Historický ústav akademie věd České republiky, v. v. i.


ISSN 0862-6111
ročník 111/2013
č. 1/2013
s. 1-265



BŮŽEK Václav – MAREK Pavel
Nemoci, smrt a pohřby Rudolfa II.
(The Illnesses, Death and Funerals of Rudolph II.)
s. 1–30

Despite few written testimonies, the state of health of Rudolph II has not been without interest to historians. At first they envisaged the causes of his unbalanced mental state, in particular, in the diseases of the nervous system which they interpreted as a result of a hereditary predisposition in the family anamnesis of the Hapsburgs. Some of them later connected the ruler’s transient periods of unnatural irritability with a syphilitic infection. It was no secret to the later biographers of Rudolph II that in addition to his stated neurological condition and infectious illnesses, the Emperor suffered from long term poor functioning of the lungs and the liver. Especially at the end of 1611 the curious eyes of foreign envoys at the Imperial Court were drawn to the fact that Rudolph II was in extremely acute pain when walking. They saw the cause of the ruler’s mobility problems in the aquosity of the lower limbs which had been noticeably swollen for a long time. Testimonies on the ruler’s state of health were accompanied by reports of his insomnia, bouts of depression and night sweats.
According to the testimonies of the ruler’s personal physicians, the weakened and seriously ill Emperor suffered terrible pains but remained fully conscious until the moment of his death which occured between 06:00 and 07:00 on the 20th January 1612. The post-mortem examination of the corpse of Rudolph II took place in the afternoon hours of the same day. According to this post-mortem report, the heart’s chambers of the deceased Emperor contained many pathological scars which seemed to imply that the ruler had suffered several repeated myocardial infarctions. The deceased’s black coloured lungs were saturated with coagulated blood. The scirrhous liver detained bile which had formed inflammatory lesions on its surface. The swollen lower limbs were, according to the post-mortem report, suffused with a dark liquid. The open wounds on the skin of both the Emperor’s lower limbs were infected by inflammatory gangrene. The contents of the post-mortem report suggest that an advance stage syphilis did not necessarily have to be the only cause of the death of Rudolph II. Although the Emperor’s state of health was also influenced by the diseases of his respiratory and digestive tracts, his death might well have been hastened up by his diseased heart.
After the completion of the post-mortem, the embalming and robing, the corpse of Rudolph II was lying-in-state in one of the representative halls probably on the second floor of the southern wing of Prague Castle, where the Emperor had granted audiences, on the 21st January 1612. The lying-in-state of the deceased Emperor’s bodily remains represented the first stage of the elaborate Catholic funeral ritual during which the departure of the biological body of the ruler from the earthly world was substituted in collective memory by the immortality of his social body. During the night of the 5th – 6th February 1612 the corpse of the Central European ruler was transferred via the Wladislaw Hall to All Saints Church at Prague Castle where it was placed for a temporary lying-in- state in an open coffin.
Although the celebration of the immortality of the social body of the deceased Emperor was to culminate during the funeral procession in Prague, the opinions on the timing of it and its progression differed significantly. For personal, political and financial reasons Rudolph’s successor Matthias advocated a modest last farewell to the departed Emperor. However, opposing views were expresed by his brothers and the majority the royal officials of the Czech Kingdom. With emphasis on the continuity of the dynastical memory they quoted the very grandiose funerals of Ferdinand I and Maximilian II in support of their argument. Whereas the views on the funeral of the deceased Rudolph II differed in Prague during the spring months, the last farewells with the late ruler took place speedily in other European towns. The final farewells for the deceased Emperor on the 12th and 13th March in Antwerp, Brussels and Madrid were in line with the symbolic expectation of the confirmation of holy continuity. The Cathedral of Our Lady of Antwerp was consecrated for the funeral ceremony, in Brussels it was the Royal Chapel in the Deputy Governor’s residence of the Archduke Albrecht, in Madrid the Church of the Monastery of Las Descalzas Reales, ly the Monastery of Barefoot Royals for the Order of Franciscans nuns. The mourning rites lasted two days – on the evening of the first day a vigil for the deceased was held, the following morning a requiem mass was celebrated. In an exceptionally solemn requiem the priest celebrated the virtues of the deceased and offered absolution to his soul. A grandiose castrum doloris formed an integral part of the mourning ritual which further emphasised a message of the devoutness, power and world domination of the deceased Hapsburg.
It was only in the evening hours of the 1st October that the coffin with the body of Rudolph II. was inconspicuously taken from All Saints’ Church and deposited next to the coffin of his father Maxmilian II. in the royal crypt of St Vitus Cathedral. Foreign observers overlooked the fact that the deposition of the coffin with the remains of Rudolph II. in the royal crypt took place without the presence of his brothers and other relatives. The presence of Matthias at the early evening vigil of the 2nd October 1612 was also a matter of little interest. They paid more attention to the proceedings of the morning requiem mass for the dead Emperor in the ceremoniously decorated St Vitus Cathedral on the 3rd October which represented the culmination of the Catholic funeral ritual. The focus of the mourning decoration was a magnificent castrum doloris, whose symbolic furnishings, signifying the prestige of the deceased, featured a coffin, the Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire, the Crown of Saint Wenceslas and the Holy Crown of St.Stephen, a sword, the Imperial Apple and the Order of the Golden Fleece. Although the coffin, placed in the middle of the castrum doloris, was empty, its decoration sent out a clear message. It emphasised the values of universal authority, sanctioned by God, a territorial based reign and the values of a Christian knight which in collective memory formed the fabric of the social body of the deceased Rudolph II. Although the image of the social body of Rudolph II. was not in accord with the earthly views on the Emperor’s competence to rule, its supratemporal message was distinctly manifested in the symbols of afterlife allegories. In line with the tradition of his legendary ancestors, this Central European ruler journeyed to the Olympian throne of eternity to live in God’s presence in the Sun Chariot of the Greek God Hercules, which was drawn to the summit of immortal glory by the Bohemian Lion and the Imperial Eagles. The sun’s rays expressing the incessancy of God’s will accompanied the triumph of the immortality of the social body of the deceased Rudolph II, which was embellished with the attributes of Imperial power.

