Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:05:31.855Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Böhmische Skizzen: Reflections on Social Space and Nationhood in Nineteenth-Century Prague

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Alena Šimůnková
Alena Šimůnková*
Affiliation:
University of California, Riverside, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Shortly before the Christmas of 1860, the major bookstores in Prague put on display a German-language booklet entitled Bohemian Sketches: By a Native Writer. Although the book was published anonymously, its author soon became well known: he was Jan Palacký, the son of the prominent historian and leading Czech politician Frantis̆ek Palacký. But even his famous name did not spare the young man from stormy, harsh criticism that followed after the publication of the book. For weeks the newspapers both in Prague and in Vienna scrutinized the rhetorical nuances of the book, pointing out the author's national and political biases. Surprisingly, neither of the Czech-language newspapers, Národní listy nor C̆as, that had recently entered into the public arena, stepped forward in defense of the author. The critical response in the press raises one's curiosity: what was wrong with Jan Palacký's arguments? How could someone so closely connected with Czech national leaders write such a controversial account? Moreover, considering the censorship practices and vigilant police supervision of the time, it is also worth asking how the publication could have escaped the attention of governmental surveillance.

Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 335 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Böhmische Skizzen: Von einem Landeskind (Litomys̆l: A. Augusta, 1860).Google Scholar

2. Kor̆alka, Jir̆í, C̆es̆i v Habsburské r̆ís̆i a Evropĕ, 1815–1914 (Prague: Argo, 1996), pp. 18–82; Jan Heidler, C̆echy a Rakousko v politický broz̆urách pr̆edbr̆eznových (Prague: r̆ivnác̆, 1920); Jan Erazim Vocel, “Nase národní boje,” C̆asopis c̆eského museum, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1849, pp. 144–171.Google Scholar

3. Palacký, Frantis̆ek, “Psaní do Frankfurtu,” in Havránek, Jan, Sekera, M., and Znoj, M., eds, Český liberalismus. Texty a osobnosti (Prague: Torts, 1995), p. 37. See also Kor̆alka, Frantis̆ek Palacký (Prague: Argo, 1998), pp. 269–272; Otto Urban, “Czech Society 1848–1918,” in Mikulás̆ Teich, ed., Bohemia in History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 203–204.Google Scholar

4. Nipperdey, Thomas, Germany from Napoleon to Bismarck, 1800–1866 (Princeton: Princenton University Press, 1996) pp. 642–643; Hans Rosenberg, Die nationalpolitische Publizistik der Deutchland, Vom Eintritt der Neuen Ära in Preuβen bis zum Ausbruch des deutchen Krieges. Eine kritische Bibliographie, Vol. 1 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1935), pp. 20–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Kazbunda, Karel, “Národní program c̆eský 1860 a zápas o politický list,” C̆eský c̆asopis historický, Vol. 33, 1927, pp. 473–547; Beránková, Milena, Krásův C̆as a jeho místo v c̆eské politice a z̆urnalistice (Prague: Universita Karlova, 1972).Google Scholar

6. Jan Palacký to his father, 7 November 1859. Archive of the National Museum, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection, carton 24 (Hereafter ANM, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection).Google Scholar

7. Zíbrt, C̆enĕk, “Z dopisů Frantis̆ka Palackého synu Janovi 1848–74,” Osvĕta, Vol. 39, 1909, pp. 41–51, 150–160; and letters of Jan Palacký to his father, ANM, František Palacký Collection.Google Scholar

8. Marie Palacká-Riegerová to her husband Rieger, F.L., 12 December 1859, quoted in Heidler, Jan and S̆usta, Josef, eds, Pr̆íspĕvky k listár̆i F. L. Riegera, Vol. 1 (Prague: Česká akademie vĕd a umĕní, 1924), p. 121.Google Scholar

9. Sabina, Karel, a Czech writer and police informer, reported on the disappointed expectations of the Czech intellectuals. See Purs̆, Jaroslav, K pr̆ípadu Karla Sabiny (Prague: C̆SAV 1959), p. 32; Kazbunda, “Národní program c̆esky̆ 1860 a zápas o politický list,” p. 486.Google Scholar

10. Frantis̆ek Palacký to S̆embera, A. V. and Gabler, V., December 1859, quoted in Kor̆alka, Frantis̆ek Palacký, pp. 399–400. The same reason was brought up in the French-language essay by F. L. Rieger, Les Slaves d'Austriche et les Magyars, originally printed in a Parisian journal Le Nord in summer 1860. See Rakous̆tí Slované a Mad'ar̆i (Prague: J. Otto, 1907), pp. 14, 65–66.Google Scholar

