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

roč. 20, 2012, č. 2



Jiří MATĚJČEK ((†)
19. století v nás – co přetrvalo
[The 19th Century in Us – What Remained]
s. 1–16

Bekämpfung der Armut in den böhmischen Ländern im 19. Jahrhundert: Eine institutionelle und legislative Übersicht
[Fighting poverty in the Bohemian Lands in the 19th century: A review of institutions and legislation]
s. 17–40

Pavel BEK
Spolky českých železničářů v sociálních a národnostních zápasech v Rakousko-Uhersku (1870−1918)
[Czech railway employees´ associations in social and national struggles in Austria-Hungary (1870−1918)]
s. 41–60

Národní výbor a četnictvo: převzetí rakouského četnictva do služeb nového československého státu (1918–1920)
[The National Committee and the gendarmerie: incorporation of the Austrian gendarmerie in the police corps of the
new-born Czechoslovak state (1918−1920)]
s. 61–82

Andrej TÓTH
Maďarské menšinové politické strany v Československu a volba Masarykova nástupce do úřadu prezidenta republiky
v prosinci 1935. II. díl
[Political parties of the Hungarian minority in Czechoslovakia and the election of President Masaryk’s successor in December 1935. Part II]
s. 83–137

Židovská náboženská obec Frýdek-Místek v letech 1918–1942. Asimilace Židů do většinové společnosti
[The Jewish congregation of Frýdek-Místek from 1918 to 1942. Assimilation of Jews to majority society]
s. 139–176

Ideální obraz „obránce hranic“ komunistického Československa v letech 1948−1956
[Ideal image of frontier guard in Communist Czechoslovakia in the years 1948−1956]
s. 177–210

Jaroslav MILLER
Neznámý příběh českého exilu: Josef Kučík a Sdružení Lidé dobré vůle v Západní Austrálii, 1950–1969
[An unknown Czech case in exile: Josef Kučík and the Goodwill Association in Western Australia, 1950−1969]
s. 211–233


Waldemar ŁAZUGA – Mariusz MENZ
Kontinuita nebo změna? Haličští konzervativci vůči projevům demokratizace, emancipace a modernizace v Rakousku
na přelomu 19. a 20. století
[Continuity or a change? The Galician conservatives opposing the signs of democratization, emancipation and modernization in Austria at the turn of the 19th century]
s. 235–244


Bohatě o chudobě
[Richly about poverty]
(Daniel Baránek)
s. 245–247

Profesor Robert Kvaček osmdesátiletý
[Professor Robert Kvaček. The Eighty Birthday]
(Josef Harna)
s. 248


Jan BÍLEK – Helena KOKEŠOVÁ – Vlasta QUAGLIATOVÁ – Marie RYANTOVÁ (eds.), Korespondence T. G. Masaryk – Josef Kaizl, Praha, Masarykův ústav a Archiv AV ČR, v.v.i. 2011, 340 s. ISBN 978-80-86495-82-8.
(Petr Prokš)
s. 251–253


The 19th Century in Us – What Remained

The mass industrialisation of the Czech Lands in the last quarter of the 19th century has changed the stratification of the society, as well as many patterns, especially of the lower class, towards activity, professionality and with effort to increase the living standard. In the 21th century the four great ideologies from the 19th century still remain: the religion, the liberalism, the nationalism and the socialism, and the simple sublocal existence of the greatest part of the population focused on the own person, the family and the next surrounding only. This quality caused the slow tempo of the social and personal cultivation. Of course, also the social differencies and quarrels between classes remained.
Key words: History, 19th century, Czech Lands, recent remained patterns

Fighting poverty in the Bohemian Lands in the 19th century: A review of institutions and legislation