Studie se zabývá zvláště na základě badatelsky nevyužitých relací zahraničních vyslanců na císařském dvoře, rodinné korespondence Habsburků a pitevní zprávy průběhem nemocí Rudolfa II., jeho smrtí a pohřby v Madridu a Praze. V souvislosti se šířením zpráv o úmrtí středoevropského vládce v průběhu roku 1612 autoři usilovali o poznání obsahu a prostředků komunikace na císařském dvoře v Praze. Stranou pozornosti neponechali činnost vlivných dvořanů a jejich zpravodajské sítě. Současně sledovali komunikační cesty mezi Prahou, Antverpami, Bruselem, Florencií, Madridem, Norimberkem a Římem, po kterých se šířily informace o smrti Rudolfa II. a přípravě jeho pohřbu. Těžiště studie spočívá ve výkladu o symbolickém významu sociálního těla zesnulého císaře, jenž od vystavení mrtvoly po zádušní mše vstupoval do kolektivní paměti podle vzoru svých slavných předků z habsburské dynastie jako ctnostný panovník, křesťanský rytíř a bojovník za katolickou víru.

This study, based, in particular, on reports, until now unused in research, from foreign envoys to the Imperial Court; the Hapsburgs’family correspondence, the post-mortem report, deals with the course of the illnesses of Rudolph II., his death and funeral ceremonies in Madrid and Prague. In connection with the spread of the reports of the death of the Central European ruler during the year of 1612, the authors have attempted to gain an insight into the contents and means of communication at the Imperial Court in Prague. They have not failed to pay attention to the activities of influential courtiers and their intelligence networks. At the same time they traced the communication routes between Prague, Antwerp, Brussels, Florence, Madrid, Nuremberg and Rome along which the information about the death of Rudolph II and preparations for his funeral spread. The focus of this study lies in the interpretation of the symbolic importance of the social body of the deceased Emperor. From the lying-in-state of the corpse to the requiem mass, he was entering the collective memory as a virtuous ruler, a Christian knight and a defender of the Catholic faith, like his famous ancestors of the Hapsburg dynasty.

