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

ročník 116
č. 2/2018

s. 347-652


PÁNEK Jaroslav – PEŠEK Jiří – VOREL Petr
Český historik Josef Petráň … s. 360
(The Czech Historian Josef Petráň)

Josef Petráň (1930–2017) is justly ranked among the most pivotal Czech historians of the 20th century and the 21th century’s early years. As Professor of Czech History at the Faculty of Arts at Charles University he educated three generations of students and principally impacted upon the develompment of historiography in the Czech Lands. His extensive publishing activity, spanning from 1951 until 2018 (books published posthumously by his wife and fellow researcher Lydia Petráňová), is marked by an all-encompassing breadth of themes, methodological thoroughness and a continuing focus on the key themes of Czech and Central European history of the Late Middle Ages up to present times. The work of Josef Petráň progressed under the difficult conditions of the Communist régime (he himself was persecuted repeatedly), yet it nevertheless became an expression of free thinking and effort to present the truthful interpretation of history against regime propaganda; however, some of his seminal works could only be published after 1989. This article presents a brief outline of the life and work of Josef Petráň (Part I); it then focuses on the evaluation of his works from the field of the economic and social history of the Early Modern Age (Part II) and finally on works from the history of culture and education, in particular Charles University (Part III).
Key words: history of historiography – economic and social history – microhistory – cultural history – history of universities – Charles University of Prague – late Middle Ages – Early Modern period – 20th century


Naše živá i mrtvá minulost po padesáti letech (Imprese nad osmi eseji z roku 1967) … s. 402
(Naše živá i mrtvá minulost Fifty Years Later [Impressions of these eight essays from 1967])

This study was written for the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of Naše živá i mrtvá minulost/Our Living and Dead Past (Praha, Svoboda 1968), which was instigated by then leading historian František Graus, and in which eight key essays on core problems of Czech history were published, mainly written by younger talented researchers. The study combines a reader witness approach and an analysis of the wider context of the book’s publication which in many regards (its criticism of dogmatic Marxism and its erosion of the traditional picture of Czech history) is one of Czech historiography’s milestones. It characterises and assesses all eight papers (with particular focus on Graus’s introductory essay), looks at its reception at the time, which was not wholly positive, and endeavours to answer the question of whether the team of authors’ work fulfilled the tasks it had set itself.
Key words: Czech history – state – nation – people – crisis of history – Marxism – structuralism – postmodernism – 1968

The modest book Naše živá i mrtvá minulost (Our Living and Dead Past), distributed by Prague publishers Svoboda on 9 January 1969 and dated 1968, is one of the milestones of modern Czech historiography. It was instigated at the turn of 1966–1967 by then leading historian František Graus (1921 – 1989), who collected a team of talented young academics around himself. The publication set itself a number of tasks. First of all, it aimed to pierce the canonical image of Czech history created in the 19th century, and to a large extent endorsed after February 1948 by official Marxist science, and also to question key terms (state – nation – people) which traditional concepts of (not just) Czech historiography of the 19thand first half of the 20th century relied upon, and last but not least it endeavoured to rehabilitate historical science and historians in the eyes of the cultural community who were fast losing interest in issues of the past. This final aspect was closely related to the so-called history crisis of the whole Euro-Atlantic area, although in the Czech context its causes were deepened by academic historiography’s servitude to the totalitarian political regime.
As such, one of the key objectives of the publication was to show the public that historical science could break away from its dependence on political pressure, and that it was able to interpret core problems of Czech history though the application of modern methods used in the West (using sociological, structuralist and comparative approaches, semantic analysis, mentalities research). Most of the authors, however, persisted in Marxist positions envisaged as an open system. Paradoxically, it was František Graus’s introductory essay which most thoroughly departed from Marxism, someone who had vigorously promoted this school of thought following 1948. His work also shows partial resonance with the crystallising post-modernism of the time, in particular with Hayden White’s positions. František Šmahel expressed a similar ideological vigour as Graus, submitting a criticism of the conventional Marxist concept of Hussitism, as did Jiří Kořalka, who characterised the Czech nation’s status within the multiethnic Habsburg monarchy during the “long 19th century” in a balanced manner. The most politically explosive text, giving a positive assessment of the so-called First Czechoslovak Republic (1918 – 1938), including its founder T G Masaryk, was written by Věra Olivová. Miroslav Hroch chose sociological and structuralist approaches in researching the foundation of the modern Czech nation, while Dušan Třeštík, looking at the early Middle Ages, and Josef Petráň, analysing the post-White Mountain period, strongly contrasted the “political nation” (elite) and “the people” lacking political rights. Bedřich Loewenstein’s essay focused on certain protagonists of Czech rightwing nationalism during the period of the First World War.
The book received reviews and the readers’ response during the first half of 1969, i.e. in a fundamentally transformed political situation. At a time of lingering press freedom, some of its formulations appeared tame, while others (critical relations to the nation’s cultural-historical situation) were not in line with the political climate of the time following the dramatic events of 1968 and January 1969. The debate which had begun and included positive and critical voices was cut off with the emerging normalisation. Thus, Czech historiography could only openly build on this extraordinary publication’s strong findings after November 1989.

