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


ročník 112
s. 597-852 + s. I.-XVI.



PÁNEK Jaroslav – PEŠEK Jiří
Znovuzrození Českého časopisu historického
(The Re-Birth of the Czech Historical Review)
s. 604-623

This study introduces the re-establishment and development of the leading Czech historical periodical after the Czechoslovak “Velvet Revolution” of 1989. The Czech Historical Review, which had been published from 1895 until 1949, was replaced in 1953 by the highly ideological, i.e. Communist Czechoslovak Historical Review. In 1990, František Šmahel, a great and internationally respected authority on Czech Medieval Studies from the 1960s onwards, who had excelled in academic research in the 1970s despite being exiled from academia into the humble occupation of a tram driver, took over the directorship of the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences. With much personal commitment he promptly re-established and raised the profile of this traditional leading periodical for the Czech historians’ community.
This study traces the setting up and development of the editorial background and the contributor base of the review and analyses its role vis-a-vis the staff of the Institute as well as the wider academic public. The authors further characterise the contents profile of there-established Czech Historical Review; they highlight its international outlook, the restoration of its role for all periods of history, as well as its focus upon the history of modern historiografy and the discipline’s theory. The content analysis initially concentrates on the first volumes Publisher after the re-establishment of the review when Czech historians turned their attention both actively and in terms of receptivity from Eastern Europe to the West. In this context, the Czech Historical Review played the role, among others, of a mirror reflecting the contents, chronological and methodological transformations of Czech post-Revolution historiography.
Then, based on the basic characterisation of 311 published studies and documentary or discussion texts, there follows a brief outline of the development of the review, the changes to the editorial board and the contributor base, which numbered 150 Czech and 30 foreign historians in total. In 2002, the Czech Historical Review celebrated its 100th issue and Šmahel then handed over the reins to the care of a younger generation.

This current study highlights the re-stablishment and development of a leading Czech historical magazine: The Czech Historical Review (Český časopis historický) after the Czechoslovak “Velvet Revolution” of 1989 until 2002. The Review was published from 1895 until 1949 but in 1953 the Communist regime replaced it by the highly ideological Czechoslovak Historical Review. Professor František Šmahel, the eminent personality of Czech Medieval Studies from the 1960s onwards, though proscribed in the 1970s, took over the management of the Institute of History of the Czech Academy of Sciences in 1990 and thanks to his huge personal involvement and commitment this traditional periodical of the Czech historical community was restored. In addition, he promoted it and was editor-in-chief until 2002. This study shows the re-establishment and development of the contributor base and the editorial background of the Review; it characterizes its contents profile, international outlook as well as its role as a mirror reflecting transformations of the Czech post-Revolution historiography.

Key words: history of historiography, the Czech Historical Review, František Šmahel, historiography after 1989, the Czech Republic

SMÍŠEK Rostislav
Uherská korunovace Josefa I. jako prostředek symbolické komunikace
(The Hungarian Coronation of Joseph I as a Means of Symobolic Communication)
s. 624-654

Based on the contents analysis of written and iconographic evidence of contemporary observers, this current study attempts to reconstruct the coronation of Joseph I as King of Hungary in Pressburg on 9th December 1687. However, the author is not interested in merely providing a description of the royal coronation, but influenced by the theoretical concept of symbolic communication, which was elaborated towards the end of the 1990s by Gerd Althoff and Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger; he also attempts to mirror the distribution of symbols, rituals, thought constructs and also values scales in this communication space, which served to express one’s hierarchical authority, legitimacy and the understanding of the order of the pre-modern society. Indeed, man of the Early Modern Age did not make light of individual gestures or symbols but ascribed them certain meanings and was able to interpret them. The stately entry of Leopold I, Eleonore Magdalene of Neuburg and the Archduke Joseph into Pressburg, as well as the consequent coronation festivities, were imbued with a rich communicative and symbolic context, the core of which was to express the supreme legitimacy of the King of Hungary and the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. The vast scope and arrangement of the procession, the distribution of social space in the outskirts of Pressburg, the ritual of their reception, fluttering standards, a canopy, a raised throne, sumptious robes glittering with gold and silver, jewelry of immeasurable value, heralds, the most noble lords representing the individual Lands of the Danube Monarchy, vast crowds of onlookers, the seating of guests round the festive tables, the choreography of a royal carousel and fireworks, also, were undoubtedly the necessary requisities for those moments in which the respective ruler highlighted his supreme sovereignity. Theatricality combined with a display of pomp and opulence were one of the means by which a Baroque ruler presented himself and, indeed, the most appropriate means
of self-expression.