Key words: the Hapsburg dynasty, Rudolph II., Prague, Madrid, the Imperial Court, illness, death, funerals, castrum doloris, symbolic communication, the memory of the social body

ŽITNÝ Miroslav
Keresztes 1596. Vytváření obrazu prohrané bitvy s Turky a její druhý život
(Keresztes 1596. The Creation of an Image of the Lost Battle with the Ottomans and its Second Life)
s. 31–65

Based on the example of the greatest battle of the fifteen years war between the Hapsburg Monarchy and the Ottomans near Keresztes (Eger) in Upper Hungary in October 1596, this case study traces the creation of a discourse image of this clash of the empires and its subsequent second life in the Rudolphinian Czech Lands and its overlap into the 19th century. The defeat of the Imperial armies at Keresztes was reflected in contemporary reports, propaganda and even in a number of personal eyewitness accounts and they consequently became Rudoph II’s levers of argument in his attempts to engage the Czech Estates in the defence of Hungary against Ottoman expansion.
Thanks to the preserved reflections of the battle in personal documents of the Czech nobility, alongside the use of approaches of historical anthropology and symbolic communication, it has been possible to demonstrate that the handed down account of the battle contained the contents that were generally understood, being, namely, on the one side a crushing defeat leading to fears of further Ottoman advance, while on the other hand (yet, acknowledged with a larger time gap) the simultaneous heroism of the Czech cavalry and the exemplary combat skills of the Christian knights, which were to be then copied by other real Christians. Both of these fundamental levels were helpful to the subsequent political aspirations of the Hapsburgs. The image of the battle was subsequently imbued with a large dose of national pride and a celebration of Czechness through the pen of Bartoloměj Paprocký of Hlohol, a Czech orientated humanist author. Yet, in Paprocký’s presentation it could not be interpreted as being anti-monarchical.
The story of the Battle of Keresztes also found a lasting place in the memory of several participating aristocratic families, for example the noble family of Pětipeský of Chýše and the Schwarzenbergs. In subsequent narratives a national dimension of the battle image gradually progressed. At the end of the 1880s and the early 1890s it even advanced to the stage when Paprocký’s image of the Czech heroes in the battle served as a strong argument for the Czech National Revival movement. The theme under study invites further research in terms of a comparative perspective on the clashes with the Ottomans in the early Modern Age.

Studie sleduje s využitím přístupů historické antropologie a symbolické komunikace vytváření diskursivního obrazu bitvy u Keresztes (Eger) v říjnu 1596, největšího střetu patnáctileté války Habsburků s osmanskými Turky. Pozornost je dále věnována proměnám a následnému druhému životu tohoto obrazu v rudolfinské době s přesahem do 19. století.

This study traces, using the approaches of historic anthropology and symbolic communication, the creation of a discourse image of the Battle of Keresztes (Eger) in October 1596, the largest clash during the fifteen years of conflict between the Hapsburgs and the Ottoman Turks. Attention is further devoted to the changes and the subsequent life of this image in the Rudolphinian period and its overlap into the 19th century.

Key words: Keresztes 1596, fifteen years war, battle, Ottoman expansion in the 16th and 17th century, discursive image, Christian knighthood, propaganda, the Rudolphinian period, historical anthropology, symbolic communication, Czech patriotism

Renesanční epitaf v průsečíku historických disciplín a jeho vypovídací možnosti
(Renaissance Epitaph on the Intersection of Disciplines and its Communicational Possibilities)
s. 66–100

