Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
2021.
Verkauftes Vaterland.
p.
307.
Article contents
Social Change in the Polish National Movement in Prussia Before World War I∗
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 November 2018
Extract
In the eighteenth century, prior to the partitioning of the Polish Commonwealth by its neighbors, the Polish szlachta or gentry constituted the Polish “nation.” Then, of course, the term did not have an ethnic connotation but rather a political one: the gentry alone had all the rights that came with full citizenship in the Polish state. The existence of such a privileged ruling class or estate was not uncommon in Europe. The szlachta, however, differed in two important respects from the gentry of most other European states. First of all, the Polish gentry included an unusually large portion of the total population: 9–10 per cent (25 per cent of the Polish-speaking population). Secondly, in theory all members of the szlachta had equal political rights whether they were magnates or completely landless. Consequently, when in the nineteenth century economic forces gradually transformed Polish society from a feudal social structure into a more modern one, individuals of gentry origin acted as a leaven bringing their consciousness of membership in the nation to the new classes of society that they joined. Some of the szlachta, influenced by the Enlightenment and the “Democratic Revolution” as well as by the obvious need for internal reform, sought to broaden the concept of the nation to include the other social classes even before Poland lost its independence. They, however, still conceived of the nation in terms of citizenship in the state. It is therefore ironic that this social broadening of the concept of the Polish nation actually occurred in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when the Polish state did not exist.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1976 Association for the Study of Nationalities
References
Notes
1. Tadeusz Łepkowski, Polska–Narodziny nowoczesnego narodu, 1764–1870 (Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1967), pp. 138, 139.Google Scholar
2. Ibid., p. 449; John H. Kautsky, ed., Political Change in Underdeveloped Countries: Nationalism and Communism (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962), pp. 39, 53. The parallels between the rise of nationalism in Eastern Europe–the “underdeveloped” part of Europe–and in the underdeveloped countries of the world seem to have been little noted.Google Scholar
3. Stefan Kieniewicz, “Rozwój polskiej świadomości narodowej w XIX wieku,” Kultura i Społeczeństwo, XIV, No. 1 (1970), 51.Google Scholar
4. Franciszek Paprocki, “W okresie Powstania Listopadowego,” in Dzieje Wielkopolski, Vol. II, ed. by Witold Jakóbczyk (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1973), p. 161.Google Scholar
5. Witold Jakóbczyk, Studia nad dziejami Wielkopolski (3 vols.; Poznań: Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk, 1951–67), I, 65.Google Scholar
6. Ibid., p. 67.Google Scholar
7. Ibid., p. 81.Google Scholar
8. Ibid., p. 85.Google Scholar
9. Ibid., II, 28, 29; III, 38.Google Scholar
10. Ibid.Google Scholar
11. Ibid., II, 29, 33; III, 37, 39–41.Google Scholar
12. Even the Słownik historii Polski (5th ed.; Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna, 1969), pp. 313, 314, makes no mention of this social aspect of organic work.Google Scholar
13. The implication made by Kieniewicz, p. 51, that the means chosen by a Pole, or even his immediate goal, indicates his level of national consciousness does not seem warranted.Google Scholar
14. Franciszek Paprocki, “Walenty Stefański,” in Wielkopolanie XIX wieku, ed. by Witold Jakóbczyk (2 vols.; Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1966–69), I, 263–88.Google Scholar