The current study attempts to reconstruct the coronation of Joseph I as King of Hungary in Pressburg on 9th December 1687 on the basis of a context analysis of written and iconographic primary sources. Yet, the author is not merely interested in outlining the political background of the coronation and the description of its progress. Using the methodological concept of symbolic communication he strives to decipher individual symbolic stages and gestures, which the very persons involved in the performance put into action. He does not overlook either the forms of personal representation of Joseph I, his parents – Leopolda I and Eleonore Magdalene von Pfalz-Neuburg, the Hungarian Estates and the ways of visualising their social standing.

Key Words: the Early Modern Age, the Habsburgs, Joseph I, performance, Hungarian coronation, symbolic communication, self-representation

Židé a josefínské školské reformy. Židovští studenti na pražské univerzitě od osmdesátých let 18. století do rozdělení univerzity v roce 1882
(Jews and the Joseph’s educational reforms. Jewish students at Prague University from eighties of the 18th century to division in 1882)

s. 655-680

The early 1750s witnessed cardinal changes in the life of the Jewish population in the Czech lands. The unprecedented spectrum of reforms introduced by Joseph II brought a turning point both to the life of the Jewish community in general and to the Jewish inhabitants in particular, and it formed an integral part of a long-term process leading to the gradual social emancipation of Czech Jews, which was successfully completed in 1848.
The ruler rendered the reformation steps relating to the Jewish population on 13 May 1781 by the so-called Handbillet, whose introduction was motivated by the interest in a more considerable participation of Jews mainly in the spheres of economic growth and economic stabilization of the country. It would, however, be rather mistaken to assume that Joseph’s reforms were guided by philanthropic incentives. On the contrary – there was a very clear and straightforward aim underlying the introduced changes: to turn the non-homogeneous monarchy into a state based on smoothly running bureaucratic foundations, with its administration departing from centralist principle. All reforms, whether it was directives in the fields of religion, economy, education or others, had to uncompromisingly subordinate to these efforts.
One of the areas where the Jewish population was the most affected by the Josephine reforms was education. Major betterments in this field, mainly grounded in an integrated, state-organized education system and in modernized elementary school education, were launched by Maria Theresa, with compulsory education ordained in 1775. The change in the system of educating Jews thus arrived only in connection with the reform measures of Joseph II whose Letter of Tolerance also imposed compulsory school education on the Jewish population. The patent issued for the Czechs in October 1781 decreed the establishment of a normal (secular) Jewish school, organized in accord with the regulations following the example of the German schools and subordinated to state surveillance.
The so-called Josephine reforms moreover gave the Jews equality with the Christians in the sphere of higher education. The court decree issued on 18 October 1781 was fundamental in this respect, as it allowed Jews to attend higher schools, graduate in philosophy, law and medicine, and receive the academic degrees of doctor of medicine (medicinae doctor) and doctor of law (doctor iuris civilis). The only exception was the Faculty of Theology where Jews, basically, remained outlaws.
In the 1786 Jews studying at universities could become part of the university catalogues in an equal manner as the university students originating from the majority, Christian population. The catalogues served to provide (and eventually have indeed been providing) detailed evidence of all students, and they thus constitute a basic and very substantial source of evidence for researching the flow of students through the universities across the Habsburg monarchy.
The earliest catalogues of Prague University originate from 1752, but the vast majority of the earlier catalogues, i.e. those issued prior to the end of the 18th century, lacks informatik about religion while the following catalogues, dating from the late 18th century to the 1850s, recorded these data inconsistently. It is therefore very difficult or even impossible to identify Jewish students – who, for that matter, occur in the catalogues in very limited numbers to the mid–19th century.