The Renaissance epitaphs visually defined the 16th and 17th century; a distinctive “culture of epitaphs” existed in this period. In some regions, this highly popular art form was predominate in the work of painters and sculptors. The main task of this text is to define epitaph in comparison with other sepulchral monuments (especially gravestones or head stones) and to attempt to explain their extreme popularity within contemporary discourse around death, remembering and salvation. The text also explores the interpretive possibilities of this “artwork” as a “source” within the “document – monument” relationship. It raises a question of the role of art history, or more exactly, of art-historical material, in the context of cultural-historical “death studies.” Which methods should we use to approach this material? Traditionally, history and art history study material within their isolated fields, which prevents them from drawing maximum benefit from their intersection. The author believes that it is not possible to analyze epitaph solely from the art-historical position as an object of style and form, a pure “art.” Neither is it useful to treat it as a reservoir of historical facts, or reduce it to vague illustration of historical texts. The epitaph carries unique information necessary for understanding the historical reality, if we explain it historically and perceive it as a specific “source.” By studying the epitaph as an “image,” art historians can contribute to the critique of this “source.” Art history takes into account the role and “networking” of the artist and the patron, analyzes the inner logic of the artwork and its relationship to visual tradition, and explores the role of visual stereotypes and conventions influenced by cultural patterns of the period and by shared experience. One concludes that it is impossible to separate the art-historical and historical point of view. Epitaph thus remains an auxiliary historical source, and a work of art, a pure form, but it is also a visual medium, a means of communication carrying a unique message. Art-historical studies of sepulchral monuments use analysis of visual norms, forms and iconography to offer an alternative view of the “death phenomenon.”
Studying the role of epitaphs as sepulchral monuments leads to a complex culturally historical theme of death, dying and remembering. Historical research deals with the theme mainly as a cultural phenomenon, studying the reception and perception of death in the past and seeing death as a social construction that touches upon the wide field of cultural history, historical anthropology and history of mentalities. Epitaphs as “social images of the dead” show expressively how the collectively imagined existence of the dead permeates both historical and present time. The text focuses on the denominational aspect of epitaphs and how this reflects the depiction of the protagonists (who were not always identical with the patrons). The author argues that sepulchral art should continue to be distinguished according to the denomination, despite justified objections that there was a tendency, especially in the Czech Lands, to restrain the strong denominational self-identification and its confrontational expression. Apart from a number of seemingly iconografically neutral examples, there are many epitaphs with distinctly Catholic as well as non-Catholic (Lutheran, Calvinistic) iconography, which, together with corresponding texts, represented the denominational identity of the protagonists. This is also connected with the way both main denominational parties built their own unique visual culture and imagination in religious art. We need to analyze the specific language of epitaphs (iconography, inscriptions, the way they address the viewer, the expression of relationship of the dead to God, the presentation of the virtuous life) because this language reflected the mentality of dying and remembering as developed in individual denominational cultures. (However, their denominational distinctness should not be perceived in all cases within a strictly polarized context.) 16th and 17th century guidebooks of good death speak similar language and even though they are often normative and idealized, their informational value is essential. In this sense, it is even more useful to compare epitaphs with funeral sermons, which were, like epitaphs, created after death, and their existence was not limited to the space of the funeral or the duration of the ceremony. In the form of prints, sermons had much wider range of influence, both spatially and temporally. Like epitaphs, sermons are “conceptual media”: they do not “describe” but use rhetorical figures and traditional clichés to construct an ideal image of the deceased person. From a confessional point of view, both sermons and epitaphs use numerous seemingly marginal nuances and universally valid formula, or omit certain denominationally charged motifs. Paradoxically, these nuances, absences and generalizations confirm the essentially denominational tone of both epitaphs and sermons. This tone may seem indistinct to us but was more than obvious to the contemporary recipient. The peculiar “conceptual” character of epitaphs, so clearly visible from the religious (confessional) point of view offers a possibility to study epitaphs as something more than “formal artworks” on the one hand, or “sources to exploit” on the other. Instead, we can view epitaphs as complex media reflecting cultural codes of dying, death, remembering and salvation (which is especially interesting in the context of Europe divided by different denominations), but also as pure phenomenon that took part in forming the death discourse of the period.

