history unfolds as a progressive and unified process. 21 R. Koselleck, 'Die Verzeitlichung der Utopie', in: Utopieforschung, ed. W. Vosskamp (Stuttgart, 1982), 1–14. 22 F. Meinecke, Die Idee der Staatsräson in der neueren Geschichte (Munich, 1924). 23 C. Schmitt, 'Zu Friedrich Meineckes "Idee der Staatsräson"', Archiv für Sozialwissenschaften und Sozialpolitik, 56 (1926), 226–34. See also R. Mehring, 'Begriffssoziologie, Begriffsgeschichte, Begriffspolitik', 33–5 and G. Balakrishnan, The Enemy: An Intellectual Portrait of Carl Schmitt (New York, 2000), 79–81. 24 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 24 note 72. Following an explanation in the main text of the historical reasons as to why absolutist states separated politics from morality, in the note, Koselleck first referred to Schmitt's Die Diktatur, to support his argument and then ventured to compare Meinecke's approach to Schmitt's. Koselleck's estimation of the differences between the approaches of Meinecke and Schmitt was seemingly not only based on a comparison of Die Idee der Staatsräson to Die Diktatur, but also deduced from Schmitt's review of Die Idee der Staatsräson that is listed in the bibliography of the unpublished version of Koselleck's dissertation. 25 Koselleck wrote: 'Since Meinecke sees the reason of state as bound up with the "historical forces" of the time, the state itself transmutes into an "amphibian" between ethics and nature .... Meinecke himself, who continues to employ the anti-state, dualist concepts of the eighteenth century, remains so convinced by the moral self-understanding of the modern state, that he only finds reason to draw a distinction between morality and politics in the field of foreign politics. In domestic politics – as he believes in 1924 and also still in – the "more refined moral sentiment" will counteract and prevent a bloody revolution, and otherwise, in case of need, state of emergency legislation will carry a moral character since the necessary concentration of power will be capable of being "legalized". The twofold possibilities of the "amphibian" state, and at the same time the sociological function of the attempt to ease out the oppositions, become manifest here.' Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 24 note 72. 26 When Koselleck in the cited passage spoke of 'finality' as 'eschatology', it was seemingly to state that the only 'coming' that human beings are to expect from their future is their own death. 27 For how, in this endeavor, Koselleck picked up on a theme that Karl Löwith had presented in his Das Individuum in der Rolle des Mitmenschen. Ein Beitrag zur anthropologischen Grundlegung der ethischen Probleme (Munich, 1928), see N. Olsen, 'Reinhart Koselleck, Karl Löwith und der Geschichtsbegriff'. 28 Koselleck wrote: 'With the categories that lie at the basis of your "Nomos der Erde", dear professor, it is certainly possible to show that the current Weltbürgerkrieg is not an ontic or contingent event that actually should not be taking place (for the Americans), but an event deeply rooted in the ontological structures of our historicity, yet something that – given these structures – does not have to be the way it is (for the Russians).' This interpretation contrasted, in Koselleck's opinion, as stated in the citation, with the American and the Russian ways of understanding of the Cold War: the American attitude to the Cold War was allegedly that it should not be taking place and that the world should be a liberal-democratic utopia instead; for the Russians, with their ideology of class struggle, the Cold War was class struggle and therefore part of the very historical condition of mankind. While acknowledging the point about the historical condition, by use of the anthropological analytical framework, Koselleck would in turn argue that history does not have to manifest itself in such a class struggle. 