12. SJEZD ČESKÝCH HISTORIKŮ / 12TH CONGRESS OF CZECH HISTORIANS

SOUBIGOU Alain
T. G. Masaryk a čeští historici:
dějiny jednoho nedorozumění ve veřejném prostoru … S. 7
(Masaryk and Czech historians: history of a misunderstanding
in public space)
(Masaryk et les historiens tcheques: histoire d'un malentendu dans l'espace public)

Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk had a long contact with foreign and home historians. From heuristic point of view, he discussed Buckle’s theory of positivist history. He tried to follow his steps but he was not so methodic as the English self-taught historian. Masaryk adored František Palacký, historian and the father of the nation. Palacký was an academic writer who worked in archives and libraries, in this perspective, he was methodic. But he wrote (elegantly) in romantic style. The point for Masaryk was to intervene in public space. For him, more than for Palacký, history has to enlight present time. Palacký had to convince colleagues, Masaryk wanted to convince other citizens.
The first Masaryk’s public battle was about authenticity of two manuscripts from Zelená Hora and Dvůr Králové. With a team around positivist historian Jaroslav Goll, Masaryk dissassembled the nationalist myth around these forged manuscripts. The struggle was so violent that Masaryk almost lost his place at Prague University and thought to an academic carrier in USA. Alongside political struggles, Masaryk wrote books about Czech question, about Jan Hus, about Karel Havlíček Borovský, which testified his durable interest for history, in spite of political, teleogical, religious interpretations. Lot of historians then stood away from Masaryk before WW1. After WW1, Masaryk was elected president of new built Republic of Czechoslovakia. He wrote two books on bolshevism and about the WW1 seen as the victory of democracy on authoritarianism of four fallen empires. Very interesting books, written with the help of professional historians, but not really books of history. The book which he dicted to his talented friend writer Karel Čapek, Talks with Masaryk, is very useful and was and is still a best-seller, but it is just the history of a (rich) personality.
Two Czech historians crossed Masaryk’s life between WW. First was great historian Josef Pekař who was next to Masaryk before WW1. But Pekař was Catholic and regretted the fate of Bohemian nobility in the Republic. He met Masaryk just once in 1933. Masaryk paid tribute to the great historian when he died at the beginning of 1937. The second historian was Kamil Krofta who worked in Vatican archive, was close to Catholic interests but served as diplomat of Czechoslovak Republic and became the last minister of Foreign Affairs after Edvard Beneš and before tragedy of Munich. Resistant against nazis, he suffered of repression and died in 1945. The paths of both historians were opposite: Pekař was close to Masaryk and went away; Krofta was far and came to Masaryk’s ideals. Above all, misunderstanding weighed on ties between Masaryk and historians. These wanted to defend scientific positions in historic discurse. Masaryk wanted to defend political, teleogical, religious positions in his books about history.
Keywords: Henry Buckle – positivist history – František Palacký – manuscripts of Zelená Hora and Dvůr Králové – Josef Pekař – Kamil Krofta