Renesanční epitaf ukazuje přes řadu dílčích příspěvků stále z větší části nedoceněný pramen, který bohužel často studují na jedné straně historikové umění jen jako „umělecké dílo“, zatímco na straně druhé historikové mnohdy vytěžují obvykle pouze dostupné faktografické (heraldické, epigrafické, genealogické, prosopografické ad.) údaje. Z hlediska širší perspektivy kulturní historie či historické antropologie by však bylo vhodné, aby si obě disciplíny uvědomily specifikum epitafu jako sepulkrálního památníku, jehož cílem bylo zvláštním způsobem konstruovat identitu „sociálního těla“ zemřelých. Osobitý konceptuální charakter epitafu tak nabízí možnost studovat jej jako složitější médium (pramen) reflektující kulturní kódy umírání, smrti, vzpomínání a spásy (zvláště zajímavé v konfesně rozdělené Evropě), avšak také jako specifický fenomén, který dobový diskurs smrti napomáhal i utvářet.

Despite a number of particular studies, the Renaissance epitaph remains a largely undervalued source. Art historians study it solely as a “work of art,” while historians tend to use it as a source of purely factual data (heraldic, epigraphic, genealogical, prosopographic etc.). However, from the wider, cultural-historical or historical- anthropological perspective, it is necessary for both disciplines to realize the specific value of the epitaph as a sepulchral monument, the goal of which was to construct the identity of the “social body” of the deceased. The specific conceptual character of the epitaph thus offers a possibility to study it as a complex medium (source) reflecting cultural codes of dying, death, remembering and salvation (which is especially interesting in the context of Europe divided by different denominations), but also as a pure phenomenon that took part in forming the death discourse of the period.

Key words: Epitaph, sepulchral monuments, death, Renaissance, early modern era, confessions, Czech Lands

Jednota bratrská a rodinné zázemí Václava Hollara
(The Unity of the Brethren and the Family Backround of Wenceslaus Hollar)
s. 101–116

The biographers of Wenceslaus Hollar, who have attempted to establish the confessional allegiance of this artist of European importance, have run into difficulties in terms of a lack of primary sources. That led them in turn to hypotheses which positioned the artist and his family on the one hand into the Protestant orbit (primarily Czech historiography) or on the other hand into Catholic stream (mainly German researchers). The main reason for this prevarication between the two confessional streams on the side of historians and art historians was the confessionally ambiguous behaviour of the members of his family. The successful pre-White Mountain and post-White Mountain clerical career of Wenceslaus Hollar’s father in the civil service, alongside an elevation of the family coat of arms of the Hollars of Prácheň in the 1630s counted as the main arguments for Catholic allegiance. On the contrary, the departure of Wenceslaus Hollar from the Czech Lands in the period of the culminating second Post-White Mountain emigration wave of 1627 and contemporary reports about his conversion to Catholicism only during his stay abroad, were to testify in favour of allegiance to some branches of the Protestant confession.
The assessment of contemporary primary sources, especially those in the collections of the Archives of the capital city of Prague point to the existence of links between the family of the Hollars of Horažďovice and the Protestant environment not merely in the pre-White Mountain period but also in the post-White Mountain period. New information on this issue has been provided by a newly discovered primary source – an index of names of the members of the Unity of the Brethren in the Towns of Prague and their suburbs from 1607, from the archive fund of Matouš Konečný, Bishop of the Unity of the Brethren. This register also mentions „John Holar of Horaždějovice“, who, on the basis of currently known resources would most probably have been the father of Wenceslaus. John Hollar,contrary to other members of the Unity of the Brethren did not publicly declare his confessional allegiance even after the 1609 Rudolphine Letter of Majesty ensuring religious freedoms. The pragmatism of his approach to faith which other members of the family clan also found convenient, naturally represents a certain specific feature not merely in the context of commonly held notions of the Brethren confession but would have also gone beyond the fortunes of the majority of other members of the Prague congregation.

