Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-w95db Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-19T05:00:14.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Czech Nationalism and Socialism in 1905

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

J. F. N. Bradley
J. F. N. Bradley*
Affiliation:
Fitzwilliam House, Cambridge University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The year 1905 is an important landmark in the history of Czech nationalism and socialism. The generally held view of the events in 1905 as the social democratic struggle for universal suffrage is perhaps narrow and misleading. On closer examination the year 1905 appears a turning point in the nationalist struggle. Nationalism scored its greatest and last but one success: it broadened its mass basis with the organized working class.

The growth of nationalism within the socialist movement is on the whole acknowledged even by contemporary Czech historians; however, the changes that 1905 represented and brought about were either misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Slavic and East European Review , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 1960 , pp. 74 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1960

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

1 Tobolka, Z., Politické dějiny československého národa od roku 1848 až do dnešni doby (Prague, 1936), Vol. II, Part 2, pp. 286–308;Google Scholar Šolle, Z., Ceské země v obdobi rozmachu kapitalismu a nástupu imperialismu (Prague, 1956), p. 59;Google Scholar also Kramář, K., Ceská Politika III (Prague, 1909), pp. 710–11Google Scholarspeaks of this movement in the narrow parliamentary sense.

2 Križek, J., Masaryk, T. G. a naše dělnickȧ třída (Prague, 1955), p. 74; Solle, op. cit., p. 56-57; O. Ríha, O národnim hnuti a národnostní otázce; See Ceskoslovenský časopis hislorický(1954), I, 63–64 Google Scholar.

3 Šolle's introduction to Prúkopníci socialismu (Prague, 1954), p. 28; Solle, op. cit., pp. 53-54.Google Scholar.

4 Prúkopníci socialismu, op. cit., p. 28; Ríha, op. cit., p. 66; Jindra, Z., reviewing Beránek., J. Rakouskjý militarismus a boj proti n£mu v Cechdch; See CCH (1956), I, 146.Google Scholar

5 Jindra, op. cit., p. 146; Kolejka, J.; Konečný, Z.; reviewing Doležal, J.; Beránek, J.; Ohlas, I.; ruské revoluce v českých zemích; See CCH (1954), II, 521–23.Google Scholar

6 Kolejka, J., op. cit., p. 523. Google Scholar.

7 Taylor, A. J. P., The Habsburg Monarchy (London, 1952), 2nd ed., pp. 199–213; Seton-Watson, R. W., A History of the Czechs and Slovaks (London, 1941), pp. 239–40, 276–77.Google Scholar

8 See reported speech by Klofáč, Statthalterei, Act No. 21, 157 (Prague, Dec. 31, 1904); E. Priester, Kurze Geschichte Ostrreichs (Wien, 1954), Czech edition, p. 511.

9 Kramář, K., in his “memoirs” (Ceská Politika, III (Prague, 1909), pp. 708–15Google Scholar; tries to dispute the primacy of the social democrats, and though he is correct in claiming parliamentary initiative for the Young Czechs, the movement became really effective when the Czech social democrats took it up.

10 This is evident from their references to Hungary (Bericht uber die am Nov. 4, 1905 … auf der Schutzeninsel in Prag abgehaltene offentliche Vereinssitzung—No. 18, 183 präs/ai 1905 Second Appendix) and their attacks on the “Hofkamarilla” (Social democratic meeting Sept. 24, 1905, Havlicek Square—appended to File No. 18, 183 präs/ai 1905)Google Scholar.

11 See Governor's report No. 15,099 (September 22, 1905).

12 See Police President's report No. 339 (Prague, Dec. 4, 1904); also No. 340 (Dec. 5, 1904), and Dr. Baxa's interpellation (Ministry of Interior, March 18, 1905).Google Scholar

13 Doležal, See j . and Ber&nek, J., Oh las I. ruskě revoluce v českých zemích (Prague, 1954); also Kramář, K., op. cit., p. 736; Solle, op. cit., p. S3; A. Grobelný, Ohlas I, ruské revoluce na Ostravsku, Slovanské studie (Prague, 1953), pp. 183–213 Google Scholar.

14 Grobelný, op. cit., p. 185; Machar, J. S., Prosa z let 1904-1905 (Prague, 1907), pp. 47–52, and p. 227.Google Scholar

15 See Governor's report on national socialists No. 21, 157 (Dec. 31, 1904), and Prague Police President's report No. 339, 340, op. citGoogle Scholar.

16 Prague Police President's report No. 136 (May 16, 1905)Google Scholar.

17 Governor, No.7,802 (May 19, 1905).Google Scholar

18 Governor, No. 8, 965 (June 16, 1905).

19 Governor, No. 8, 965 (June 16, 1905) and No. 15,099 (Sept. 22, 1905).

20 At Nov^ Bydžov a meeting was organised by Poležal J., Diet MP, and Maštálka, Young Czech deputy on September 17, 1905. (See Governor No. 15,099).