Thus, in following the issues linked with the adjusted education level of the Jewish population prior to 1850, we can, to a certain extent, draw from indirect sources – mainly the registers of Prague and countryside Jewish population (between 1723 and 1811). However, here we are limited by the value of notice even more than in the case of the university catalogues.
To monitor the students recorded in the catalogues of the faculties, respective of Law and Medicine, and to satisfy the criterion of the highest value of notice, we selected five-year intervals beginning with the academic year 1850/51. The data immediately preceding the division of the university, i.e. from the academic year 1880/81, were the last included in our survey. It clearly shows that the most attractive in this respect was the Faculty of Law, followed by the Faculty of Medicine, while the Faculty of Arts occupied last position.
The considerable increase in the percentage of Jewish students active at Prague University between the 1850s and the late 1870s, respectively, the early 1880s can be perceived as a natural consequence of the 1848 and 1849 social changes when Jews, for the first time ever, factually – that is without the hitherto restrictions – became equal members of the local society. For that matter, the given changes also markedly affected the internal life of the university and influenced both its future standards and style of education (among other things, it was possible to lecture not only in German, but also in Czech). The main aspect, however, was that the newly arriving ideas attracted new people: in connection with the removed limitations of religion character, it was the first time in history that Jewish professors could lecture in more subjects than only Hebrew!
A factor playing a considerable role in following the enrolled Jewish students is thein social status. If we compare their social background with the social structure of the majority Christian students, the difference between the two is apparent at first sight. The social portfolio of the enrolled Christians according to the catalogues seemed to encompass all social strata. It included the offspring of the most distinguished and wealthiest noble families, hereditary holders of vast agrarian properties, sons of industrialists, leading entrepreneurs, decision-makers and white-collar workers – as well as sons stemming from the incomparably more modest conditions of artisans, blue-collar workers, minor peasants and the like. The situation with the enrolled Jewish students was, on the other hand, quite different. They can be divided into free basic categories according to their father’s profession, departing from the basic character of the individual professions. The first group were manufacturing professions (factory owners, revers of business premises – mainly distilleries, tanneries and potassium manufactures – and, eventually, artisans). The second group were traders (from small business owners to wholesalers), while the third category were representatives of non-manufacturing professions (financiers, people active in the sphere of religious administration, education and various administrative bodies and other intellectuals).
Let us finally take a swift look at a subject which certainly deserves at least brief attention: it is the places of origin of Jewish students arriving at Prague University. The catalogue records testify that most of them originated from Bohemia, more or less evenly from its individual regions, where there were places of traditionally Jewish settlement. It is, however, none too surprising that the highest ratio of the enrolled Jewish students from the total number of students naturally was from Prague. According to the available information, most students enrolling in regular studies graduated from grammar schools, usually situated close to thein place of origin.
Other regions of origin of the enrolled students in the records first include Moravia, which is followed by Hungary (especially, but not only, the territory of, what is today, Slovakia), and Galicia (from where the number of students enrolling apparently increased towards the end of the followed period). In the followed period, there were also exceptions as first-formers from Vienna and Germany and very rare cases from Silesia and Croatia. Most students from abroad were moreover transferring from other schools of university character (for example, from Vienna) and especially from faculties of arts, but we can also rarely trace students transferring from technical schools. There were also very often transfers between faculties within Prague University itself, with the most frequent “stop-gap” being the Faculty of Arts.