Masaryk et les historiens tchèques:
histoire d’un malentendu dans l’espace public
Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk a eu un long contact avec les historiens internationaux et tcheques. D’un point de vue heuristique, il discuta la théorie positiviste de l’histoire de l’historien anglais autodidacte Henry Buckle. Masaryk adorait l’historien et pere de la nation František Palacký. Celui-ci était un historien méthodique, qui travaillait dans les archives et dans les bibliotheques. De ce point de vue, il était méthodique. Mais il écrivait (avec élégance) dans un style romantique. Le souci de Masaryk était d’intervenir dans l’espace public. Pour lui, davantage que pour Palacký, l’histoire devait éclairer les enjeux du présent. Palacký s’assignait comme tâche de convaincre ses collegues; Masaryk voulait convaincre ses concitoyens.
La premiere querelle publique de Masaryk dans le domaine de l’histoire éclata autour de l’authenticité des manuscrits de Zelená Hora et de Dvůr Králové. Avec une équipe d’historiens positivistes autour de Jaroslav Goll, il démonta le mythe nationaliste construit sur la base de ces faux manuscrits. Le combat fut si violent que Masaryk perdit presque sa place a l’université de Prague et songea a entreprendre une carriere académique aux Etats-Unis, le pays de sa femme ou il était populaire. En marge de combats politiques, Masaryk rédigea trois livres d’histoire avant la Premiere Guerre mondiale, sur la Question tcheque, sur Jan Hus et sur Karel Havlíček Borovský, ce qui témoignait de son intéret durable pour l’histoire, en dépit d’interprétations politiques, téléologiques et religieuses. Beaucoup d’historiens s’éloignerent alors de lui avant la Premiere Guerre mondiale. Apres la Premiere Guerre mondiale, Masaryk fut élu président de la nouvelle République tchécoslovaque. Il écrivit deux livres sur le bolchevisme et sur la Guerre mondiale, interprétée comme la victoire de la démocratie sur l’autoritarisme des quatre empires vaincus. Ce sont des livres fort intéressants, écrits avec l’aide d’historiens professionnels. Mais on peut difficilement les tenir pour des livres d’histoire. Le livre qu’il dicta a son talentueux ami l’écrivain Karel Čapek, Les entretiens avec Masaryk, est tres utile, fut et est toujours un best-seller, mais il n’est que l’histoire d’une (riche) personnalité.
Deux historiens ont croisé la vie de Masaryk entre les deux guerres. Le premier fut le grand historien Josef Pekař, qui était un proche de Masaryk avant la Premiere Guerre mondiale. Mais Pekař était catholique et il regrettait le sort de la noblesse de Boheme sous la République. Il ne rencontra Masaryk qu’une seule fois en 1933. Masaryk lui rendit hommage a sa mort au début de l’année 1937. Le second historien fut Kamil Krofta, qui travailla dans les archives du Vatican, fut proche des intérets catholiques et servit néanmoins dans la diplomatie de la République tchécoslovaque et devint le dernier ministre des Affaires étrangeres sous Edvard Beneš avant la tragédie de Munich. Résistant anti-nazi, il souffrit de la répression et mourut en 1945. Les trajectoires des deux historiens furent opposées. Pekař fut proche de Masaryk et s’en éloigna; Krofta était loin de Masaryk et finit par défendre les idéaux de Masaryk, il le paya de sa vie. Par dessus tout, un malentendu pesait sur les relations entre Masaryk et les historiens tcheques. Ceux-ci voulaient défendre des positions scientifiques dans le discours historique. Masaryk, lui, voulait défendre des positions politiques, téléologiques, religieuses dans ses livres sur l’histoire.
Mots-clés: Henry Buckle – histoire posivitiste – František Palacký – manuscrits de Zelená Hora et Dvůr Králové – Josef Pekař – Kamil Krofta

STUDIE / STUDIES

PEŠEK Jiří
Humanitní vědy a vzdělanci v 19. a 20. století … S. 17
(The Humanities and Intellectuals in the 19th and 20th centuries)

The paper monitors the transformations of the position of the humanities and scholars in the 19th and 20th centuries. It shows the more or less unexpected acquisition of influence and power in society by a group of educated people in the service of the state or country. They were legitimized by their competence in the humanities – especially those linked to the ancient cultural heritage and secured by university certificates. The prestige capital of this professional group or perhaps even social class was great. They stood out for the 19th century, a time when only a small part of the population possessed full active literacy, the ability to formulate and communicate the problems of society and the time. Already at the beginning of the 20th century, their influence in society began to weaken, two world wars and the modernization and technology of the second half of the century significantly reduced their social role. However, the critical competence of historians and other humanities scholars is socially indispensable even today.
Keywords: Humanities intelligentsia – 19th and 20th centuries – power position of the sciences – prestige capital – emancipation of the technical fields – the social role of historiography