29 For excellent remarks on the narrow line of interpretations as well as on the strengths of Kritik und Krise, see first of all S. Haikala, 'Criticism in the Enlightenment: Perspectives on Koselleck's Kritik und Krise study', Finnish Yearbook of Political Thought, 1 (1997), 70–86; Edwards, 'Critique and Crisis', 428–46; A. J. La Vopa, 'Conceiving a Public: Ideas and Society in Eighteenth-Century Europe', Journal of Modern History, 64 (1992), 79–116; J. Popkin, 'The Concept of Public Opinion in the Historiography of the French Revolution', Storia della Storiografia, 20 (1991), 77–92. When Koselleck later remarked that the 'missing' chapter on the English constitution that was supposed to follow the section on Locke 'fed' certain 'wrong' interpretations of the book, he undoubtedly first of all referred to the mentioned review by Jürgen Habermas. R. Koselleck, 'Dankrede am 23 November 2004', in: Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006). Reden zum 50. Jahrestag seiner Promotion in Heidelberg, ed. S. Weinfurter (Heidelberg, 2006), 56. 30 For the topoi used to describe modernity by German conservatives in the postwar period, see J.-S. Chun, Das Bild der Moderne in der Nachkriegszeit. Die westdeutsche 'Strukturgeschichte' im Spannungsfeld von Modernitätskritik und wissenschaftlicher Innovation 1948–1962 (Munich, 2000). Among the most famous critics of the Weimar Öffentlichkeit were Schmitt and Heidegger. For a history of the concept of Öffentlichkeit in the nineteenth and twentieth century, see Öffentlichkeit: Geschichte eines kritischen Begriffs, ed. P. U. Hohendahl (Stuttgart, 2000). For a broader history of the concept, see L. Hölscher, 'Öffentlichkeit', in: Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, vol. 4, ed. O. Brunner, W. Conze, R. Koselleck (Stuttgart, 1978), 413–67. 31 Missfelder, 'Die Gegenkraft und ihre Geschichte', 325–34. 32 For such interpretations of world history among German conservatives in the 1940s and 1950s, see for example D. van Laak, '"Nach dem Sturm schlägt man auf die Barometer ein…" Rechtsintellektuelle Reaktionen auf das Ende des "Dritten Reiches"', Werkstatt Geschichte, 17 (1997), 25–44; D. van Laak, 'Trotz und Nachurteil. Rechtsintellektuelle im Anschluß an das "Dritte Reich"' in: Verwandlungspolitik. NS-Eliten in der Westdeutschen Nachkriegsgesellschaft, ed. W. Loth, B.-A. Rusenik (Frankfurt am Main, 1998), 55–77; J. Solchany, 'Vom Antimodernismus zum Antitotalitarismus. Konservative Interpretationen des Nationalsozialismus in Deutschland 1945–1949', Vierteljahreshefte für Zeitgeschichte, 44 (1996), 373–94; A. Schildt, 'Ende der Ideologien. Politisch-ideologische Strömungen in der 50er Jahren', in: Modernisierung im Wiederaufbau: die Westdeutsche Gesellschaft in der 50er Jahre, ed. A. Schildt, A. Sywottek (Bonn, 1993), 627–35; Chun, Das Bild der Moderne. The notion of Weltbürgerkrieg was given a special niche in German historical writing in the 1970s and in the socalled Historikerstreit of the 1980s, as Ernst Nolte referred to it in his attempt to explain the rise of National Socialism and its radicalization as a reaction to and shelter against communism. 33 C. Schmitt, Glossarium: Aufzeichnungen der Jahre 1947–1951 (Berlin, 1991). See also R. Mehring, 'Zu Schmitts Dämonologie – nach seinem Glossarium', Rechtstheorie. Zeitschrift für Logik, Methodenlehre, Kybernetik und Soziologie des Rechts, 23 (1992), 258–71. 34 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 134–5. See also Missfelder, 'Die Gegenkraft und ihre Geschichte', 332; L. Odysseos, 'Violence after the State? A Preliminary Examination of the Concept of "Global Civil War"', http://www.louizaodysseos.org.uk/resources/OdysseosSGIR2007.pdf. (2007). 35 Sombart, 'Rendezvous mit dem Weltgeist', 273. Ernst Jünger was among the first to use the term Weltbürgerkrieg. Schmitt began to use the term after a conversation with Jünger – the first time in C. Schmitt, 'Die letzte Globale Linie' (1943), in: Staat, Grossraum, Nomos: Arbeiten aus den Jahren 1916–1969 (Berlin, 1995), 441–52. See Missfelder, 'Die Gegenkraft und ihre Geschichte', 332; Odysseos, 'Violence after the State?' 