The reforms of Maria Theresa and Joseph II significantly affected the traditional way of education of the Jewish population. The breakthrough has been heralded by issue of General Study Regulations in 1774, and in particular the issue of the Court Decree of 1781. On the basis of the Court Decree German Jewish schools were established and Jews were allowed to study at all higher education institutions including universities, with the exception of canon law and theology. According to the decree of 1786 Jewish and Christian’s students alike were supposed to be enrolled in the university catalogs, which are a fundamental source of information for tracking of students in universities in the Austrian Empire. The main theme of this paper is monitoring of the Jewish students at Charles University in Prague in the second half of the 19th century (e.g. their numbers on the faculties of the University, their birthplace or home, social status, age structure etc.). The oldest of these catalogs were kept since 1752 and are preserved. There has been a fundamental change of the catalogs on the basis of law about the arrangements of the organization of universities from 1848 and in accordance with General Study Regulations from 1850 – detailed regulations about the management of the catalogs were made and from the mid–19th century, much more detailed information about students is available including religion. This information is not listed in older catalogs that means that Jewish students (even though that until the mid–19th century there and only a few in the catalogs) can be identified only with great difficulty if at all. Some compensation in this context is represented by the inventories of Prague and rural Jews written during the 18th and early 19th century (1723/1724 to 1811), in which it is possible to find more specific information regarding the education of the Jewish population during that period. But even here we face a number of limiting factors – in the case of the most students their field of study is not specified. That means whether they were a Jewish high school student (primarily oriented to other religious education) or they attended university studies. It was indicated only in the case of person who have undergone medical or legal studies. Until 1781 those students mostly graduated in Italian and German universities.

Key words: Jews, education, university, Prague, reforms of Joseph II, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Medicine, General study regulations, catalogs

ŠEDIVÝ Miroslav
Ohlas Rýnské krize v Rakouském císařství. Příspěvek ke studiu veřejného mínění v českých zemích doby předbřeznové
(The Reverberations of the Rhine Crisis in the Austrian Empire. A Contribution to the Study of Public Opinion in the Czech Lands in the Pre-March Period)
s. 681-712

In the pre-March period, the Austrian Empire had earned for itself the pejorative label “Europe’s China,” which even today historians occasionally invoke in order to highlight the repressive nature of this Central European power. Its Goverment is alleged to have isolated its own population from the rest of the world by a “Chinese wall,” and thus to have prevented the influx of new ideas and information about events in other parts of the world. Despite the unquestionable existence of the repressive apparatus in the Habsburg Monarchy of the first half of the 19th century, the allegation about “a Central European China” is exaggerated and the product of its time. However, it may be even more dangerous as historians may employ it to provide superficial justification for historical events and, thus, prevent more detailed, and logically more time-consuming and much costlier research, which would be based on the study of a wider range of primary sources, resulting in a more balanced view on the conditions in the Austrian Empire in the period under study.
This study aims to follow the latter approach, when, based on primary sources and the most recent foreign literature, it is to be pointed out that the argument based on the Viennese Government’s resistance towards new ideas, or namely, the existence of censorship, may not be adequate and relevant at all times. This is also true for the absence of German Nationalist feelings in the period of the so-called Rhine Crisis in the second half of 1840, which historians traditionally view as an important stimulus for the development of a German national movement, namely in the entire German Confederation, including the Cisleithanian part of the Austrian Empire. However, primary sources at hand, as well as a comparison with the situation in Bavaria clearly prove that this claim is not true for any of the parts of Cisleithania, including the Czech Lands. It is, however, necessary to seek reasons for this state of affairs elsewhere, also, and in particular, somewhere else than in the opposition of the Emperor himself and his advisors towards German nationalist propaganda.
The Rhine Crisis is not the only subject of interest in this study but also, and essentially, a means (a historial probe) of analysing the attitudes of the inhabitants of the Czech Lands towards the international political events of the pre-March period. It leads one to the conclusion that educated individuals, sometimes even the representatives of the lower classes, were not merely interested in the events but they were also able to discuss them publicly and that Theky had access to a relatively broad range of relevant information. If the Rhine Crisis had a negligible impact on the development of a German Nationalism in the Austrian Empire, then the reasons for this state of affairs have necessarily to be sought also outside the repressive impact of the state apparatus. In this instance they are to be found especially in the relatively small numbers of German nationalists on the territory of the Monarchy, the priority of other issues and in the very strong loyalty felt by the population for the Imperial House.