RESUMÉ

The paper monitors the transformations of the position of the humanities and scholars in the 19th and 20th centuries. After the destruction and exhaustion of Europe by the Napoleonic wars, states or countries had to take over the role of organisers and financial guarantors of schooling and education. The Humboldt reforms significantly strengthened the role of the humanities intelligentsia firmly connected to the state. They were legitimized by their competence in the humanities – especially those linked to the ancient cultural heritage and secured by university certificates. The prestige capital of this professional group or perhaps even social class was great. Its members, including secondary school teachers, excelled in the 19th century, when only a small part of the population possessed full active literacy, the ability to formulate and communicate the problems of society and the time. This opened the door for them to politics, but also to important economic positions.
However, already at the beginning of the 20th century, their influence in society began to weaken. The consequences of two world wars, changes in communication modes in mass society and especially its modernization and technology in the second half of the century then significantly reduced the social role, and thus the prestige and influence of humanities experts. However, current events, especially discussions related to Russian aggression in Ukraine and its ideological preparation, show that the critical competence of historians and other humanities scholars is socially indispensable even today.

PÁNEK Jaroslav
Česká a obecná tematika na světových kongresech historiků (1990–2022) … S. 33
(Czech and general topics at world congresses of historians /1990–2022/)

The article provides an analysis of the international congresses of historical sciences held between 1990 and 2022 in terms of the definition of major themes, specialized themes, round tables, joint sessions and evening sessions. It traces the development with regard to the changes in the geopolitical situation, the preferences of the organizing country, development of methodology in the field, and the differences between the countries of Euro-American civilization on the one hand and the countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America on the other. It raises the question of the possibilities of smaller and medium-sized European countries in applying themselves as organizers of the international congress of historical sciences; in this context, it compares Poland, Norway and the Czech Republic. The author evaluates the organisation of a congress of this type as both an opportunity and a great test for historiographies that are breaking free from the grip of a narrower national framework and are striving for inclusion in the coordinates of world historiography.
Keywords: Historiography – Historians – International Congresses of Historical Sciences – Poland – Norway – Czech Republic