36 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 39–45. 37 For the historical background of these topoi, see K. Flasch, Die geistige Mobilmachung: Die deutschen Intellektuellen und der Erste Weltkrieg (Berlin, 2000) and W. J. Mommsen, Kultur und Krieg: Die Rolle der Intellektuellen, Künstler und Schriftsteller im Ersten Weltkrieg (Munich, 1996). 38 RW265-8132: 8/7 (1953). 39 See also W. Steinmetz, 'Nachruf auf Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006)', Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 32 (2006), 427 – 'As always when Koselleck approached new themes, he did not stick to empirical observations. Already in his early works, he tried to fixate his theoretical perspective on general 'anthropological categories' that should allow comparisons from Antiquity to the present.' – and the two articles by S.-L. Hoffmann 'Zur Anthropologie geschichtlicher Erfahrungen Reinhart Koselleck und Hannah Arendt', in: Begriffene Geschichte: Beiträge zum Werk Reinhart Kosellecks, ed. H. Joas, P. Vogt (Frankfurt am Main, 2010), 171–204, and 'Was die Zukunft Birgt: Über Reinhart Kosellecks Historik', Merkur: Deutsche Zeitschrift für europäisches Denken, 63 (2009), 546–50, in which Hoffman illuminates Koselleck's attempt to provide a new concept of history. 40 R. Koselleck, 'Historik und Hermeneutik', in: Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften (1987), 9–28. 41 Hence the analytical vocabulary in the study frequently refers to the anthropological categories, first of all those of 'death', 'inner/outer', 'friend/enemy', 'up/down' and 'master/slave'. 42 R. Koselleck, 'Zur historisch-politischen Semantik asymmetrischer Gegenbegriffe', in: Positionen der Negativität: Poetik und Hermeneutik VI, ed. H. Weinrich (Munich, 1975), 65–105. 43 In Nomos der Erde, Schmitt outlined a shorter, but similar analysis of the dynamics at play in the definitions and uses of the asymmetrical counter-concepts that Koselleck deals with in his article. See Schmitt, Der Nomos der Erde, 71–5. 44 Koselleck, 'Zur historisch-politischen Semantik', 103–4. In Nomos der Erde, Schmitt outlined a shorter, but similar analysis of the dynamics at play in the definitions and uses of the asymmetrical counter-concepts that Koselleck deals with in his article. See Schmitt, Der Nomos der Erde, 71–5. 45 See Mehring, 'Begriffssoziologie, Begriffsgeschichte, Begriffspolitik'. 46 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 31 note 108. 47 For an account of Gadamer's reception of Heidegger, see J. Grondin, 'Heidegger und Hans-Georg Gadamer: Zur Phänomenologie des Verstehens-Geschehens', in: Heidegger-Handbuch. Leben-Werk-Wirkung, ed. D. Thomä (Stuttgart, 2003), 384–90. 48 RW265-8172: 3/1 (1977). 49 See also the later interview – Koselleck, 'Formen der Bürgerlichkeit', 76. 50 RW265-8172: 3/1 (1977). 51 Gott mit uns was the slogan of the Prussian royal house (from 1701) and the German emperor and a part of the Prussian (and later German) military emblem. Later, it was also used by the German army (and the German armed forces [Reichswehr] between 1921 and 1935). During World War II, the German soldiers carried the slogan on their buckle-belts, while the members of the SS carried the slogan Meine Ehre heißt Treue. For the history of the slogan, see G. Krumreich, 'Gott mit uns'? Der Erste Weltkrieg als Religionskrieg', in: 'Gott mit uns'. Nation, Religion und Gewalt im 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhundert, ed. G. Krumreich, H. Lehmann (Göttingen, 2000), 273–83 and P. Franz, 'Gott mit uns', in: Kleines Lexikon historisches Schlagwörter, ed. K. Pätzold, M. Weißbecker (Cologne, 2005), 136–8. 52 For comments on Heidegger's heroic and militaristic language, see T. Rentsch, Das Sein und der Tod. Eine kritische Einführung (Munich, 1989), 158–74. For an account of Heidegger's fascination of 'death', see H.