First, different definitions of poverty are explained as a social phenomenon in the dynamically developing social structure during the modernization process taking place in the Bohemian Lands in the 19th century. Periodization is the topic dealt with in the second part; the author structures the long period between the Josephinian reforms and the beginning of the Elberfeld system in the Bohemian Lands in the late 19th century. Parts 3 and 4 describe the legal foundations of poor relief at the level of province and empire. The architecture of the poor relief system is analyzed in the next chapter.  The ideal and typical key institutions of poor relief are described here and structured according to the relevant city or country milieu. The penultimate chapter is devoted to the financial sources for poor relief funding. The final chapter contains fourteen theses that are considered by the author as crucial for characterizing the Austrian and/or Bohemian poor relief system.
Key words: History, 19th century, Bohemian Lands, poverty, social policy

Pavel BEK
Czech railway employees´ associations in social and national struggles in Austria-Hungary (1870−1918)

The foundation and activity of two associations, Spolek českých úředníků železničních (Association of Czech Railway Employees) and Zemská jednota zřízenců drah (Provincial Association of Railway Servants) are described from the late 19th century to the end of World War I. Their attitude to the problem of nationalism among the railway workers in Cisleithania is briefly dealt with. One part of the study shows also the role of both associations in the foundation of the League of Slav Railway Organizations (Liga slawischer Eisenbahnorganisationen).
Key words: History of 19th and 20th century, Austria-Hungary, railways, associations, nationalism

The National Committee and the gendarmerie: incorporation of the Austrian gendarmerie in the police corps of the new-born Czechoslovak state (1918−1920)

From October 1918 to early 1920 the original Austrian Gendarmerie was transformed into Czechoslovak gendarmerie that was supposed to become a cornerstone of the democratic order in the new state. The process was far from being easy; nevertheless, when the provincial gendarmerie commander joined the National Committee in Prague on 29 October 1918 it became clear to all Committee members that another suitable instrument to build the new state power could hardly be found. Thus, overnight, the gendarmes removed the Austrian state eagle and German inscriptions, and pinned on Czechoslovak ribbons. The acceptance of the gendarmerie by the population believing that with the fall of Austria its gendarmerie would also be dismissed was far from being easy. Citizens of the new state who were members of municipal councils and national committees had many ‘open accounts’ with the gendarmes as immediate representatives of the former state authorities. Due to their role in the wartime they had drifted apart from the population. The National Committee in Prague, however, did not consider it a sufficient reason to reject the gendarmerie and its incorporation in the new state’s system. Actually, the new state needed the gendarmerie, and it started therefore playing a double game. On the one hand, the population was being persuaded through declarations published in newspapers that the new state would undergo substantial changes and reforms, that the legacy of the old Austrian monarchy had been abandoned and that the new social order would be based on democratic foundations while, on the other hand, discipline in the gendarmerie was strengthened, its staffing was increased, and the new law enforcement body was protected against attacks on the part of population, local national committees, and state authorities. The Ministry of Interior knew by that time that it wanted to keep the gendarmerie within its competence so that it was not in its interest to destabilize it in any way. The gendarme was supposed to retain his high authority, as the new state could only survive the following turbulent months and years with an efficient and powerful police corps, and only with the support of new state authorities and of the new political representation the gendarmerie could be incorporated into the new state’s structure.
Key words: History, 20th century, gendarmerie, national committees, emergence of Czechoslovakia

Andrej TÓTH
Political parties of the Hungarian minority in Czechoslovakia and the election of President Masaryk’s successor in December 1935. Part II