RESUMÉ

The International Congresses of Historical Sciences, which have been held since 1898, reflect the geopolitical situation of the times in which they are held, despite all the efforts of historians to be apolitical. The 1990 Madrid Congress was the last of those prepared during the bipolar system; it therefore still reflected the division of issues between West and East. Subsequent congresses – Montreal 1995, Oslo 2000, Sydney 2005, Amsterdam 2010 and Jinan 2015 – were held at a time of relative peace in the world; the choice of topics and their distribution among states were liberal in their main features and reflected the strength of individual states and their historiographies. The most recent congress so far, in Poznań, which had to be postponed due to the pandemic from 2020 to 2021 and then 2022, was already taking place at the time of the Russian aggression against Ukraine. Although the choice of topics came from the “pre-war era”, the great conflict in Eastern Europe was clearly reflected in its course.
Since 1995, the major themes have formed the guiding and most prestigious part of the congress proceedings. Several conclusions emerge from their analysis: 1) the major themes are not a space for the exclusive treatment of the historical issues of one continent, macroregion or even one state; the only exception, however, confirming the rule, is China, which pushed the “Empire of the Centre” into the programme of “its” congress in Jinan; 2) the major themes are of such a general character that historians from all continents can comment on them in their papers; 3) in parallel, there are both classical, but permanently topical themes (empires, states, nations, wars, peace, revolutions) and new, previously completely overlooked or marginalised themes (gender, identities, eco-history, historical anthropo-zoology); 4) some congresses also include major methodological themes (global history, historical time, the politicisation of history, the digital turn).
However, the general – intercontinental – framework of the major themes does not mean that ethnically or territorially defined approaches do not apply. On the contrary, a significant number of speakers draw on their knowledge of the situation of their own country or the wider macro-region and present their findings as a basis for comparative discussion. This is especially true of historiographies that are smaller in scope and in which the emphasis is particularly on national history, while general issues are pursued with less intensity than in historiographies developing in large, mainly Western, countries. There has been a gradual decline in the number of historians dealing with themes from their own national history, and a growing number, particularly in Europe, North America and Australia, who deal with other macro-regions or broader comparative issues. Historians from outside the Euro-American territory, especially from Asia, Africa, and Latin America, are almost exclusively pushing forward with topics from their own country‘s history in the major themes category. In contrast, the pressure for a broader – transnational – territorial scope in the Euro-American space has intensified considerably. However, this thesis applies mainly to „classic“ themes, while the development is not so clear-cut in the case studies of the newly explored themes; such studies still largely force a grounding in the themes of „own“ countries even among Western historians.
However, the programme of each congress is filled with dozens of other sessions of a smaller format, which can sometimes provoke lively discussion and can be more innovative than discussing – to some extent summarizing – major topics. These sessions are accessible to a much larger number of states or National Committees of Historians in terms of active participation. In the period 1995–2022, a total of 129 specialized themes, 133 round tables, 36 joint sessions and 7 evening sessions were registered. In assessing the activity of the various countries that have held congresses in recent decades, parameters such as the size of the country and the size of the historical community, the geopolitical integration of the country before and after 1989/1990, the existence of a national historiography (published primarily in a language other than the congress languages), and the position of this historiography in the world context must be taken into account.
Norway and Poland are partially comparable to the Czech Republic, which has been increasing its activity in organising congress panels, especially since 2005. These countries have organised – each for the second time – congresses in Oslo (2000) and Poznań (2022). It was at these congresses that the stark contrast in country representation and in the treatment of major themes became apparent, most strikingly in the comparison between China in 2015 and Poland in 2022. In Jinan, there was a strong preference for the host state (major theme) and big states, whereas in Poznań, small and medium-sized states gained considerable opportunities. The Polish National Committee of Historians promoted the Central European theme in a global context as one of the central themes of the Congress, in cooperation with the Czech and Hungarian Committees of Historians; the result was one of the three major themes (Towards a Balanced Historical Knowledge: State and Nation in a Comparative Perspective – Paradigms of Investigation, Narratives, Explications). Polish historiography demonstrated its ability to contribute by organising panels, presenting papers and formulating its own conception of the issues discussed on about half of the congress topics. It clearly demonstrated that the venue of the congress is of crucial importance in the design of its programme and in the availability of major themes for historians from countries with different influence in power politics and international historiography.
In Poznań (2022), Czech historiography presented its ability to prepare and co-organise a major theme on Central European and global issues. In smaller formats – already in the wake of the congresses in Sydney (2005), Amsterdam (2010) and Jinan (2015) – Czech historians have been able to propose, promote and manage themes that are in line with the current developments in the world and correspond to the current tendencies of Western historiography. These have successively included political culture, trade and civilization, the Reformation as a model of revolutions and crises, forced population transfers and extermination, the position of national minorities in war conflicts and diplomatic negotiations, and, most recently, the social significance of entrepreneurship, women in global migration, and family memory and its transmission. It is no longer an attempt to present a particular phenomenon or personality of Czech history to an international audience, as was the case until 1990, but a formulation of general issues into which Czech or Central European themes can be integrated. Czech historiography has come to terms with the Western concept of historical congresses. It does not present its isolated national story, but themes that are generally human, or at least common within Euro-American civilisation, into which national and territorial specificities are necessarily reflected in the concrete treatment.

VOREL Petr
Jak se hodnotí kvalita historikovy vědecké práce
(Evaluace výsledků české historické vědy podle Metodiky17+ za léta 2016–2020) … S. 49
(How to evaluate the quality of a historian’s scientific work /Evaluation of the results of Czech historical science according to Methodology 17+ for 2016–2020/)

The study deals with the genesis of evaluation processes of the results of science and research in history in the Czech Republic. It summarises the fundamental problems related to the relationship between the evaluation of the results of basic and applied research and the funding of individual workplaces. The attention is focused on the current state of the art, i.e., the progress and results of evaluation according to Methodology 17+ for the past five-year period (2016–2020), defines the main weaknesses of this systém and explains why bibliometric tools are unusable for history (and other humanities) in practice and why they are not considered at all in the national assessment of science and research in these fields. It introduces discussion topics related to the currently ongoing adjustment of the entire evaluation system so that it takes more into account the discipline specifics of individual scientific areas.
Keywords: History – evaluation of science and research – 2016-2020 – evaluation systems – Czech Republic