Příspěvek na základě údajů z nově nalezeného pramene k dějinám Jednoty bratrské, tj. soupisu jejích členů z měst pražských a jejich předměstí z roku 1607, a jejich konfrontace s dalšími dobovými dokumenty, odhaluje příslušnost otce malíře a rytce Václava Hollara k této konfesi. Část příslušníků hollarovského rodu, který měl českobratrské kořeny, se však dokázala v dobovém konfesijním prostředí pohybovat poměrně pragmaticky a přizpůsobovat se i změnám konfesijních poměrů, čímž se nejen vymykala obvyklým představám o bratrské konfesi, ale stála i v protikladu k osudům většiny dalších pražských členů sboru Jednoty bratrské.

This contribution, on the basis of data from a recently discovered primary source on the history of the Unity of the Brethren, i.e. the name index of its members from the Towns of Prague and suburbs from 1607, and their confrontation with other contemporary documents, reveals the allegiance of Wenceslaus Hollar’s father to this confession. However, some members of the Hollar Family, which had Czech Brethren roots, suceeded in behaving rather pragmatically in a new contemporary confessional environment and in adapting to the changes of confessional conditions by which they went beyond the usual notions of the Brethren confession and stood in contrast to the fortunes of the majority of other Prague members of the congregation of the Unity of the Brethren.

Key words: 17th century, the Czech Lands, Prague, Horažďovice, Wenceslaus Hollar, John Hollar, the Unity of the Brethren


Synody a synodální zákonodárství ve středovýchodní Evropě. Přehled bádání za posledních patnáct let
(Synods and Synodical Legislation in East Central Europe. An Overview of Research over the last Fifteen Years)
s. 117–143

The author presents an overview of research into the issues related to synods and synod legislation in East Central Europe over the last fifteen years. The prevailing part of the research is represented by outputs dealing with the history of the high and late Middle Ages, when synods took place with the highest frequency. The emphasis is put on the research of Czech and Polish synods. The paper describes the outputs dealing with legatine synods, provincial synods and diocesan synods. The territory is limited to the lands of the Bohemian Crown, Poland, Hungary, Pomerania, the State of German Knights in Prussia and the Margraviate of Meissen. Regarding the levels of church administration, the paper covers the church provinces of Prague, Gniezno, Esztergom and Riga and the dioceses of Kamień Pomorski and Meißen. Given the fact that the dioceses of Prague and Olomouc were included in the Mainz church province, the paper also deals with works on Mainz Archbishops’ provincial synods and statutes. New monographs on synods
and critical editions of synodical statutes of dioceses in Olomouc and Kamień Pomorski have been published. Editions of Prague Archbishops’ and Bishops’ statutes, originally published in the Apollinaris journal, have appeared in a comprehensive collection. Numerous studies on Polish diocesan synods, Polish provincial synods, synodical legislation in Prussia and Moravia and Hungarian synods, have been released.

The author presents an overview of research into the issues related to synods and synod legislation in East Central Europe over the last fifteen years. The paper describes the outputs dealing with legatine synods, provincial synods and diocesan synods. The territory is limited to the lands of the Bohemian Crown, Poland, Hungary, Pomerania, the State of German Knights in Prussia and the Margraviate of Meissen. Given the fact that the dioceses of Prague and Olomouc were included in the Mainz church province, the paper also deals with works on Mainz Archbishops’ provincial synods and statutes. The article is structured in the following chapters: 1. Introduction; 2. Position of synodical issues within Czech historiography; 3. Book sources editions; 4. Book monographs; 5. Chapters on synods in syntheses; 6. Conference collections on synods and book anthologies of synodical studies; 7. Studies and articles: 7.1. Legatine, provincial and diocesan synods in the lands of the Bohemian Crown; 7.2. Polish legatine, provincial and diocesan synods; 7.3. Synods in Prussia and Pomerania; 7.4. Legatine synods of Hungary (and Poland) and Hungarian diocesan synods; 7.5. Catholic synods and the Hussite movement; 8. Summary. Publications in preparation.