Foreign Minister Edvard Beneš became the second President of the Czechoslovak Republic when he was elected by the overwhelming majority of deputies and senators of the National Assembly on 18 December 1935.  His nomination for President was supported by the members of all Czechoslovak parties, i.e., the Agrarian Party, Social Democratic Party, National Socialist Party, People’s Party, Hlinka’s Slovakian People’s Party, Political Tradesmen, and Communist Party. Beneš’s nomination was also supported by deputies and senators of the German ‘activist’ parties (German Social Democratic Party, German Christian Social Party, and German Agrarian Party). For the first time in the history of presidential elections also legislators-members of the Hungarian opposition parties in the country showed an activist attitude to that election, unlike the previous elections where they had always demonstrated their negative attitude to Czechoslovakia’s constitutional foundations by abstaining, i.e., by returning blank ballots. Their position on the presidential election was to be homogeneous, as subsequently declared by their representatives. Negative position at the election was only shown by deputies and senators of Henlein’s Sudetengerman Party and Kramář’s National Unification Party. The most probable voting pattern of Hungarian parties at the presidential election in December 1935 was as follows: Edvard Beneš’s candidature for President was certainly supported by 10 Hungarian representatives in the least (provided Jaross and Szent-Ivány failed to do so) or 11 (if from the OKSzP and MNP representatives attending the National Assembly only Jaross or Szent-Ivány failed to vote for Beneš); nevertheless, it cannot be excluded that Presidential Nominee Beneš had obtained the votes of all their 12 legislators that attended the election session on 18 December 1935.
Key words: History, 20th century, politics, Czechoslovakia, Hungarians, presidential election, Edvard Beneš

The Jewish congregation of Frýdek-Místek from 1918 to 1942. Assimilation of Jews to majority society

Before the outbreak of World War I the Jewish congregation in Frýdek-Místek saw a period of its apparent heyday. The growing number and wealth of its members reflected also in the size of member contributions and in the development of Jewish religious institutions. After the creation of Czechoslovakia the authorities started distinguishing between the Jewish and the German nationality. The local Jews declared their adherence to the Jewish nationality; this encouraged the local followers of Zionism to try and establish a Zionist association. In the twenties, however, the Zionists failed to create a compact group within the local Jewish community. The economic foundations of the Jewish congregation were then disrupted by the Great Depression. The local Jewish textile factories were getting into growing difficulties, their owners had to lay off hundreds of workers and faced some large strikes and demonstrations during which also gendarmerie had to intervene. The rise of Nazi power reflected also in the congregation in spring 1938 as several Jewish refugees came here from Austria. Other refugees joined the community in late summer and early autumn in connection with the Nazi occupation of Sudetenland. In spite of that most Jews stayed here. The existence of the local Jewish community ended with the dissolution of all “provincial” Jewish congregations in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and with the transfer of their agenda to the only remaining Jewish congregation in Prague. Most Jews from the region of Frýdek-Místek were deported to Terezin in September 1942. An overwhelming majority of them were after a couple of days in Terezin transported to the extermination camps Treblinka and/or Maly Trostenets where they were immediately killed. Additional 42 Jewish residents of the region of Frýdek-Místek were transported from other places in the Protectorate during the following one and a quarter of years. Only 45 Jews living in mixed marriage remained in the region. Finally, in the first months of 1945, 28 Jews of the remaining 45 were transported, while mostly children remained. All of them survived; nevertheless, of all the local Jews “evacuated” by the Nazis in September 1942 only seven returned from concentration camps.
Key words: History, 20th century, Czechoslovakia, Jews, Zionism, racism, holocaust

Ideal image of frontier guard in Communist Czechoslovakia in the years 1948−1956

Protecting the state frontier and separating the country by the Iron Curtain were important Communist instruments to control society. Therefore, much attention was paid to it also by Communist propaganda. It was important to depict an outer enemy who allegedly threatened the country and against whom the country had to be defended by the Iron Curtain. The bad enemies were confronted with heroes – brave frontier guards. Particular elements of the frontier guard´s image between 1948 and 1956 are discussed as well as a model frontier guard in that period of time and the way of presenting the guard inside and outside the country. The frontier guard was mostly presented as a guardian protecting the country, homes and children against the dishonest and bloodthirsty enemy. Additional motifs in the picture of model frontier guard were, e.g., devotion to the people and to the Communist Party, patriotism, adventure, and struggle with wild nature. Communist propaganda made use of all media available (political speeches, literary texts, visual tools – posters, caricature, film) to disseminate the frontier guard´s image. “Political education” was used in the Frontier Guard Corps to indoctrinate and form its members.
Key words: History, 20th century Czechoslovakia 1948−1956, frontier-guard, propaganda, image of the enemy, image of the frontier guard