RESUMÉ

This study builds on from the author’s previous text published in 2018. In it, the author provided an analysis of the evaluation of science and research in history within the framework of the previous evaluation model called Metodika13+, applied in the Czech Republic to evaluate the results of science and research from 2013 to 2015. The author served as the president of the evaluation expert panel both in the case of the previous system and in the framework of the newly introduced so-called Methodology 17+, according to which the results for a five-year period (2016–2020) were assessed.
Based on the publicly available documentation and his own experience, the author reconstructs the general context in which the transition from the earlier methodology to the newer one took place, with a deliberate disruption of continuity. The earlier evaluation was based on an annually updated point system, which was directly linked to the funding of science and research in the Framework of the redistribution of institutional funds. The aim of the new evaluation was to create a five-year module evaluation cycle starting in 2017, the result of which would be the qualitative scaling of individual research organisations, which would serve individual providers as a tool for the subsequent redistribution of the state aid for the long-term conceptual development of the research organisation. On a national scale, the evaluation took place in two modules, focusing on the quality of selected results (M1) and the productivity of the research (M2). The evaluation of the other three areas was provided by specific providers: social relevance (M3), viability (M4), and strategy and concept (M5).
In this system, history was assessed (history and archaeology jointly) as a component of the scientific area, “Humanities”. However, in the course of fiveyear period, this evaluation took place only in the category of the quality of selected results. The current bibliometric tools that were chosen for the evaluation of overal research productivity (providing data from the Web of Science and SCOPUS databases) are not a suitable tool for the humanities, which has been proved repeatedly in the Czech Republic as well.

HLAVAČKA Milan
Etika historické práce v éře společenské proměny … S. 77
(The ethics of historical work in the era of social transformation)

With the assistance of the theory of comparative ethics, which claims that morality cannot be justified in a traditionalist way in today’s society using so-called higher truth, the author has no choice but to take into account some other substitute for morality in assessing the behaviour of historians in the public space. For the author, such a substitute is contractualism, which claims that the institution of ethics and even morality has never known narrowly defined boundaries and therefore that it has never existed in cultural isolation. The theory of contractualism then justifies why it is reasonable to submit to a certain system of reciprocal norms on the assumption that others will likewise submit to them. This also results in the consequence that there is no threat of sanctions for violating the unwritten rules of ethics, but only the relativization of these standards. In this philosophicalmethodological context, an attempt is made to characterise the social-creative milieu of the Czech historical community over the last thirty years.
Keywords: comparative ethics – contractualism – Czech historical community

RESUMÉ

In an essay form, the text deals with the contractualist behaviour of Czech historians in recent decades and focuses primarily on the character of the transformation of the social milieu and general trends of historiographical operation, including coming to terms with the past, introducing evaluation processes, obtaining funds for research in the humanities, educating historians in the digital age and increasing their media literacy. Its outcome ends with the thesis that a free-thinking society does not seem to provide a moral horizon around which a closed community could be built, and that “weak contractualism” still provides, according to ethics theorist Ernst Tugenthat, a good and plausible support for ethics and morality in today’s complex social milieu even for historians, most of whom do high-quality professional work.

MATERIÁLY / MATERIALS

STARÝ Marek
Deskové právo českých měst a „inkolátní“ privilegia z doby Rudolfa II. … S. 93
(Land tables right of Bohemian towns and “inkolat” privileges
from the time of Rudolf II)

The study deals with the issue of the legal capacity of towns and their burghers to acquire tables estates in the Bohemian kingdom in the Middle Ages and the early modern period. This legal capacity was, in principle, tied to royal permission on a case-by-case basis. Already in the Middle Ages, however, some towns received a privilege that exempted them from the obligation to apply for royal approval across the board. The main focus of the study is on the period of the 16th century, when the towns of Prague were temporarily deprived of this privilege, but on the contrary, they received the same right during the reign of Rudolf II as well as two other cities – Pilsen and Žatec. The aim is not only to interpret the content of the mentioned privileges, but also to place them in a wider legal framework and, last but not least, to warn about the unsuccessful initiative of Lesser Town to obtain the same privilege from the monarch.
Keywords: inkolat – cities – burghers – early modern period – Rudolf II – land tables