11. Rieger, F. L. to Gabler, V., September 1859, in Heidler and S̆usta, Pr̆íspĕvky k listár̆i F.L. Riegera, Vol. 1, p. 115; Kor̆alka, Frantis̆ek Palacký, p. 398; Urban, C̆eská spolec̆nost 1848–1914 (Prague: Svoboda, 1982), pp. 155–157.Google Scholar

12. Palacký, Jan to his father, 1 January 1860, ANM, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection.Google Scholar

13. Böhmische Skizzen, p. 121.Google Scholar

14. Kor̆alka, “Palacký, Sybel a poc̆átky Historische Zeitschrift,” Husitský Tábor, Vol. 9, 1986–1987, pp. 199–248. Václav S̆ambera, “O Janu Palackém,” Osvĕta, Vol. 38, 1908, pp. 410–420, 481–493; Sheehan, James J., German Liberalism in the Nineteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), p. 114; Zíbrt, “Z dopisů Frantis̆ka Palackého synu Janovi 1848–74,” p. 39.Google Scholar

15. As has been well explained in the literature, arguments based on linguistic diversity and historically constructed territoriality were fundamental principles on which non-dominant nations based their self-understanding. See, for example, Hroch, Miroslav, V národním zájmu (Prague: Mladá fronta, 1999), pp. 244–245.Google Scholar

16. Böhmische Skizzen, p. 30. Palacký here referred to the official census by Karl von Czoernik, Ethnographie der österreichischen Monarchie, Vols 1–3 (Vienna: k.k.Direction der administrativen Statistik/k.k.hof und Staatsdruckerei, 1855–1857). On controversial estimates concerning the ethnic composition of Bohemia, see Kor̆alka, C̆es̆i v Habsburské r̆ís̆i a Evropĕ, 1815–1914, pp. 84–86.Google Scholar

17. Palacký, Jan to his father, 4 April 1860, ANM, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection.Google Scholar

18. On police reports by Karel Sabina noting the careful stance of Rieger, F. L., see Kazbunda, , “Národní program c̆eský 1860 a zápas o politický list,” pp. 486, 491; Purs̆, K pr̆ípadu Karla Sabiny, pp. 31–32.Google Scholar

19. Palacký, Jan to his father, 25 May 1860, ANM, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection; and Rieger, F. L. to Frantis̆ek Palacký, May 1860, see Heidler and S̆usta, Pr̆íspĕvky k listár̆i F. L. Riegera, Vol. 1, p. 127.Google Scholar

20. Böhmische Skizzen, p. 90.Google Scholar

21. Palacký, Jan, “Den v Syndehamu,” in Josef Barak, ed., Máj: Jarní almanach (Prague, 1858), pp. 285–294.Google Scholar

22. Böhmische Skizzen, p. 61 Google Scholar

23. Ibid., p. 89.Google Scholar

24. Ibid., p. 39.Google Scholar

25. Hroch, Miroslav, Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe. A Comparative Analysis of the Social Composisition of Patriotic Groups among the Smaller European Nations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 44–61; Havránek, “Pr̆edpoklady působení c̆eské kultury v C̆echách,” in Milena Freimanová, ed., Mĕsto v c̆eské kultur̆e 19.století (Prague: Národní Galerie, 1983), pp. 108–121.Google Scholar

26. Urban, C̆eská spolec̆nost 1848–1918, pp. 158–159; Cohen, Gary B., Politics of Ethnic Survival: Germans in Prague, 1867–1914 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), pp. 19–48.Google Scholar

27. Böhmische Skizzen, p. 56.Google Scholar

28. A call for fostering Czech-language curriculum in advanced education echoed repeatedly throughout the volume. See, for example, Böhmische Skizzen, pp. 57, 61–63, 122.Google Scholar

29. Ibid., p. 86.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., p. 90.Google Scholar

31. Státní ústr̆ední archiv, Presidium místodrz̆iteltví (hereafter SUA, PM), 1860–1870, 8/4/2/8, a document issued on 22 December 1860.Google Scholar

32. SUA, PM, 1860–1870, 8/4/2/8, a document issued on 30 December 1860. The governor office had a history of approving the press campaign against the Queen's Court Manuscript in 1858. A series of articles in Tagesbote aus Böhmen that targeted Václav Hanka as a forger was arranged directly by a director of the police headquarters in Prague, Anton von Päumann, and intended to trigger public polemics on a sensitive issue. Nevertheless, I have found no documents that would prove governmental officials were involved in the same way in debating on Bohemian Sketches. See Frantis̆ek Roubík, “Úc̆ast policie v útoku na rukopisy roku 1858,” in Od pravĕku k dnes̆ku: Sborník prací k s̆edesátým narozeninám Josefa Pekar̆e, Vol. 2 (Prague, 1930), pp. 435–449.Google Scholar