Repatriace polských a československých občanů po druhé světové válce v polské a české historiografii … s. 426
(The repatriation of Polish and Czechoslovak citizens after World War II in Polish and Czech historiographies)

The repatriation of the so-called displaced persons after World War II represented a serious problem, with which the states of the anti-Hitler coalition in Europe had to deal. Due to the war events millions of inhabitants found themselves absent from home. This article strives to present and characterize the approaches of Polish and Czech historiographies to the study of these issues. It follows the developing interest in the research of the repatriation of Polish and Czech citizens in both historiographies. It is likely that the post-war repatriation of Poles because of its magnitude and also the contradictions accompanying it, makes this migration relatively deeply rooted in Polish historical thinking. Consequently, the interest in the study of repatriation appears as early as the 1960s and nowadays encompasses dozens of publications and magazine articles. Contrary to that Czech historiography has until now devoted little attention to the issue od the repatriation of Czech citizens. It, however, seems that this tendency finally takes its turn and Czech historians are paying more attention to this topic.
Key words: Czechoslovakia – Poland – repatriation after World War II – historiography

The end of World War II in Europe brought about the necessity to resolve the issue of the so-called displaced persons. They were in particular the liberated prisoners from concentration camps, POWs, forced labour or those fleeing the war zones. The nationals of the states of the anti-Hitler coalition had priority rights to return to their homes – to be repatriated. After Soviet citizens, Polish repatriated persons were the second most numerous group. The majority of them were to be found on territories liberated by the Western armies and they procrastinated with their return to Poland. It, from 1944, was in fact under the rule of Polish communists. There was also no agreement amongst the Polish emigrant community in London whether to recommend that Poles return to their homeland. For this reason, the mass repatriation of Poles lasted for a relatively long time. And because this was a serious issue which affected a relatively great part of the Polish population, it also drew the attention of historians relatively early. At the same time it is necessary to emphasize that until 1989 there were both a home-based Polish historiography and an exiled-based one. Predicated on that their interests and limits varied. As early as the 1960s the first studies on the repatriation of Poles appeared and in 1974 a seminal work by Krystyna Kersten was published. After 1989, possibilites of research have further expanded, which on one side led to the publication of a great number of archival materials, yet it also led to the atomization of research. 
Contrary to that the repatriation of Czechoslovak displaced persons did not represent a more serious problem after World War II. Czechoslovakia was restored as an independent state with a functioning (albeit to a certain degree limited) democracy. The landslide majority of repatriated persons did not hesitate whether to return, so the mass repatriation could be completed, in fact, as early as 1945. It is likely that for this reason the study of repatriation did not meet with such an interest as in Poland. It was only in 2004 that a fundamental work by Jaroslav Vaculík was published, yet it did not fully exhaust this theme. However, it is evident that a new generation of Czech historians is demonstrating an interest in this topic.