RESUMÉ

Manors and estates registered in land tables could generally be owned mainly by nobles. As far as the towns and their individual inhabitants are concerned, land law also allowed their possession, but its creation was fundamentally tied to the sovereign’s permission. Already in the Middle Ages, however, the Old Town and later the New Town of Prague, as well as Kutná Hora, received special privileges, on the basis of which they could purchase and otherwise acquire tableted estates without having to apply for such a permit in each individual case, which also applied to their burghers. At first glance, it may be surprising that the land constitutions of the 16th century did not reflect this fact. This is because the Old and New Towns of Prague were deprived of this privilege in connection with the Estates’ Rebellion in 1547. Later, however, they were returned. Alongside these, letters of majesty granting this “land tables legal capacity” (“Landtaffelfähigkeit”) were also issued for Pilsen (1580) and Žatec (1583) under the reign of Rudolf II. Apparently, however, it was a privilege that was primarily intended to give the affected towns prestige within the framework of the estate of the towns, without its practical usability being worth talking about. In the case of Pilsen, the city council even received explicit criticism a few years later and was told that the considerable sum spent on obtaining this privilege had unnecessarily burdened the city budget. The fact that such a privilege was of considerable value in the view of the time is nevertheless evidenced by the efforts of the Lesser Town of Prague, which at the beginning of the 17th century applied to the emperor for it to be granted one as well. However, the submitted application rather inappropriately emphasized that the mentioned right should be enjoyed by both native burghers and immigrants from anywhere, which ran into a parliamentary resolution of 1575, because according to it the Bohemian right of residence (inkolat), which included the legal capability to use the land tables, should not have arisen by being accepted as a burgher, but should always be tied to the grant by the Land Diet. This contradiction was also pointed out by the extant opinion of the royal prosecutor Florián Daniel Mejstřický from the Vatican, which is made available in the appendix. It was probably mainly on his basis that the request was rejected and the Malá Strana (Lesser Town) did not receive the coveted privilege until 1629, when granting the right of residence was no longer a matter for the Land Diet, but for the monarch. Although the examined cases are marginal, they are undoubtedly an interesting chapter in the history of residential law, as well as in a wider context the intermingling of aristocratic and burgher society, or land and town law. In other words, topics that have not yet been exhaustively treated in Czech historiography.

SLAVÍČEK Jan
Družstevnictví v českých zemích do první světové války … S. 119
(Cooperative Movement in the Bohemian Lands until the First World War)

The study analyzes selected aspects of cooperative development in Bohemian lands between the 1850s and World War One. Based on methods of modern economic and social history, the paper focuses on four important topics: 1. It deals with the four key laws that regulated the cooperatives and concludes that they created a solid basis for cooperative development. 2. It analyzes the development of cooperatives between the late 1840s and late 1880s, pointing out the different development of credit and consumer cooperatives during this period which was primarily caused by very different social groups being members of these two types of cooperatives. 3. It analyses the rapid growth of cooperatives since the 1890s, during which thousands of cooperatives and dozens of new cooperative types emerged. The study proves that the most important reason for such explosive growth was the general modernization as a part of the industrial revolution. 4. It compares the statistics of the 1890s and 1910 and demonstrates that cooperatives became a respected and strong part of the society and economy.
Keywords: Bohemian lands – Cooperatives – Cooperative laws – Economic nationalism – Industrial revolution – Modernization – 1850s–1910s