This study aims to disprove a thesis about the exceptional impact of this Crisis upon the qualitative and quantitative transformation of German nationalism in this part of the German Confederation, using an analysis of the response of the population of the Cisleithanian part of the Austrian Empire on the Rhine Crisis of 1840. It simultaneously aims to throw doubts on the as yet black and white perception of Austria as “Europe’s China”, whose inhabitants were cut off from the events beyond their borders by an information barrier erected by state repression.
Yet, as this study aims to prove, educated Austrians, in particular, were acutely interested in international events; they had sufficient access to relevant and often highly reliable information and, in fact, no one prevented them from discussing these events in public. If the Rhine Crisis had a completely negligible impact upon the development of German Nationalism in Cisleithania, then, clearly, the main reasons for this state of affairs were to be found somewhere else then in the repressive apparatus of the Austrian Empire.

Key Words: The Rhine Crisis, 1840, the pre-March period, German nationalism, Austria, Cisleithania, the Czech Lands, public opinion, situation reports

Dva pokusy o vývoz revoluce do Persie. Sovětské Rusko a Persie v roce 1920
(Two Attempts at Exporting the Revolution into Persia. Soviet Russia and Persia in 1920)

s. 713-744

Shortly after its formation, the Soviet Government made an attempt to establish diplomatic links with Persia, and to define their mutual relations on a new basis – in accordance with the principles of equality and self-determination. Thereby, it intended to distance itself, for political and ideological reasons, also, from the legacy of earlier Russian governments. It had expectations that this step would lead to the creation of a wider space for closer cooperation with the Persians and the preparation of the ground for future revolutionary activities, directed, among others, against the European superpowers. Yet, this Soviet initiative did not fall on fertile ground due to the unsettled situation in Soviet Russia itself, culminating in the outbreak of the civil war, and British counter activities. In November 1918, the building of the Soviet diplomatic mission was attacked by the Persian Cossacks led by Russian officers. The staff of the Soviet mission were arrested and later deported to Mesopotamia and India. In August 1919, immediately after his arrival to Persia, a Soviet diplomatic envoy, I. O. Kolomijcev, was arrested and executed by the White-Russian officers in the employ of Britain, whereby practically all contacts between Soviet Russia and Persia were disrupted.
In the spring of 1920 there arose an opportunity for a more active policy towards Persia once Soviet Russia took control of the North Caucasus and Azerbaijan. Following that Soviet Russia made two attempts to penetrate into Persia with the assistance of local revolutionary forces. The central roles within the framework of these attempts were actions undertaken in the Guilan Province. Contrary to that a similar attempt in Khorasan did not go beyond the stage of preliminary probings. Whereas during the first above mentioned attempt to export the revolution into Persia, a certain degree of success was achieved and the Soviet involvement in Guilan largely influenced the Soviet policy towards Persia as a whole, the second attempt seems to have had a merely peripheral impact on the formulation of the totality of Soviet policy against Persia. This present text aims to research both the above mentioned attempts to export the revolution to Persia; to attempt a comparison of them and to ascertain their similar and different features.
Soviet attempts to export the revolution into Persia can be interpreted within the framework of three fundamental interpretation schemes, according to which the dynamics of events on the Soviet side resulted from tension: 1) between the centre and periphery (i.e. between Moscow and the Soviet organs in Transcaucasia and Trans-Caspia, or respectively in Central Asia), 2) between individual interest groups in the Soviet leadership (notably Leon Trotsky, possibly G. V. Čičerin versus Stalin) and 3) between the idealistic and pragmatically-minded Soviet representatives. Therefore, the aim of this text is also be to establish which of these schemes is the most relevant and appropriate for the topic of Soviet attempts to export the revolution into Persia.
Both above mentioned Soviet attempts to export the revolution into Persia undertaken in Guilan and Khorasan have several common features. Yet, they simultaneously differ from one another in a number of aspects. It is these very differences that were the reason for different outcomes and in particular, the degrees of success.
A common feature for both attempts is, firstly, the timing of these events, namely the spring months of 1920. A further common feature for both attempts to export the revolution to Persia is the decisive role played by local Soviet organs – i.e. in Transcaucasia and Trans-Caspia and in Central Asia. In addition, what the Soviet approach towards the uprising in Guilan and the activities of Chodá Verdi Khan had in common was that they varied depending on the priorities of general Soviet policy. Finally, both attempts significantly affected the internal political development in Persia.
Yet, a far greater number of different features by which the individual attempts differed, rather than the common ones, can be discovered in the Soviet attempts to export the revolution into Persia. Firstly, there was a different umbrella organisation on the Soviet side. Another difference relates to a degree of Soviet support and control over events. A different role within the framework of the individual attempts to export the revolution into Persia was played by the Adalat Party, later reorganized into the Communist party of Iran. Each of the two uprisings played a different role in the process of formulation of the general policy of Soviet Russia towards Persia. And last but not least, the uprisings in Guilan and Khorasan differ from one another in their respective success rates.
To answer the question as to what unfolded the dynamics of events in the attempts to export the revolution into Persia, it is important to note that in the course of the individual stages of the development of Soviet policy towards Persia in the spring, summer and autumn of 1920, all three interpretation stages, mentioned in the introduction, can be applied stage by stage, albeit in different degrees. Each of the mentioned interpretation schemes fits in with certain events and levels of decision-making. Due to the complexity of the issues involved, which the topic of Soviet attempts to export the revolution into Persia represents, it, therefore follows that the individual interpretation schemes intermingle and complement each other. For this mason it is impossible to choose one of them as the most appropriate as it is necessary to combine them. In future, it would certainly be most interesting, in this connection, to research other contemporary Soviet foreign policies and to attempt to find out whether, in those cases the given interpretation schemes intermingle and complement each other in the manner described above, or respectively to what degree, the Soviet attempts to export the revolution to Persia may, from this point of view, be considered to be a situation model.
The progress of both attempts to export the revolution to Persia has clearly shown that their success relied on the fulfilment of three prerequisites – the acquisition of the stable support within the local population, direct Soviet military assistance and achieving mutual co-ordination between the individual actions of the rebels. Yet, these were never achieved to a satisfactory degree due to a number of reasons. The failure of the attempts to export revolution into Persia finally made the Soviet Government return to the negotiating table with the Persian Government and arrive at a formal agreement on the establishment of diplomatic relations.