15. Franciszek Paprocki, “W kręgu konspiracji w latach czterdziestych,” in Polityczna działalność rzemiosła wielkopolskiego w okresie zaborów (1793–1918), ed. by Zdzisław Grot (Poznań: Polskie Towarzystwo Historyczne, 1963), p. 266.Google Scholar
16. Stefan Kieniewicz, Społeczeństwo polskie w powstaniu poznańskim 1848r. (Rev. ed.; Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1960), pp. 114, 115.Google Scholar
17. Ibid., p. 175.Google Scholar
18. Ibid., pp. 211, 227. Concerning 1848, a publicist wrote in 1861: “The lower bourgeoisie, the artisans of the small towns, squeezed by German and Jewish competition, constitute precisely that social stratum in which hatred of the enemy takes the place of a more positive or idealistic patriotism, although the net results are the same. For, not having much to lose and everything to gain, the readiness for insurrection is natural among them,” Jackóbczyk, Studia, I, 102.Google Scholar
19. Franciszek Paprocki, “Na polach bitew Wiosny Ludów,” in Grot, p. 316.Google Scholar
20. Jakóbczyk, Studia, I, 130.Google Scholar
21. Ibid., p. 141.Google Scholar
22. Zdzisław Grot, Rok 1863 w zaborze pruskim (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1963), pp. 148–52.Google Scholar
23. Jakóbczyk, Studia, II, 91, 92.Google Scholar
24. Ibid., p. 94.Google Scholar
25. Just prior to 1914 the Polish-speaking population was over 99 per cent Roman Catholic and comprised almost 90 per cent of the Roman Catholics of the province, Statistisches Jahrbuch für den preussischen Staat, 11. Jahrgang 1913 (Berlin: Herausgegeben vom Königlichen Statistischen Landesamt, 1914), p. 21; moreover, the overwhelming majority of Catholic priests were Polish while the overwhelming majority of Prussian officials were Protestant.Google Scholar
26. Lech Trzeciakowski, Pod pruskim zaborem 1850–1918 (Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna, 1973), p. 300.Google Scholar
27. Józef Buzek, Historia polityki narodowościowej rządu pruskiego wobec Polaków od traktatów wiedeńskich do ustaw wyjątkowych 1908 r. (Lwów: H. Altenberg, 1909), p. 319.Google Scholar
28. Ibid., p. 399.Google Scholar
29. Lech Trzeciakowski, Walka o polskość miast Poznańskiego na przełomie XIX i XX w. (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1964), p. 49.Google Scholar
30. Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 46; William Walter Hagen, “Poles, Germans and Jews: The Nationality Conflict in Prussian Poland in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1971), p. 470, reports that in 1914 the patron of the agricultural circles claimed that they included roughly 63 per cent of the self-sufficient peasantry.Google Scholar
31. Jakóbczyk, Studia, II, 121.Google Scholar
32. Ibid., III, 94, 95; according to Hagen, p. 473, half of the Polish artisans belonged.Google Scholar
33. Hagen, p. 473.Google Scholar
34. Jakóbczyk, Studia, II, 129.Google Scholar
35. Hagen, p. 474; Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 119, gives a higher estimate of over half the Polish commercial employees being included.Google Scholar
36. Hagen, p. 474; Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 117, nevertheless suggests that 27 per cent of all Polish merchants belonged.Google Scholar
37. These and the following statistics are given by Trzeciakowski, Walka, pp. 120–22.Google Scholar
38. Hagen, p. 487.Google Scholar
39. These and the following statistics are given by Jakóbczyk, Studia, III.Google Scholar
40. Ibid., III, 136.Google Scholar
41. Lech Trzeciakowski, “Rzemieślnicy w walce z germanizacją,” in Grot, Polityczna działalność, p. 222.Google Scholar
42. Wolfgang Zorn, “Sozialgeschichtliche Probleme der nationalen Bewegung in Deutschland,” in Sozialstruktur und Organisation europäischer Nationalbewegungen, ed. by Theodor Schieder (München: R. Oldenbourg, 1971), p. 109, speaks of Turnenvereine, gun clubs, and choral societies as a substitute for a unified political life in the early 1860s in what was to become Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 106, 107.Google Scholar
