The conference concerned the links between mass gymnastics and biopolitics in the modern history of East Central Europe. In particular, the event focused on Sokol (Falcon), a nationalist mass gymnastics association. The first keynote speaker, BALÁZS TRENCSÉNYI (Vienna), discussed the historiography of national movements and the processes of nationalization in East Central Europe, with an emphasis on comparative and transnational perspectives. His talk is available on the CEFRES Prague YouTube site1. The second keynote speaker, PETR ROUBAL (Prague) examined continuities and conflicts in post-Second World War mass gymnastics,2 focusing particularly on the relationship between the Czechoslovak Communist Party and Sokol. Prior to the First World War, Sokol gatherings, or slety, were intended to forge an image of perfect national community; in the interwar period, they came to embody the idea of Czechoslovakia. Sokol members were aware that the communists, upon taking over, wanted to convene a successful slet in order to demonstrate that the political situation was stable. Sokol tried to exploit the situation to maintain its autonomy as far as possible.

The main foci of the first two panels were connected to biopolitics, nationalism, and supranationalism. Writing on the Yugoslav writer, journalist, and activist Zofka Kveder, ISIDORA GRUBAČKI (Budapest / Ljubljana) investigated the relationship between Yugoslavism and feminism and argued that the origins of the Yugoslavist orientation of the interwar feminist movement were closely linked to Kveder and her journal Jugoslavenska žena (Yugoslav Woman). Kveder, who was born in Ljubljana in 1878, studied and worked in Trieste, Bern, Munich, Prague, and Zagreb. In 1917, she started publishing the journal Ženski svijet (Women’s World), which was renamed Jugoslavenska žena in 1918 and discontinued in 1920. The journal circulated ideas among Yugoslav-oriented intellectuals and activists from across the Yugoslav territory who were advocating for women’s political rights and women’s participation in politics. It was not connected to one party or to one circle but to women who had two common goals, namely the unification of Yugoslavia and equality between women and men.

MIKLÓS TÖMÖRY (Budapest) showed how the foundation of the Serbian Sokol association in Novi Sad in 1872 was linked to the ethnic division of local civil society and to urban military culture. The military presence in Petrovaradin affected everyday life in nearby Novi Sad (e.g. through the German-dominated Schützenverein, a shooting association, and army involvement in festivities and parades). Following the repression of Serbian liberals and the circumscription of municipal autonomy in the late 1860s, the United Serbian Youth, or Omladina, was dissolved. The Omladina was established in 1866 as a cultural-social movement and an umbrella association for Serbian youth organizations in the Hungarian Kingdom, Serbia, and the diaspora. It represented an incubator of Serbian political thought, marking the beginning of Serbian liberalism, as well as promoting mass gimnastics as a healty lifestyle choice, in its purusit of national rejuvenation. In 1872, a year after the dissolution of the Omladina, the First Gymnastic, Rowing and Firefighters’ Association (Falcon) was established in Novi Sad with the approval of the Pest authorities.

DUŠAN J. LJUBOJA (Budapest) presented the evolution of the Pan-Slavic idea in the 19th and the 20th century and pointed to three main stages, namely Russian Pan-Slavism, Polish messianism, and the Austro-Slavism that proliferated among the Czech after the events of 1848–1849. According to Ljuboja, Pan-Slavism never drove political change. It nevertheless enjoyed a relatively high degree of cultural success. For example, numerous Pan-Slavic congresses were held. The first such congress took place in Prague in 1848 and the most recent one was convened in 2010 in Kiev. Special attention was paid also to the Neo-Slavic movement, in which Sokol played a major role: the Federation of Slavic Sokols was established in 1908. By 1910, the Czech, Slovene, Croatian, and Galician Polish Sokol movements had also formed, and it was argued that the Serbian and the Russian Sokol should have participated as well. Pan-Slavism generated paradoxes in its interaction with other ideas, such as Austro-Slavism, Russian imperialism, the Polish and the South Slavic questions, and Westernization.

By the end of the 19th century, another gymnastic youth organization, Orel (Eagle) emerged in Moravia as a rival to Sokol. FABIO GIOMI (Paris) showed how this Catholic Church-supported organization operated in the Yugoslav space, especially in Croatia. In Slovenia, Orel was established before the First World War and was closely connected to the Slovene People’s Party. In Croatia, Orel was a postwar phenomenon. The Hrvatski Orlovski Savez (Croatian Eagle Union) and its women’s counterpart, the Savez Hrvatskih Orlica, were established in the early 1920s. By the end of the decade, there were 292 Orel branches in Croatia, with 14.000 members. A decade later, in 1939, membership had increased to 43.100. By investigating press sources, memoirs, and the Vatican archives (the association had no central archive), Giomi links research on associational culture with religious revivalism.