During the spring of 1920, Soviet Russia supported two uprisings, which were under way or being planned in the north Persian provinces of Guilan and Khorasan with the intended aim of exporting the revolution to Persia. The decisive role in these events was played by local Soviet organs in Transcaucasia and Trans-Caspia, or in other words in Central Asia. Indeed, Moscow soon sanctioned their approach and established the general limits of the Soviet involvement. Ultimately, both attempts at exporting the revolution into Persia failed due to the inability of the rebels to gain the unqualified support of the population; their inability to coordinate their activities and finally, due to the unwillingness of the Soviet regime to provide direct military assistance to the rebels. This failure, consequently persuaded the Soviet Government to follow the direction of establishing proper diplomatic channels in their relationship with Persia.

Key words: Soviet Russia, Persia, export of the revolution, international relationships, 1920


„Cizí“ a „dějinné“: Hranice kultur versus kontinuita dějin
(“Alien” and “historical”: The boundaries of cultures versus continuity of history)
s. 745-753

In current methodological discourse there are two competing approaches, on one hand the emphasis placed on discontinuity as a principle of research (earlier forms of our culture are to be studied as the forms of an “alien” culture), yet on the other hand, it also emphasizes that no interpretation can manage without hermeneutics. Yet, hermeneutics is based essentially on the presupposition of (cultural, historical and spiritual) continuity. This study considers relationships between these opposing principles. It simultaneously demonstrates that a reflection of “alien” may have an impact on “historical consciousness” (Geschichtsbewusstsein). However, the nature of this impact does not have to be unequivocal.