44. Ibid., p. 108.Google Scholar
45. Witold Jakóbczyk, ed., Wielkopolska (1851–1914): Wybór źródeł (Wrocław: Zakład Imienia Ossolińskich, 1954), p. LV.Google Scholar
46. Tadeusz Filipiak, “Udział rzemiosła w związkach zawodowych,” in Grot, Polityczna działalność, p. 169.Google Scholar
47. These and the following statistics are given by Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 122, 123, 132.Google Scholar
48. Trzeciakowski, “Rzemieślnicy,” p. 229.Google Scholar
49. Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 238.Google Scholar
50. Lech Trzeciakowski, “Roman Szymański,” in Jakóbczyk, Wielkopolanie, II, 341–61; Lech Trzeciakowski, “Rola rzemieślników w zyciu politycznym,” in Grot, Polityczna działalność, pp. 203–15.Google Scholar
51. Lech Trzeciakowski, Kulturkampf w zaborze pruskim (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1970), p. 220.Google Scholar
52. Ibid., p. 229.Google Scholar
53. Lech Trzeciakowski, Polityka polskich klas posiadających w Wielkopolsce w erze Capriviego (1890–1894) (Poznań: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1960), pp. 20, 21.Google Scholar
54. On the election results, see Trzeciakowski, “Rola rzemieślników,” pp. 210, 212.Google Scholar
55. Jakóbczyk, Wielkopolska, pp. 233, 234. It was the National Democrats who organized the Polish Trade Union in 1902; since, however, Poznania's economy was based on agriculture, they did not advocate a lowering of the tariffs on imported grain.Google Scholar
56. Jerzy Marczewski, Narodowa demokracja w Poznanskiem 1900–1914 (Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1967), p. 151.Google Scholar
57. Ibid., p. 175.Google Scholar
58. John J. Kulczycki, “The School Strike of 1906–1907 in the Province of Poznań, in American Contributions to the Seventh International Congress of Slavists, Vol. III: History, ed. by Anna Cienciala (The Hague: Mouton, 1973), p. 175.Google Scholar
59. Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 190.Google Scholar
60. Hagen, p. 565.Google Scholar
61. Trzeciakowski, “Rola rzemieślników,” p. 214; Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 206.Google Scholar
62. Dziennik Poznański, Jan. 6, 1907, No. 5; Jan. 16, 1907, No. 13.Google Scholar
63. Zygmunt Hemmerling, Posłowie polscy w parlamencie Rzeszy niemieckiej i sejmie pruskim 1907–1914 (Warszawa: Ludowa Spółdzielnia Wydawnicza, 1968), p. 54.Google Scholar
64. Marczewski, pp. 275, 276, 363.Google Scholar
65. Jakóbczyk, Studia, III, 23.Google Scholar
66. Trzeciakowski, Walka, pp. 180, 181.Google Scholar
67. These and the following statistics are given by Hemmerling, pp. 83, 98.Google Scholar
68. Marczewski, p. 276.Google Scholar
69. Stanisław Borowski, “Rozwój rolnictwa,” in Jakóbczyk, Dzieje, p. 383.Google Scholar
70. Stanisław Borowski, Rozwarstwienie wsi wielkopolskiej w latach 1807–1914 (Poznań: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1962), pp. 310, 311.Google Scholar
71. Ibid., p. 343.Google Scholar
72. Hagen, p. 68.Google Scholar
73. Borowski, Rozwarstwienie wsi, p. 269.Google Scholar
74. Ibid., p. 339.Google Scholar
75. Buzek, p. 297.Google Scholar
76. Hagen, pp. 152–55.Google Scholar
77. Ibid., pp. 128, 157, 158.Google Scholar
78. Borowski, Rozwarstwienie wsi, p. 75.Google Scholar
79. Ibid., p. 342.Google Scholar
80. Czesław Łuczak, Przemysł wielkopolski w latach 1871–1914 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie, 1960), p. 102.Google Scholar
81. Czesław Łuczak, “Przemysł i rzemiosło,” in Jakóbczyk, Dzieje, p. 391.Google Scholar
82. Ibid., p. 387.Google Scholar
83. Łuczak, Przemysł wielkopolski, p. 28.Google Scholar
84. Hagen, pp. 707, 708.Google Scholar
85. Trzeciakowski, Walka, p. 217.Google Scholar
86. Hagen, pp. 706–08.Google Scholar
87. Trzeciakowski, Walka, p. 142.Google Scholar
88. Łuczak, Przemysł wielkopolski, p. 72.Google Scholar
