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

ČESKÝ ČASOPIS HISTORICKÝ
THE CZECH HISTORICAL REVIEW


ročník 111/2013
č. 2/2013

s. 269-480
ISSN 0862-6111


OBSAH / CONTENTS


STUDIE / STUDIES


KVAČEK Robert
Atentát na Reinharda Heydricha v souvislostech
(The Assassination of Reinhard Heydrich and its Connections)

s. 269–275

Czech society, the main creator of the Czechoslovak state, was threatened in its very existence by the intentions of Nazi Germany to conquer fully the Czech Lands. The Reich prepared their Germanization to which it had laid the foundations through the establishment of a temporary Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. It strengthened and expanded them when the Acting Reich Protector Reinhard Heydrich became the Head of the Protectorate. He attempted to suppress the main rival of Germanization – the Czech resistance – through bloody repressions and political interventions. He became its victim when attacked by a resistance section from abroad. The assassination was at the same time a part of the war against the Nazi Reich and it should be viewed accordingly. Its plan was conceived by a Czechoslovak military and political exile group in London, and also with the full co-operation of the relevant British authorities. Several domestic resistance groupings, for whom the primary motivation was their Czech patriotism participated in its realization. The successful assassination directed at the all-powerful Heydrich strengthened the international efforts of Czechoslovak resistance to enforce the post-war restoration of the Czechoslovak state.

Abstrakt:
Text Heydrichiáda a česká společnost byl přednesen na XVIII. valném shromáždění Učené společnosti České republiky v Karolinu dne 14. května 2012. Jedná se o stručnou historii autorova celoživotního výzkumu problematiky české společnosti v době Protektorátu Čechy a Morava.

This address, The Heydrich Era and Czech Society, was presented to the XVIIIth General Assembly of the Learned Society of the Czech Republic in the Carolinum, the Great Hall of Charles University, on the 14th May 2012. It encapsulated a brief synopsis of the author’s life-long research into the issues of Czech society during the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.

Key words: Czech nation, Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, Reinhard Heydrich, World War II


HRBEK Jiří
Stavovství, absolutismus a osvícenství v díle Rudolfa Vierhause. Význam německého historika nejen pro dějiny raného novověku
(The Estates, the Age of Absolutism and the Enlightenment in the Work of Rudolf Vierhaus. The significance of this German historian yet not merely for the history of the Early Modern Age)
s. 276–299

This study offers a review of the work of Rudolf Vierhaus, the recently deceased German historian. The scope of his work is staggering: starting with historiographical studies in which he returned with the clockwork-like regularity to the personality of Leopold von Ranke, the founder of German historiography, through fundamental studies on modern history (e.g. on the nature of the leadership principle in Nazi Germany) up to the history of notions and the history of intellectual movements. When interpreting these topics he made good use of his philosophical training. This training has fundamentally influenced his merited interest in the history of the Enlightenment, which he saw in principle as a cultural process in which the modern Europe was born. In this sense he viewed the decades preceding the French Revolution to be decisive ones, when the Enlightenment even touched on political history. Indeed, it was the very period of the 18th century to which Vierhaus devoted his synthetic works in which the focus was on the relationship between the Estates’s structures and the Sovereign’s Absolutism. However, Rudolf Vierhaus also participated in the organisation of scientific life and the establishment of contacts between German and Eastern European historians post-1989, namely in conjunction with his conviction that the knowledge of historical roots of problems would lead to their ultimate resolution.

Abstrakt:
Studie se věnuje dílu Rudolfa Vierhause, které lze rozdělit na čtyři základní části, jež odrážejí jeho zájem historiografický (Leopold von Ranke), teoreticko-filozofický (dějiny pojmů a idejí), dále potom zájem o moderní dějiny (otázka zvláštní německé cesty k modernitě, problematika nacismu a jeho kořenů) a zejména o osvícenství jako kulturně-historický proces s výraznými politickými a společenskými konotacemi.

The study is devoted to the work of Rudolf Vierhaus, which may be divided into four fundamental parts reflecting his historiographical interest (Leopold von Ranke); his theoretical-philosophical interest (history of concepts and ideas), thereafter his interest in modern history (the issue of of a particular German path to modernity, the questions of Nazism and its roots) and primarily the Enlightenment as a cultural-historical process with its distinctive political and social connotations.