33. Die Presse, 29 December 1859, p. 3.Google Scholar

34. Prager Morgenpost, 9 January 1861, p. 2.Google Scholar

35. For detailed accounts about Pinkas, see Heidler, Jan, Antonin Springer a česká politika (Prague: C̆eský akademie, 1914); Heidler, “Dr. Adolf Marie Pinkas a vznik c̆eského programu v letech 1848–1850 a 1861,” Vĕstník Královské c̆eské spolec̆nosti nauk, Vol. 1, 1913, pp. 1–33. Also see Kazbunda, “Národní program c̆eský 1860 a zápas o politický list,” p. 502; Kor̆alka, Frantis̆ek Palacký, pp. 313, 319–320, 333–336.Google Scholar

36. Národní listy, 4 January 1861, p. 1.Google Scholar

37. Alois Krása, the editor of the newspaper, maintained the views of Czech national liberals, even though he was suspected of representing the interests of the Bohemian nobility. Like A. M. Pinkas, he joined the centralists in summer 1861. Shortly afterwards, the radical-minded journalists such as Karel Sladkovský, Josef Barak, and Jan Neruda left the editorial staff for a new daily, Hlas. See Beránková, Krásův C̆as a jeho místo v c̆eské politice a z̆urnalistice; Urban, C̆eská spolec̆nost, pp. 171–172.Google Scholar

38. C̆as, 5 January 1861, p. 1.Google Scholar

39. Tagesbote aus Böhmen, 5 January 1861, p. 3.Google Scholar

40. Jan Palacký to his father, 7 November 1859, ANM, Frantis̆ek Palacký Collection.Google Scholar

41. Jan Palacký to Heinrich von Sybel, 8 January 1861; see Kor̆alka, “Palacký, Sybel, a poc̆átky Historische Zeitschift,” pp. 239–240.Google Scholar

42. Sybel's later apology in his letter to Frantis̆ek Palacký could not change the unfavorable impression left by his article. See, Kor̆alka, “Palacký, Sybel, a poc̆átky Historische Zeitschift,” pp. 237–238.Google Scholar

43. Henrich von Sybel to Frantis̆ek Palacký, 3 January 1861; see Kor̆alka, “Palacký, Sybel, a poc̆átky Historische Zeitschift,” pp. 237–238. Národní listy reported on Sybel's changing view in favor of the brochure on 7 January 1861. A day later, Tagesbote aus Böhmen questioned the possibility that Sybel would have the courage to denounce publicly his previous statement. See Tagesbote aus Böhmen, 8 January 1861.Google Scholar

44. As some historians have noted, the two major political factions that became known as the federalist Czechs and the centralist Germans adopted remarkably similar strategies for the 1861 campaign. They manipulated national rhetoric in the press, and endorsed the same personalities on their lists of candidates, whether they declared themselves Czechs or Germans or remained undecided in their national affiliation. Both parties also ultimately allied themselves with a centralist or autonomy-minded faction of nobles. See Cohen, The Politics of Ethnic Survival, pp. 46–51; Judson, Pieter, Exclusive Revolutionaries: Liberal Politics, Social Experience and National Identity in the Austrian Empire (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996), pp. 89–90; Kor̆alka, C̆es̆i v habsburské r̆ís̆i a Evropĕ, pp. 154–155; Jeremy King, “Loyalty and Polity, Nation and State: A Town in Habsburg Central Europe, 1848–1948” (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1998), Chapter 1. On the alliance of the Czech national party and federalist aristocrats see, for example, Bruce M. Garver, The Young Czech Party 1874–1901 and the Emergence of Multi-Party System (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1978), p. 51; Havránek, “C̆eská politika, konzervativní aristokraté a uspor̆ádání pomĕrů v habsburské r̆ísi 1860–1867,” Sborník historický, Vol. 17, 1970, pp. 67–93.Google Scholar

45. Böhmische Skizzen, pp. 124–127.Google Scholar

46. Urban, C̆eská spolec̆nost, p.177.Google Scholar

47. Indeed, the many ideas the young geographer outlined in Bohemian Sketches corresponded in many respects with the program statement of the nascent Young Czech faction issued in the newspaper Hlas on 1 January 1862. See Havránek et al., C̆eský liberalismus, pp. 170–174.Google Scholar

48. While most scholars have rightly pointed out the consequences that the developing Young Czech opposition had on party unity, less attention has been paid to how the diversity inside the Czech national movement emerged in the first place. See Urban, , Kapitalismus a c̆eská spolec̆nost (Prague: Svoboda, 1978), pp. 200–214, 238–250. On the dormant conflict inside the Czech national party in the early 1860s, see also Urban, C̆eská spolec̆nost, pp. 173–182; Garver, The Young Czech Party, pp. 60–87.Google Scholar