The study analyzes selected aspects of cooperative development in Bohemian lands between the 1850s and World War One. It focuses on four important topics:
1. It deals with the four key laws that regulated cooperatives. They reflect the changing understanding of cooperatives by the state. Initially, cooperatives were seen only as a little different form of association. Later, the state found out that cooperatives can make the living of the lower social classes better. Therefore, it made the basic regulation for creating and running cooperatives and gave them significant tax concessions.
2. The study analyzes the first few decades of cooperative development in Bohemian lands (the late 1840s – late 1880s). During that period, only two major cooperative types developed: The savings banks (towns-based credit cooperatives) and consumer cooperatives (associations). However, their development was very different – while the savings banks flourished, the consumer cooperatives experienced rapid growth in the early 1870s, followed by the crisis and the wave of bankruptcies and the de facto disappearing until the 1890s. The reasons for this contradictory development were primarily the different membership and, as a result, different managerial skills of cooperatives managers: the members of savings banks were typically middle-class traders, artisans, etc., while in the case of consumer cooperatives, they were usually (non-expert) workers. Secondly, the savings banks were much more connected to the Czech national movement than the consumer cooperatives. Finally, they were also much financially stronger.
3. The explosive growth of cooperatives since the 1890s is dealt with. Not only were hundreds of new cooperatives founded but – more importantly – in about 15 years, the modern structure of cooperatives was created. The new, small and rural credit cooperatives (of the Raiffeisen type) appeared and developer quickly. The non-credit cooperatives consisted of dozens of new types. The broad range of agricultural and artisans/traders’ cooperatives (esp. warehouse, wholesale and purchasing; machinery; electrification and powerplant; processing and other cooperatives) was complemented by hundreds of modern consumer and housing cooperatives, etc. There were several reasons for such rapid growth which were interconnected and created a synergy effect. The most important was the general modernization of the economy and society during the late First and early Second industrial revolutions, the incorporation of broad strata of society (esp. Workers and peasants) into market-oriented production, the need for cheap and accessible credit (esp. in rural areas) and the growth of the expertise of the cooperative leaders.
4. The study analyzes the major statistical parameters of cooperatives regarding their different types and official languages (i.e., compares the Czech and German cooperatives). Based on the comparison of 1890s and 1910 data, the study concludes that A. the Czech cooperatives were stronger (because of the bigger numbers of Czech population in the Bohemian lands). On the other hand, a typical German cooperative was bigger (both in membership and financial aspects) than its Czech counterpart, B. The credit cooperatives were much stronger than the non-credit ones, C. The cooperatives were an important and respected part of the market in 1910: It can be assumed that some 28 % of the whole population used the services of the cooperatives and the deposits of the population in the cooperatives reached about 20 % of the estimated GDP of the Bohemian lands.
In short conclusion: Cooperatives in the Bohemian lands were a strong and ubiquitous part of the economy and society before WWI. And still, the best was to come for them.

PŘEHLED BÁDÁNÍ / RESEARCH OVERVIEW

DVOŘÁČKOVÁ-MALÁ Dana
Středověká domácnost. Cesty výzkumu … S. 169
(Medieval Household and Research Directions)

The text deals with the presentation of current research on the topic of the household in the Middle Ages from the point of view of archaeology and history, it analyses individual methodological and source options with the aim of appealing to a deepening of interdisciplinary research. Part of the research overview is the definition of a methodology for a new concept of research on the topic of the household in the Middle Ages.
Keywords: Household – Middle Ages – Methodology – Archaeology – Interdisciplinarity