21 Two telephone reports by Governor to Premier on Sept. 24, 1905, and Oct. 1, 1905; also Kramář, op. cit. pp. 710, 714, 718.Google Scholar

22 Governor. No. 15,099; Kramář, op. cit., p. 723.Google Scholar

23 See Social democratic meeting Sept. 24, 1905, Havlicek Square, cited N. 10; See Governor No. 15,504 (Sept. 26, 1905).Google Scholar

24 Police report No. E 16,273 PP (Oct. 4, 1905)Google Scholar.

25 Governor, No. 16,046 (Oct. 4, 1905)Google Scholar.

26 Report E 16,273.Google Scholar

27 Police Report 274 (Oct. 1, 1905).

28 28 Governor, No. 16, 046 (Oct. 4, 1905).

29 Ibid.

30 Police Report 283 (Oct. 10, 1905).Google Scholar

31 Ibid., also Police 6516/171.Google Scholar

32 Ibid.; Also telephone report Oct. 10, 1905, 11:50 A.M.; Kramář, op. cit., p. 716; Tobolka, op. cit., p. 716; Tobolka, op. cit., p. 294.Google Scholar

33 Governor, No. 16,046 (Oct. 10, 1905)Google Scholar.

34 Ministry of Interior, No. 8,628, Digest of 1905 demonstrations kept from August 5, 1905.Google Scholar

35 Police 16,787 PP (Oct. 16, 1905)Google Scholar.

36 See Bericht uber die am Nov. 4, 1905, Supra, N. 10.Google Scholar

37 Ministry of Interior, 8628.Google Scholar

38 Governor, No. 18,609 (Nov. 10, 1905).Google Scholar

39 Ibid.

40 Ibid.

41 Governor, No. 18,370 (Nov. 8, 1905).Google Scholar

42 See students telegram of Nov. 5, 1905—Ministry of Interior File No. 7403—Students (Oct. 26, 1905)Google Scholar.

43 Governor, No. 18, 609 .Google Scholar

44 Ibid.; also No. 18,401 (Nov. 9, 1905)Google Scholar

45 Neither the Governor nor the police suggested that violence and clashes were prepared or organized, but of course, excitable meetings were their breeding ground.Google Scholar

46 Ministry of Interior 8063 (Nov. 23, 1905)Google Scholar.

47 Governor, No. 19,589 (Nov. 22, 1905)Google Scholar.

48 Kramář, op. cit., pp. 714–17Google Scholar.

49 Ibid., p. 716.

50 Governor, Nos. 18,609; 15,099;8965Google Scholar.

51 Governor, No. 17,997 (Nov. 13, 1905).Google Scholar

52 Governor, No. 6833 (May 1, 1905)Google Scholar.

53 63Governor, 17,997 (Nov. 13, 1905)Google Scholar.

54 “Ibid

55 E., Police 18,727 PP (Nov. 13, 1905)Google Scholar.

56 Governor 19,088 (Nov. 16, 1905)Google Scholar.

57 See Strafsache Prager Excesse—Ages of Accused—Ministry of Interior (Nov. 15, 1905)Google Scholar.

58 Governor 19,589 (Nov. 22, 1905); Ministry of Interior, see Reinforcement in Prague, No. 7843 (Nov. 17, 1905)Google Scholar.

59 Ibid.

60 Police, No. 19,553 PP (Nov. 25, 1905)Google Scholar.

61 Ministry of interior, No. 8063 (Nov. 23, y).Google Scholar

62 Governor, No. 19,589 Google Scholar.

63 Police E 19,923 (Dec. 1, 1905)Google Scholar.

64 Ibid.

65 Governor, No. 20,584 (Dec. 3, 1905)Google Scholar.

66 Governor 20,427 (Dec. 1, 1905)Google Scholar.

67 Governor 20,498 (Dec. 2, 1905)Google Scholar.

68 Ibid.; Survey of Gendarme reinforcement—Ministry of Interior, No. 8063 (Nov. 23, 1905)Google Scholar.

69 Governor, No. 20,429 (Dec. 1, 1905), sounded alarm.Google Scholar

70 Ministry of Interior, No. 8887 (Dec. 7, 1905)Google Scholar.

71 See mobilization discussion—mit der in Abschift mitfolgende note vom 12.12, D. J., etc.; K. K. Minister President 2,928/M.P. (Dec. 14, 1905)Google Scholar.

72 Governor, No. 20,584 (Dec. 3, 1905)Google Scholar.

73 Ibid

74 Seton-Watson, R. W., op. cit., p. 239; Kramdf, op. cit., p. 720 Google Scholar.

75 Schlesinger, R., Central European Democracy and Its Background (London, 1953), p. 124, rightly observes that the demands were accepted in view of a national revolt in Bohemia rather than social democratic pressureGoogle Scholar.

76 Seton-Watson, op. cit., p. 240, Kramář, op. cit., p. 721 ff.Google Scholar

77 Kramář, op. cit., p. 722; Governor, No. 4261 (March 2, 1906)Google Scholar.

78 Ibid.

79 Governor, No. 8056 (April 27, 1906)Google Scholar.

80 See Kolejka, J., Rozkol socialni demokracie na autonomisthy a centralisty v roce 1910 a činnost centralistické socialni demokracie v rocich 1911-1919 (Slezský Sbornik, 1956); Krofta, op. cit., pp. 666–67Google Scholar.

81 See Krížek, J., in his introduction to L. Otáhalová, Souhrnná hlašeni presidia pražského mistodržitelstvi o protistdtni, protirakouske a protivdlečne činnosti v Cehách 1915-1918 (Prague, 1957), p. 13 ff.Google Scholar