Jaroslav MILLER
An unknown Czech case in exile: Josef Kučík and the Goodwill Association in Western Australia, 1950−1969

Studies on the Czech and Slovak exile and emigration have developed in the last two decades into an autonomous and promising field of research, which was also due to its strong institutional base in Olomouc, the Center for Czechoslovak Exile Studies, as well as to the Libri Prohibiti Archives, the Institute for Studies into Totalitarian Regimes, and the Czechoslovak Documentation Center.According to the Australian national census of 1954 the total number of Czech and Slovak post-February (1948) exiles in Australia amounted to some 10 to 12 thousand people referred to as displaced persons. This rather high number was mainly due to the fact that Australiaoffered the shortest repatriation waiting time, at least at the turn of the 1940s, and actively fostered immigration from Europe. For that purpose the Australian government launched a media campaign that found its echo primarily in the refugee camps in Germany and Austria. It was first of all Radio Free Europe that systematically publicized that continent and regularly reported on the life of immigrants in particular Australian states. The Czech post-February (1948) exiles in Western Australia numbering 400-500 in the 1950s were developing rather separately (perhaps even in voluntary isolation) from the main exile centers in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Brisbane, and exhibited some very specific features. The obligatory two-year employment contract, the extensive territory of Western Australia (one third of the continent), the underdeveloped transport infrastructure, and the low number of Czechoslovaks who had settled there – these were obviously the main reasons why the Association of Czechoslovak Compatriots could be established in Perth with a several-year-delay compared to analogical organizations in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, or South Australia. The above group in Australian exile faced many personal, collective, organizational, financial and political controversies and problems. In the fall of 1969 the first stage of Czech and Slovak emigration to Western Australia was closed and another stage started in connection with the new wave of post-August (1968) exiles.
Key words: History, 20th century, Australia, Cold War, Czech and Slovak emigration after February 1948

Waldemar ŁAZUGA – Mariusz MENZ
Continuity or a change? The Galician conservatives opposing the signs of democratization, emancipation and modernization in Austria at the turn of the 19th century

By the end of the 19th century the Polish-Lithuanian state declined and disintegrated. As a result, Malopolska (Lesser Poland), the southern part of the state, appeared under the Habsburg rule and this new territory of their empire was renamed Galicia. The name comes from the Austrian claim to that territory as in the Middle Ages it had been under the rule of Hungarian kings who were also sovereigns of Galicia and Wladimierz (the revindication claim). For eighty years after the disintegration of the Polish state Galicia was the worst annexed territory.  The reforms introduced by the last Polish king, Stanislaw August Poniatowski, could not be implemented here, and the reforms carried out in Austria in the period of enlightened absolutism did not take place here, either. And if Vienna had ever waged an inner colonial war, so it was here, in the north-eastern corner of the monarchy. Taxes and recruits were wrung from that territory, and Vienna would certainly have not hesitated to exchange it for some other territories in the Balkans or in Germany. Galicia was “accommodated” to the rest of the monarchy with many difficulties. The Habsburgs were not too happy about the long border with Russia and Prussia. The new country was poor, the performance of its agriculture was low, and the peasants were backward. The profits from the new acquisition appeared to be rather uncertain. Galicia’s nobility had to quickly adapt to the new political order and law. The diet of nobility was converted into a diet of estates, instead of free vote there were now petitions to the throne. Local ruling nobles were everywhere replaced by the rule of foreigners, mostly Czech and German officials. The Galician conservatives were divided (not only geographically) in two parts: the West Galician group and the East Galician group. The first were called “stańczycy“, the latter “podolaci”. Comparing the two groups we can say that the conservatives of Cracow were certainly more open to changes. On the other hand, the conservatism of “podolaci” was “blind” and “absolute”, their program being limited to the slogan: “What will be here must be what was here”. Due to their traditionalist positions the Polish conservatives failed to understand and were not willing to accept “the modern world”. Therefore, they would never play again the same role as they did in the history of autonomous Galicia. Their vacated positions were taken by “modern” mass political parties.