Jak vznikal obraz Václava IV. jako ochránce Židů … s. 447
(How the image of Wenceslas IV as defender of the Jews originated)

Already during his lifetime, King of Bohemia and the Romans Wenceslas IV was labelled as a bad ruler, who did not take care of the administration of the lands – neither those of the Empire nor the Czech Lands. He was very often accused of the decline of the Church, the inability to resolve the Papal Schism, but also very personal defamations were spread about him in Europe, which were purposefully to deform the image of the king further. One of them is also the accusation for favouring the Jews too much, whom he even favoured against Christians according to some sources. Apparently, Ludolf of Sagan wrote the most extremely in this regard of King of Bohemia and the Romans Wenceslas IV in his work “Tractatus de longevo schismate”. Besides many bad characteristics, he directly labelled the sovereign with the title of the Jewish king. However, Ludolf of Sagan was not the only one, who criticized the king for his overprotection of the Jews. The majority of these critics came from the Czech Lands.
Key words: Wenceslas IV – the Jews – Czech Lands – historical tradition – Ludolf of Sagan – John of Jenstein

Already during his lifetime, King of Bohemia and the Romans Wenceslas IV was labelled as a bad ruler. He was blamed for insufficiently taking care of the administration of the Empire and the Czech Lands, for not attending negotiations. He was very often accused of the decline of the Church, the inability to resolve the Papal Schism, but also for a direct attack on ecclesiastical institutions and the clergy. However, also very personal defamations were spread about him in Europe, which were purposefully to deform the image of the king further, but which in many cases reflected some real experience with the sovereign or were founded on substantiated reports. Among a number of serious allegations, there is also an accusation for favouring the Jews too much. According to some sources, Wenceslas IV was to protect the Jews, sometimes even preferring them to Christians. Apparently, Ludolf of Sagan wrote the most extremely in this regard of King of Bohemia and the Romans Wenceslas IV in his work “Tractatus de longevo schismate”. Besides many bad characteristics, he directly labelled the sovereign with the title of the Jewish king. However, Ludolf of Sagan was not the only one, who criticized the king for his overprotection of the Jews. The majority of these critics came from the Czech Lands. In a way, they might have hit upon the different approach of the sovereign to the Jews in the Empire and in the Czech Lands. It is not possible to identify clearly from the preserved sources the exact reason Wenceslas IV was labelled as a defender of the Jews. The earliest reports with this accusation date to the turn of the 1390s, when the king became involved in an escalated conflict with Archbishop of Prague John of Jenstein. The archbishop expanded his complaint against Wenceslas IV even by an analogical accusation of the royal underchamberlain (a deputy chamberlain of the exchequer) Zikmund Huler. Although these reports could be perceived as the means for the formation of a negative image of the king, documents have also been preserved in the medieval Hebrew sources that Wenceslas IV was a good king and the Jews did well during his reign.

Integrace příchozích cizinců do raně novověké pražské společnosti … s. 459
(The Integration of Foreigners Arriving in Early Modern Prague Society)

This study looks at the issue of migration processes in relation to integration in the early modern urban society and its methodological background in terms of socio-historical and cultural-historic research. In regard to options for further development of local historiographic research, the concept of interculturalism is focused on, as a reflection on the space for cultures to encounter each other and mutually define themselves. Using the example of research of immigration into Prague towns during the pre-White Mountain period, opportunities for applying it are outlined and the source base available is characterised. Its effective use should be linked first of all with prosopographic research.
Key words: Early Modern period – Prague – migration – integration – interculturalism – prosopography