RESUMÉ

Research on the household in the Middle Ages was presented based on previous studies, especially from the perspective of archaeology and history. However, it turned out that there is a lack of a unified concept for the joint research of this topic, which forms a key area of the history of everyday life. In the overview, the different research approaches of both scientific areas, which are based on different groups of sources, were monitored and introduced. In the context of the research of households, or households of sub-classes, it has been shown, thanks to the given overview, to be essential for the further direction of the research that interdisciplinarity is much more applied within its own fields, where it is used, for example, to identify the find situation, or, for example, to translate and excerpt written sources for the purpose of simply illustrating family ties, patriarchal arrangements, or emotions. However, those different groups of sources remain the so-called two sides of the same coin. Archaeology shows tangible connections in a historical context in the same way that written sources show the meaning of their use, or approximate the ideal, contemporary models and opinions about the functioning or operation of the monitored space – here, households. At the same time, it was pointed out that from the point of view of written sources, it is always necessary to perceive naturally also the context of their creation, because it primarily reflected the habits of its social class. The theme of the household therefore offers the possibility of a partial discussion of households according to a defined research group. For instance, by looking at the functioning in the court milieu of nobles or monarchs, the household was evaluated as a subsystem of the court. The aforementioned R. van Dülmen expressed his views on the community of the house within the towns and villages of the early modern period. Among other things, one of the recent studies on the research of town houses in Chrudim was pointed out from the large amount of archaeological research. However, this overview, although it pointed to different approaches, evaluations, and sources, brought the realization that the centre of interest is always the household space, regardless of the type of dwelling/social class. A person stood in this space, followed by a family/relatives, and this household covered their basic needs. Based on this, a new methodological approach within household research was defined in the given research review, which consists of defining the basic needs of a person and which each (even socially different) household covered, even though we have a different amount of source material on each of them and knowledge of the context of its creation. Three categories were defined as basic human needs for the research of the household in the Middle Ages: safety, food and clothing, because it was the construction, acquisition and sustainability of these commodities that remained the link for the topic of the household, which ultimately neither begins nor ends with the epoch of the Middle Ages.

OBZORY LITERATURY / REVIEW ARTICLES AND REVIEWS

Recenze

Michal DRAGOUN
Středověká knihovna Starého Města pražského … S. 197
(František Šmahel)

Lucie DOLEŽALOVÁ – Magda KRÁLOVÁ (edd.)
Opuscula. Neznámá dílka z rukopisů Kříže z Telče … S. 200
(František Šmahel)

Matthias KLUGE
Verschuldete Konige. Geld, Politik und die Kammer des Reiches
im 15. Jahrhundert … S. 204
(Martin Nodl)

Miriam HLAVAČKOVÁ
Pútnik. Sonda do života stredovekých pútnikov. Kráľ Mikuláš Ujlaki a jeho cesta do Ríma … S. 207
(Peter Bučko)

Gerd SCHWERHOFF
Verfluchte Gotter. Die Geschichte der Blasphemie … S. 212
(Petr Kreuz)

Petr VOREL
Šmalkaldská válka v evropských dějinách 1546–1547 … S. 217
(Michaela Hrubá)

Hana JORDÁNKOVÁ – Ludmila SULITKOVÁ
Předbělohorské Brno. Hospodářský potenciál města a sociální situace jeho obyvatel … S. 221
(Jan Lhoták)

Eva DRAŠAROVÁ – Martin KLEČACKÝ – Martin KLEMENT – Luboš VELEK
Nedostatek odvahy ke smíru. Edice dokumentů k pokusům o česko-německé vyrovnaní: 1912–1915 … S. 227
(Pavel Cibulka)

Kristýna KAUCKÁ
„Taková tlačenice na jednom dvorečku!“, aneb, První pozemková reforma na velkostatcích Křivoklát, Plasy a Radnice (1918–1938) … S. 231
(Pavel Dufek)

David MAJTENYI – Jiří RAJLICH
Říkali jim španěláci … S. 236
(Tomáš Baletka)

Ludwig von MISES
Socialismus: ekonomická a sociologická analýza 239
(Marek Skála)

Zprávy o literatuře … S. 247

Z VĚDECKÉHO ŽIVOTA / CHRONICLE

The 23rd International Conference on the History of Concepts.
Global Modernity: Emotions, Temporalities and Concepts … S. 265
(Tomáš W. Pavlíček)

XVI. mezinárodni konference editorů diplomatických dokumentů
ve Varšavě … S. 269
(Jindřich Dejmek)

Nekrology

Eva Melmuková-Šašecí (25. února 1932 – 5. listopadu 2022)
(Ondřej Macek - Sixtus Bolom-Kotari - ) … S. 275

Milan Hauner (4. března 1940 – 26. září 2022)
(Jan Němeček) … S. 283

Jan Wanner (21. srpna 1940 – 14. prosince 2022)
(Jindřich Dejmek) … S. 289

Knihy a časopisy došlé redakci … S. 295
Výtahy z českých časopisů a sborníků … S. 295