Key Words: the theory and methodology of historical sciences, hermeneutics, interpretation, the principle of alienness, continuity versus discontinuity



BIVOLAROV Vasil, Inquisitoren-Handbücher. Papsturkunden und juristische Gutachten aus dem 13. Jahrhundert mit Edition des Consilium von Guido Fulcodii
(= Studien und Texte der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Bd. 56)
(Ivan Hlaváček)  s. 754-755

ALBRECHT Stefan (Hrsg.), Die Königsaaler Chronik.
(= Forschungen zu Geschichte und Kultur der böhmischen Länder, Bd. 2)
(Marie Bláhová) s. 756-757

ŠMAHEL František, Jan Hus. Život a dílo
(= Ecce homo, sv. 19)
(Petr Čornej) s. 758-762

HLAVÁČEK Ivan (ed.), Codex Přemyslaeus. Regesty z výpisů z dvorských register Václava IV. z doby kolem a po roku 1400 / Regesten aus den Auszügen von der Hofkanzleiregistern Wenzels IV. aus der Zeit um und nach 1400
(= Edice Archiv český, díl XXXIX)
(Hana Pátková) s. 762-763

ЧУБАРЬЯН Александр Оганович (гл. ред.) / ČUBARJAN Alexandr Oganovič (ed.), Всемирная история: В 6-ти томах / Vsemirnaja istorija: V 6-ti tomach. (Тom 3: В. А. Ведюшкин – М. А. Юсим (отв. ред.), Мир в раннее Новое время) / Tom 3: V. A. Vedjuškin – M. A. Jusim (eds.), Mir v ranneje Novoje vremja)
(Jaroslav Pánek) s. 764-766

ĎURČANSKÝ Marek, Česká města a jejich správa za třicetileté války. Zemský a lokální kontext
(Josef Kadeřábek) s. 766-767

SHORE Paul, Narratives of Adversity: Jesuits in the Eastern Peripheries of the Habsburg Realms (1640–1773)
(Jakub Zouhar) s. 768-770

HRBEK Jiří, Barokní Valdštejnové v Čechách, 1640–1740
(= České dějiny, svazek 5)
(Jiří Kubeš) s. 770-774

Ivo CERMAN, Šlechtická kultura v 18. století. Filozofové, mystici, politici
(Svatava Raková) s. 774-778

MÜLLER Sven Oliver, Das Publikum macht die Musik. Musikleben in Berlin, London und Wien im 19. Jahrhundert
(Martin Bojda) s. 778-782

DÖGE Klaus, Antonín Dvořák. Život – dílo – dokumenty
(Lukáš Vytlačil) s. 782-785

HOFFMANNOVÁ Jaroslava, Václav Novotný (1869–1932). Život a dílo univerzitního profesora českých dějin
(František Šmahel) s. 785-790

KŘESŤAN Jiří, Zdeněk Nejedlý. Politik a vědec v osamění
(Tomáš Borovský) s. 790-792

KOHÁROVÁ Marta, Výbušné výbušniny. Od nostrifikace k znárodnění v Československu
(Zdeněk R. Nešpor) s. 793-795

ŠIMSOVÁ Milena, Svět Jaroslava Šimsy
(Jana Nechutová) s. 796-799

INGRAO Christian, Believe and Destroy. Intellectuals in the SS War Machine
(Daniel Putík) s. 799-802

SCHRIJVER Emile G. L. – WIESEMANN Falk (Hrsg.), Schöne Seiten. Jüdische Schriftkultur aus der Braginsky Collection
(Jiří Pešek) s. 802-804

HLAVAČKA Milan – MARÈS Antoine – POKORNÁ Magdaléna et alii, Paměť míst, událostí a osobností: historie jako identita a manipulace
(David Emler) s. 804-808

Zprávy o literatuře
s. 809-826



Jaroslav Kašpar (3. 6. 1929 – 8. 9. 2014)
(Ivan Hlaváček) s. 827

Bohumil Baďura (18. 7. 1929 – 21. 9. 2014)
(Josef Opatrný) s. 829

Robert Sak (19. 1. 1933 – 14. 8. 2014)
(Zdeněk Bezecný – Milena Lenderová) s. 832

Knihy a časopisy došlé redakci

s. 834

Výtahy z českých časopisů a sborníků

s. 834-849


s. III

s. V

Přehledy bádání, s. V
Recenze, s. V
Zprávy o literatuře, s. IX

s. IX
Nekrology, s. IX
Knihy a časopisy došlé redakci, s. IX

s. X