Two core fields of migration research have been formed within European historiography, i.e. socio-historical and cultural-historical research, which in studying phenomena linked to migration – integration, the concept of interculturalism in particular is applied as a reflection of the existence of a space for cultures to encounter each other. As yet, research of Central and Eastern Europe has not entirely managed to apply cultural-historical paradigms related to migration and integration processes, one reason being that such research is still mainly undertaken using a traditional demographic concept.
Research of immigration into Prague towns during the Early Modern period has historically been based above all on books of burgher rights and single preserved lists of the urban population without full rights from the pre-White Mountain period, which were produced in order to record and regulate the migration of this class of urban society during the period the Court of Rudolf II was resident in Prague. During this Rudolfine period, Prague was more than at any other time a place where various population groups differentiated both by legal and professional status, and also language, habitus, cultural background and denominational affiliation, to some extent in line with ethnicity, associated, defined themselves and coexisted. The paper presents possible research topics for this period of history, and sources for studying the issue of migration – integration in the early Modern city, and in the provincial and residential centre.
The core fields of research should include research on the economic integration of new arrivals along with the working of the guild system, but also the business activities of domestic and foreign buyers. Research into the power elite (councillors) represents a separate chapter, and this could particularly help in uncovering the social mobility mechanisms of the new arrivals. Attention should be focused on the Early Modern Prague towns as a space for communication in which the success or failure of the integration of foreigners could manifest itself in conflicts with an ethnic or religious denominational background. In this regard, one can use sources of a normative nature, and also court papers – first of all libri testimonarium (books of testimony), and also municipal correspondence. The coexistence of various groups of the population should be captured in their “living space” – town neighbourhoods or parishes which can to a certain extent be reconstructed from official administration books, and funeral documents alongside books of testaments.
A key area for integration processes viewed from a cultural-historical perspective is the language of communication as a significant prerequisite for integration. Research has shown that Czech held the dominant position as the language for everyday and official communication during the Rudolfine period, but that a number of new town citizens never acquired the ability to speak the language, while in contrast the Czech urban townsfolk frequently had knowledge of the German language, which became the universal language of trade and a means for spreading Lutheranism.
The provisional image of the multiethnic space of the Prague towns during the Pre-White Mountain period, reconstructed on the basis of some of the above detailed sources, indicates the limited integration of most new city citizens of other than Czech origin, based on economic and partially social integration, confirmed by a strategy of intermarriage within the local host environment. On the basis of our current knowledge, these processes cannot be called assimilation, and rather than integration for the largest minorities represented accommodation in terms of the concept of interculturality, as is the case for the German minority (formed by a common modus vivendi for foreigners and locals without cultural identity being suppressed; to some extent representing mutual adaptation), while for the Italian population it was more exclusion, one reason for this being increased denominational exclusivity within the majority Protestant environment. We have a minimum of information on the course of these processes amongst the majority population without full rights; these classes are mostly not included in records of sources as the most mobile part of society. However since the Czech language was dominant amongst these immigrants, and Utraquist was the predominant denomination, it seems their integration did not involve any major problems.
These conclusions stated can be specified not just through the application of inspiring methodological concepts, but in particular through extensive source prosopographical research of the large number of non-contentious jurisdiction books, representing the basic prerequisite for further progress in researching the field of migration – integration in Early Modern towns.

MAJEWSKI Piotr Maciej
Polskie badania na temat najnowszych dziejów Czech: kontynuacja i nowe tendencje … s. 486
(Polish research in the 20th–century History of the Czech Lands: continuity and new trends)

The article deals with the Polish historiography of the 20th-century history of the Czech Lands (Czechoslovakia). It evaluates publications from the years 2002–2017. In this period Polish historians were interested in Czech history predominantly in the context of broadly understood relations with Poland. They were strictly concentrated to special Czech issues only rarely.
Key words: Polish historiography – history of the 20th century – Czech studies – Polish-Czechoslovak relations – foreign policy of Czechoslovakia – Communism in Czechoslovakia

Většina vědeckých prací, které se týkají dějin českých zemí nebo Československa ve 20. století a jež vyšly v Polsku v letech 2002–2017, je věnována bilaterálním vztahům. Týká se to jak výzkumu meziválečné doby a let druhé světové války, tak i epochy komunismu. Polští historici přednostně analyzovali buď různé aspekty těchto vztahů, nebo polský kontext vybraných událostí odehrávajících se v Československu (mnichovská krize, Pražské jaro, činnost disidentského hnutí v sedmdesátých a osmdesátých letech 20. století).
Naproti tomu poměrně zřídka vznikaly práce o striktně české problematice, postrádající bezprostřední sepětí s Polskem; zato však šlo o témata poměrně velkého významu, například dějiny agrární strany, česko-německé vztahy a československý poměr. V polské historiografii, týkající se českých dějin 20. století, dominovaly publikace z oblasti politických dějin. Téměř úplně chybělo zpracování českých dějin sociálních, hospodářských, intelektuálních a kulturních. Jedinou výjimku v tomto směru představovalo bádání o dějinách Těšínského Slezska, které bylo polskými historiky stále zřetelněji nazíráno jako fenomén etnicko-kulturního pomezí, nikoli jen jako objekt politických sporů.
Se zřetelem k nevelkému počtu badatelů, zabývajících se dějinami českých zemí ve 20. století, lze výsledky polské bohemistiky uplynulých patnácti let označit za vcelku uspokojivé. V polské literatuře tohoto zaměření zůstávají však i nadále velmi podstatné mezery.