89. In a study of the national movements of seven small nations, mostly in Eastern Europe, Miroslav Hroch, “Das Erwachen kleiner Nationen als Problem der komparativen sozialgeschichtlichen Forschung,” in Schieder, p. 133, found that each movement had its greatest success in the area most affected by social transformation; for similar cases in Asia and Africa, see R. Emerson, “Paradoxes of Asian Nationalism,” in Social Change: The Colonial Situation, ed. by Immanuel Wallerstein (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1966), p. 525, and S. Eisenstadt, “Sociological Aspects of Political Development in Underdeveloped Countries,” ibid., p. 578.Google Scholar
90. Ted Robert Gurr, Why Men Rebel (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970), p. 24. See also Gary K. Bertsch, “The Revival of Nationalisms,” Problems of Communism, XXII, No. 6 (1973), 1–15, on the national conflict in contemporary Yugoslavia in what is apparently the only attempt to apply this concept to Eastern Europe.Google Scholar
91. Tamotsu Shibutani and Kian M. Kwan, Ethnic Stratification: A Comparative Approach (New York: Macmillan, 1965), p. 53.Google Scholar
92. Ibid., p. 362.Google Scholar
93. Gurr, p. 105.Google Scholar
94. Ibid., p. 110.Google Scholar
95. Ibid., p. 113.Google Scholar
96. Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 383, 384, 576.Google Scholar
97. Gurr, pp. 105, 353, 354.Google Scholar
98. Ibid., pp. 179, 180; Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 103, 437.Google Scholar
99. Karl W. Deutsch, Nationalism and Social Communication: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Nationality (2nd ed.; Cambridge, Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press, 1966), p. 2.Google Scholar
100. C. E. Black, The Dynamics of Modernization: A Study in Comparative History (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), pp. 77, 78, 87; Gurr, p. 180.Google Scholar
101. Ernest Gellner, Thought and Change (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), pp. 154, 155.Google Scholar
102. Ibid., pp. 157, 172; Deutsch, p. 2.Google Scholar
103. Deutsch, p. 101.Google Scholar
104. Ibid. See also Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 59, 573.Google Scholar
105. Deutsch, p. 101. See also Shibutani and Kwan, p. 58.Google Scholar
106. Łepkowski, pp. 223, 224.Google Scholar
107. Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 41, 42; Deutsch, p. 181.Google Scholar
108. Deutsch, p. 181; Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 382, 383.Google Scholar
109. Shibutani and Kwan, p. 5.Google Scholar
110. Ibid., pp. 199, 208–10, 220. See also Robert F. Hill and Howard F. Stein, “Ethnic Stratification and Social Unrest in Contemporary Eastern Europe and America,” Nationalities Papers, I, No. 1 (1972) pp. 15, 23.Google Scholar
111. On dissident organizations, see Gurr, pp. 296–300, 304, 305, 356, 357.Google Scholar
112. On the role of such symbols, see ibid., p. 208; Shibutani and Kwan, p. 80; Deutsch, p. 178.Google Scholar
113. Deutsch, p. 99.Google Scholar
114. Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 42, 51, 572–74.Google Scholar
115. Hroch, p. 129, found that this was true of seven other nations. See also Deutsch, p. 154; Shibutani and Kwan, p. 524; Gellner, p. 167.Google Scholar
116. Shibutani and Kwan, pp. 209, 332.Google Scholar
117. Deutsch, p. 146.Google Scholar
118. Edward Shils, “The Intellectuals in the Political Development of the New States,” in Kautsky, pp. 207–10.Google Scholar
119. Ibid., pp. 221–23.Google Scholar
120. Kevin B. Nowlan, “Problems of Organization and Social Questions in the Irish National Movement,” in Schieder, p. 62; Mirjana Gross, “Einfluss der sozialen Struktur auf den Charakter der National-bewegugng in den kroatischen Ländern im 19. Jahrhundert,” ibid., p. 73.Google Scholar
122. Black, pp. 71-5. See also Kautsky, p. 24.Google Scholar
123. Kautsky, pp. 39, 53, 54.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by