Key words: German historiography, the Age of Absolutism, the Enlightenment, the history of historiography, the Estates, 18th century


CERMAN Ivo
Lidská práva v rakouském osvícenství. Wolff, Martini a Windischgrätz
(Human rights in the Austrian Enlightenment. Wolff, Martini and Windischgrätz)
s. 300–334

The present article reconstructs the development of early human rights theories in the Austrian Enlightenment, which have been unduly neglected by Czech historiography. In a critical review of previous research, I reject maximalism stretching the history of human rights back to Hammurabi, and establish the minimal requirements of theories relating to the history of human rights.
In this case, our attention focuses on Christian Wolff, Karl Anton Martini and Joseph Nikolaus Windischgraetz. We argue that Martini’s conception was grounded in Wolff’s concept of natural law. Martini proceeds from rational human nature and the priority of universal obligations, and affirms natural equality, liberty and the right to pursue happiness, to which he adds the perfect rights to self-preservation, necessary property, security, defence, force, and assertion of one’s rights. Unlike Wolff he devoted more attention to the situation after the social contract, in which he follows the second generation of German Protestant lawyers. Contrary to Wolff he lays greater emphasis on the defence of freedom of conscience, and on the sovereign’s rights over Church property. In a conflict between the subject and the sovereign, Martini advises trusting the ruler, and rejects violent resistance. In the case of a clash between the rights of citizens, Martini argues on the basis of a hierarchy of perfect and imperfect obligations.
Windischgraetz builds on his ideas on this position, but he does not infer rights from obligations, but from the negative law of nature which prohibits doing evil to any human being. His theory proceeds from French doctrines of sensualism and from the need to seek pleasure and avoid pain, but rejects the idea of the social contract. The aim of human rights is to protect humans against unnecessary evil which they did not cause; these rights thus become merely a catalogue of prohibitions, which are, however, not enumerated. Instead of doing so, Windischgraetz simply expounds his negative rule. Human rights, as well as the state, are solely obligated not to hinder anyone in the pursuit of happiness, but every individual must attain happiness independently.

Abstrakt:
Studie rekonstruuje počátky teorie lidských práv u Christiana Wolffa, její rozvinutí v pojetí rakouského právníka Karla Antona Martiniho a originální přepracování teorie na základě sensualismu v podání hraběte Josefa Mikuláše Windischgrätze.

This study returns to the beginnings of the theory of human rights as it was conceived by Christian Wolff; it discusses its developments in the conception of the Austrian lawyer Karl Anton von Martini and the original re-working of this theory based on sensualism as presented by Joseph Nikolaus Count Windischgrätz.

Key words: human rights – the Enlightenment – Karl Anton Martini


EMLER David
Využívání paměti v projevech francouzských prezidentů Chiraka a Sarkozyho
(Uses of Memory in the Political Statements of the French Presidents Chirac and Sarkozy)

s. 335–354

Relations of French society with the past have been changing in the last twenty years. Multiple questions regarding the freedom of education and science have been studied; the changing role of history among other social sciences and within society in general is being analyzed. Another important point of view from which we can study this change is political discourse. The past is one of the traditional sources of inspiration for political statements; it can provide very important arguments underpinning current political objectives. In France, it is the president who has the right to speak about this matter at his disposal. “Tell the history” is one of the “reserved domains” of the French president. Even though both presidents analyzed in this paper, Jacques Chirac (1995–2007) and Nicolas Sarkozy (2007–2012), were representatives of the post-Gaullist right in the French political arena, their approach to the past and their decisions to use it for their own political purposes were very different. The author of this paper thinks that Chirac was representative of a “repentant” attitude towards difficult times in the national past. He came with an important change in the relation of French society to the past. On July 16, 1995 he said about the 1942 Holocaust-linked Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup: “...France, on that day, committed an irreparable mistake. ... there is collective guilt.” He was the first French president to break with the Gaullist vision of the history. His famous speech has been considered a real landmark in this context; the majority of public opinion approved this mea culpa at its time. The vision of the past of the next president in office, Nicolas Sarkozy, was also different, but in another way. Sarkozy had a very political vision of the history of France; already during his 2007 presidential campaign Sarkozy used historical references very often. His conceptions were also very uncommon. Sarkozy (as the presidential candidate of the right “post-Gaullist” party) for example mentioned Jean Jaurès, the founding figure of the French left, more frequently than de Gaulle. Sarkozy wanted to forge a vision of one common great history that every French person should be proud of. On April 17, 2007 he refused any kind of guilt of France in the Holocaust: “...France never ceded to the totalitarian temptation. She never exterminated a nation. She did not invent the final solution, she did not commit crimes against humanity, nor genocide.” Even though the positions of the two French presidents vis-à-vis the national past were different, the author argues that both of them made substantial use of memory in their communications. This paper provides quantitative lexicometry analysis comparing the use of key history-linked words in the two presidents’ statements. The analysis proves very clearly that Sarkozy used most of the studied expressions in his official speeches relatively more often than his predecessor (58 out of 78 expressions). Chirac used only a few historic terms more frequently than Sarkozy (20 out of 78 expressions). These are often linked to the “problematic” parts of national history or its victims, such as slavery (esclavage) or deportation (déportation). This result complements his “repentant” attitude discussed in the first part of the paper well.