Problémy interpretace dějin Černé Hory … s. 502
(The problems of interpretation of the history of Montenegro)

This text deals with a synthesis of the history of Montenegro published last year. The review considers it to be a significant contribution to both Czech and European research in the history of this state, as well as of the whole of the Balkan Peninsula. It values highly that the publication is well researched factwise and that it represents the culmination of the author’s long-standing and comprehensive researches into this part of Southeast Europe. It appreciates highly the comprehensiveness of interpretation (in particular the high standard of chapters on the cultural development and bilateral relations of Montenegro with the Czech Lands, alongside its accuracy of factography and accessibility for readers. Yet, on the other hand this review points out some interpretationally disputable sections in which the author did not succeed in separating himself sufficiently from the intentionally misrepresented nationalist narrative of Montenegran history. Further critical remarks refer to, amongst others, the relationships to the Serbian nationalist movement and Serbian social and power elites; the events of World War II; the assessment of the role and importance of the supporters of Montenegran autonomy or independence after World War I, yet also in the first half of the 1990s.
Key words: Montenegro – Serbia – nationalist movement – resistance – collaboration – interpretation

Několik poznámek k diskusi o Biografickém slovníku českých zemí (BSČZ) … s. 515


Recenzní článek

RAKOVÁ Svatava
Úskalí globální hybridizace (či hybridní globalizace) … s. 521
Understanding Multiculturalism. (The Habsburg Central European Experience)


Miroslav BÁRTA – Martin KOVÁŘ – Otakar FOLTÝN (eds.)
Povaha změny. Bezpečnost, rizika a stav dnešní civilizace

Miroslav BÁRTA – Martin KOVÁŘ – Otakar FOLTÝN (eds.)
Na rozhraní. Krize a proměny současného světa
(Jaroslav Pánek) … s. 533

František ŠMAHEL
Nahlédnutí do středověku. Mluva písma a četba obrazů
(Petr Čornej) … s. 538

Vratislav. První král Čechů
(Vratislav Vaníček) … s. 542

Alena M. ČERNÁ – František ŠMAHEL (edd.)
Nejstarší městská kniha táborská z let 1432–1452
(Petr Čornej) … s. 547

Petr KOZÁK (ed.)
Červená kniha Opavského knížectví. Edice registra komunikace opavských stavů z let 1614–1618 ve věci jejich sporu s Karlem z Lichtenštejna
(Marek Starý) … s. 550

Der Dreißigjährige Krieg. Eine Einführung
(Jaroslav Pánek) … s. 556

Die Kirchenmusikhandschriften der Benediktiner in Böhmen im 18. Jahrhundert , Bd 1

Martin MÁDL a kol.
Benediktini: barokní nástěnná malba v českých zemích I–II.
(Ondřej Koupil) … s. 559

František Pubička S.I. (1722–1807). Barokní historik ve století rozumu
(Jiří Wolf) … s. 563

Evangelíci v rané toleranční době v Čechách a na Moravě
(Sixtus Bolom-Kotari) … s. 566

Ivo CERMAN (ed.)
Habsburkové 1740–1918. Vznikání občanské společnosti
(Jakub Zouhar) … s. 569

Rome and the World – The World in Rome.
The Politics of International Culture, 1911–2011
(Jaroslav Pánek) … s. 572

Sabine WITT
Nationalistische Intellektuelle in der Slowakei 1918–1945. Kulturelle Praxis zwischen Sakralisierung und Säkularisierung
(Róbert Arpáš) … s. 579

Zprávy o literatuře … s. 582


PÁNEK Jaroslav
Noví čestní členové Sdružení historiků ČR
(Joachim Bahlcke – Georgij Pavlovič Meľnikov) … s. 619
Two Scholars of Czech Studies – Honorary Members of the Association of Historians of the Czech Republic
(Joachim Bahlcke – Georgij Pavlovič Meľnikov)

Knihy a časopisy došlé redakci … s. 629

Výtahy z českých časopisů a sborníků … s. 629