-U. Gumbrecht, 'Stichwort: Tod im Kontext. Heideggers Umgang mit einer Faszination der 1920er Jahre', in: Heidegger-Handbuch. Leben-Werk-Wirkung, ed. D. Thomä (Stuttgart, 2003), 98–103. 53 See also the comments in the interview Koselleck, 'Formen der Bürgerlichkeit', 76. 54 J. Taubes, 'Geschichtsphilosophie und Historik. Bemerkungen zu Kosellecks Programm einer neuen Historik', in: Poetik und Hermeneutik V. Geschichte – Ereignis und Erzählung, ed. R. Koselleck, W.-D. Stempel (Munich, 1973). 55 Koselleck, Kritik und Krise, 4. 56 For a historical perspective on the traditions in the German academic community, see F. K. Ringer, The decline of the German mandarins: the German academic community, 1890–1933 (Cambridge, 1969). 57 In the published version of Kritik und Krise, Koselleck had also deleted the note that compared Hobbes's and Heidegger's categories of 'death'. 58 R. Koselleck, 'Im Vorfeld einer neuen Historik', Neue Politische Literatur, 7 (1961), 577–87. See also R. Koselleck, 'Review of Theodor Schieder: Begegnungen mit der Geschichte (Göttingen, 1962)', Das historisch-politische Buch, 11 (1963), 295. 59 H. Kuhn, 'Review', Historische Zeitschrift, 192 (1961), 666. 60 Kuhn, 'Review', 668. In the citation, Kuhn presumably alluded to the many striking similarities between Adorno and Horkheimer's Dialektik der Aufklärung and Kritik und Krise, among other things the idea that National Socialism was not an aberration of modern history, but instead rooted deeply in Western civilization: in a fateful and self-destructive dialectic inherent in the birth of the Enlightenment. On several occasions, also Koselleck referred to the similarities between the two books. In addition, he once stated that he intended to give his dissertation the title Dialektik der Aufklärung until he discovered the 1947 edition of Adorno and Horkheimer's book (which is listed in the bibliography of the 1954 edition of Kritik und Krise). See R. Koselleck, 'Dankrede am 23 November 2004', in: Reinhart Koselleck (1923–2006). Reden zum 50. Jahrestag seiner Promotion in Heidelberg, ed. S. Weinfurter (Heidelberg, 2006), 34. 61 Koselleck, 'Formen der Bürgerlichkeit', 75. As late as 1965, Koselleck is mentioned in an article by the political scientist Christian Graf von Krockow that warned against the authoritarian alternative to the German democracy that Ernst Forsthoff and other 'associates' of Schmitt allegedly argued for in the journal Der Staat. C. Graf von Krockow, 'Staatsideologie oder demokratisches Bewusstsein. Die deutsche Alternative', Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 6 (1965), 118–31. For recent readings of Kritik und Krise as a conservative book, see Schwartz, 'Leviathan oder Lucifer' and Hohendahl, 'Recasting the Public Sphere'. See also F. L. Fillafer, 'The Enlightenment on Trial: Reinhart Koselleck's Interpretation of Aufklärung', in: The Many Faces of Clio: Cross-Cultural Approaches to Historiography, ed. F. L. Fillafer, E. Q. Wang (Oxford, 2007), 322–45. 62 C. Schmitt, 'Review', Das Historisch-Politische Buch, 7 (1959), 301–2. Schmitt read the manuscript before the publication and Koselleck asked him hereupon for a review. Mehring, 'Begriffsgeschichte mit Carl Schmitt'. Schmitt's reflections on the applied method in the review might have been prompted by a request made by Koselleck. See his letter to Schmitt – RW265-8151: 18/6-1959. 63 Schmitt, 'Review', 302. An excerpt of Schmitt's review was printed on the back-page of the later editions of Kritik und Krise. In the cited passage, Schmitt referred to the book Die Lessing-Legende (1882), written by the German publicist, politician and Marxist historian Franz Mehring (1846–1919). The book was directed against the patriotic school of German literary historians who tried to prove that the renaissance of German literature in the eighteenth century was due to the rise of Prussia as a European power, and that there was a close connection between the despotism of the Prussian king Frederick II and the birth of classical German literature.
Referência(s)