Abstrakt:
The past is one of the traditional sources of inspiration for political discourse; it can provide very important arguments underpinning current political objectives. Even though both French presidents analyzed in this paper, Jacques Chirac (1995–2007) and Nicolas Sarkozy (2007–2012), were representatives of the post-Gaullist right in the French political arena, their approach to the past and their decisions to use it for their own political purposes were very different. The autor of this paper thinks that Chirac impersonated a “repentant“ attitude towards difficult times in the national past. Sarkozy on the other hand wanted to forge a vision of one common great history that every French person should be proud of. Even though the positions of the two French presidents vis-à-vis the national past were different. The author argues that both of them made substantial use of memory in their communications. This paper provides quantitative lexicometry analysis comparing the use of key history-linked words in the two presidents’ statements.

Key words: France, history, historiography, memory, president, discourse, lexicometry, Chirac, Sarkozy


DISKUSE / DISCUSSION

KREUZ Petr
Polemika ad: David Zbíral, Současné bádání o středověké inkvizici. Stav, směřování, perspektivy. Český časopis historický 110, 2012, s. 1–18
s. 355–377


OBZORY LITERATURY / REVIEW ARTICLES AND REVIEWS

Přehledy bádání a historiografických studií

GRULICH Josef
Migrační teorie, integrační procesy a evropské dějiny migrací
(Migration theories, integration processes and migrations in European history)
s. 378–406

Abstrakt:
Studie se zabývá vysoce aktuálním badatelským problémem – migracemi a s nimi neodmyslitelně spjatými integračními procesy. Zároveň se snaží podat základní přehled nejvýznamnějších migračních teorií. Přestože většina z nich vznikla mimo oblast historie, představují cestu k objasnění okolností vzniku a uskutečnění prostorového pohybu různých společenských vrstev v dějinném kontextu. Předložená práce zohledňuje především nejnovější zahraniční literaturu a přibližuje dílčí témata, kterým je z hlediska evropských dějin migrací přikládán mimořádný význam. Zároveň představuje jednotlivé teoretické koncepty, rozkrývá jejich členění na makro a mikro teorie, uvádí vzorové hypotézy, jejich autory i teoretické práce. Svým způsobem se jedná o specializovanou bibliografii, která podává základní přehled řešených témat v interdisciplinární rovině.

This study deals with a highly topical research issue – migrations and integration processes which are intrinsically connected with them. At the same time it strives to present a basic overview of the most important migration theories. Although a majority of them have originated outwith the discipline of history, they do represent a pathway to the clarification of the circumstances of the origins and the realization of shifts in spatial mobility of different social classes in a historical context. The presented work primarily focuses on the most recent foreign literature and introduces individual themes which are seen as exceptionally significant from the point of migrations in European history. It also introduces individual theoretical concepts; it analyses their division into macro and micro theories; it presents examples of hypotheses, their authors and even their theoretical works. This work, in its own way, is a specialised bibliography which presents a basic overview of the themes under research at the interdisciplinary level.

Key words: migration, mobility, migration theories, integration processes, history of migrations, Europe


Recenze

HENGERER Mark, Kaiser Ferdinand III. (1608–1657). Eine Biographie
(Václav Bůžek) s. 407–410

BOK Václav – KUBÍKOVÁ Anna (Hg.), Bericht über die Reise Johann Christians und Johann Seyfrieds von Eggenberg durch die Länder Mittel-, West- und Südeuropas in den Jahren 1660–1663. Eine kommentierte Edition
(Jiří Kubeš) s. 410–414

ALBAREDA SALVADÓ Joaquim, La Guerra de Sucesión de España (1700–1714)
(Bohumil Baďura) s. 414–420

KRAUß Jirko, Ländlicher Alltag und Konflikt in der späten Frühen Neuzeit. Lebenswelt erzgebirgischer Rittergutsdörfer im Spiegel der kursächsischen Bauernunruhen 1790
(Josef Grulich – Markéta Skořepová) s. 420–422

HRONSKÝ Marián – PEKNÍK Miroslav, Martinská deklarácia: cesta slovenskej politiky k vzniku Česko-Slovenska
(Tomáš Bandžuch) s. 423–425

PETRÁŇ Josef ve spolupráci s Lydií PETRÁŇOVOU, Dějiny českého venkova v příběhu Ouběnic
(Jiří Pešek) s. 425–427


Zprávy
s. 428–452


Z VĚDECKÉHO ŽIVOTA / CHRONICLE

Nekrology

Jaroslav Kolár (18. 9. 1929 – 12. 2. 2013)
(Jan Horský) s. 453–454

Miloslav Petrusek (15. 10. 1936 – 19. 8. 2012)
(Jan Balon) s. 455–457

PETRUSEK Miloslav
Konec dějin nebo konec dějepisectví?
s. 458–465


Knihy došlé redakci
s. 466

Výtahy z českých časopisů a sborníků
s. 467