Key words: legatine synod, provincial synod, diocesan synod, legatine statutes, provincial statutes, diocesan statutes, synodical statutes, synodical legislation, particular eccclesiastical law, canon law, codification, East Central Europe, Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, Lusatia, Polonia, Pomerania, Prussia, Hungary, Meißen, church provinces of Prague, Gniezno, Riga, Esztergom, Mainz, L’viv, dioeceses of Meißen, Kamień Pomorski, the high and late Middle Ages


Přehledy bádání a historiografických studií

RAKOVÁ Svatava
Dilemata antifašismu: mezi appeasementem a Kominternou
(The Dilemma of Anti-Fascism: Between Appeasement and the Comintern)
s. 144-151

This review article is concerned with the tactics and tools employed by the European Left in the anti-fascist campaigns related to the significant political events of the 1930’s (Reichstag Fire, Spanish Civil War etc.). The relationship among anti-fascism, struggle against anti-Semitism and pro-Soviet sympathies are followed through the case study of Otto Katz (sentenced to death as André Simone in the so called „Slánský process“ 1952), an important figure of the Communist organizational and propaganda network, and the reflection of his intricate career in the recent English historiography.

Key words: Interwar period, communist movement, anti-fascism, Otto Katz, propaganda


ŽEMLIČKA Josef, Přemysl Otakar II. Král na rozhraní věků
(Jiří Kuthan) s. 152–154

CERMAN Markus, Villagers and Lords in Eastern Europe, 1300–1800
(Josef Grulich) s. 154–157

DOLEŽALOVÁ Eva, Svěcenci pražské diecéze 1395–1416
(Jindřich Marek) s. 157–159

BYLINA Stanisław, Rewolucja husycka. Przedświt i pierwsze lata
(Pavel Krafl) s. 159–161

KELLER Katrin – CATALANO Alessandro (edd.), Die Diarien und Tagzettel des Kardinals Ernst Adalbert von Harrach (1598–1667), I–VII
(Rostislav Smíšek) s. 161–165

LEONHARD Jörn – WIELAND Christian (Eds.), What Makes the Nobility Noble? Comparative Perspectives from the Sixteenth to the Twentieth Century
(Jan Županič) s. 165–167

BAHLCKE Joachim – KAMPMANN Christoph (edd.), Wallensteinbilder im Widerstreit. Eine historische Symbolfigur in Geschichtsschreibung und Literatur vom 17. bis zum 20. Jahrhundert
(Václav Bůžek) s. 167–170

MILLER Michael Laurence, Rabbis and Revolution: The Jews of Moravia in the Age of Emancipation
(Daniel Baránek) s. 170–174

VIRŠINSKÁ Miriam, Evanjelická cirkev a. v. v Uhorsku a Slováci v druhej polovici 19. storočia
(Zdeněk R. Nešpor) s. 174–176

KOELTZSCH Ines, Geteilte Kulturen. Eine Geschichte der tschechisch-jüdisch-deutschen Beziehungen in Prag (1918–1938)
(Bedřich Loewenstein) s. 176–178

KOELTZSCH Ines, Geteilte Kulturen. Eine Geschichte der tschechisch-jüdisch-deutschen Beziehungen in Prag (1918–1938)
(Jiří Pešek) s. 178–190

KOVALEV Michail V., Russkije istoriki-emigranty v Prage (1920–1940 gg.)
(Jiří Vacek) s. 190–193

KRÁLOVÁ Kateřina, Nesplacená minulost. Řecko-německé vztahy ve stínu nacismu
(Konstantinos Tsivos) s. 193–196

BROUČEK Stanislav a kol., Lidová kultura. Národopisná encyklopedie Čech, Moravy a Slezska
(Marcela Suchomelová) s. 196–199

s. 200–234


Činnost Česko-německé komise historiků v roce 2011
s. 235–239

Vilém Herold (15. 9. 1933 – 10. 9. 2012)
(Ivan Hlaváček) s. 240–244

Jozef Jablonický (3. 1. 1933 – 7. 12. 2012)
(Jan Rychlík) s. 245–246

Knihy došlé redakci
s. 247

Výtahy z českých časopisů a sborníků
s. 247