The presentation of PAUL BATCABE-LACOSTE (Paris) was the only one that concerned the post-Second World War period. It examined the Peace Race, a two-week cycling event that was held in May in the period after 1948. Initially, the route ran between Prague and Warsaw; after 1952, Berlin was also included. Comparing the event with the Tour de France, which, according to Batcabe-Lacoste, played an important role in the construction of national space in France, the presentation inquired into the extent to which the Peace Race contributed to the forging of an original definition of the Eastern Bloc. Furthermore, it sought to determine the degree to which the Peace Race succeeded in becoming a global event and a representation of a new internationalist society. It was pointed out that the links between the Peace Race and the Sokol movement are not immediately obvious. There is a tension between the German-Czech model of physical culture and the British one, which is based on competition. However, the participation of the population in the preparations for the race, resembled classic mass-event organization, that is, modalities of mobilization that were inherited from the Sokol movement.

The final three panels of the conference were dedicated to contributions that are planned to be submitted to a Special Issue of the East Central Europe Journal, which is expected to be published in the Fall 2023. Focusing on interwar Yugoslavia, JOVANA PAPOVIĆ (Paris) sought to show how Sokol became a hegemonic organization and an actor of liberation and unification. The main goal of Sokol was to educate the new Yugoslav citizen. It was therefore essential to win over the young, who were also courted by other organizations. One of them, as Giomi showed, was Orel. Papović concentrated mainly on the rivalries between Sokol and the Scout organization. Sokol, presenting itself as a liberal version of the Scouts, tried to win over rural youth.

Sokol was first founded in Prague and was especially strong in Bohemia. JOHN PAUL NEWMAN (Maynooth) inquired into the role of Sokol in Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia in interwar Czechoslovakia. These areas were less developed than the Czech domain, and Sokol had shallow roots—the Czechoslovak Sokol Association in Slovakia was established in 1919. Was Sokol a vehicle for state formation? Is it correct to speak about the promotion of Czechoslovakia from the centre or about the continuation of the practice of Pan-Slavic franchising, which had begun prior to 1914? Newman pointed out that in Yugoslavia, Sokol emerged out of the former Habsburg domain, not from Serbia, and that King Alexander patronized Sokol, as well as many other voluntary associations. In the discussion, questions were raised about the opposition between voluntary associations and the state, the intertwining of the private and the public, and the appropriateness of the term “civil society.”

VLADANA PUTNIK PRICA (Belgrade) showed the role of architecture in shaping Sokol visual identity in interwar Yugoslavia. In the early 1920s, the Sokol infrastructure was relatively poor. Between 250 and 280 sokolane (Sokol halls) had been built by the late 1930s. There were different views on the content of the Sokol image. However, no attempt was made to unify the infrastructure. Instead, the approach to regional differences was open. Sokol architecture in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia had three main styles. The first, historicism, entailed the addition of ancient or neoclassical columns or attempts to mimic Serbian orthodox monasteries, as was the case with the stadium for the Yugoslav slet in Ljubljana in 1922. The Sokol hall Tabor in Ljubljana was representative of national styles, both Yugoslav and regional. Resembling Czech cubism, its architecture represented Slovene identity, while the memorial stones in the building came from different parts of Yugoslavia. The role of Sokol as a generator of modernity was also reflected in the modern architectural style, as exemplified by the designs for sokolane in Zagreb, Novi Sad, and Sarajevo.

IVAYLO NANCHEV (Sofia) presented the case of the Yunak Gymnastic Society, which was established in Bulgaria at the beginning of the 20th century. It was based on the Swiss model and received assistance from Swiss gymnastic instructors. Nanchev focused on the Yunak societies in the interwar period. During that time, the organization grew rapidly. By 1936, there were 298 societies with 40,000 members, mostly from rural areas. The Yunak organization had close ties with the state, as well as being highly loyal to the church, the army, and King Boris III. Yunak members participated in the Paris Olympics in 1924. The organization also held numerous manifestations, such as the first slet in Sofia in 1924, and established connections with foreign societies. After the Balkan Wars, the Yunak received frequent visits from Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, and Russia. In 1935, the Yunak hosted an international slet with, among others, 9.000 Bulgarian gymnasts; 6.000 Yugoslav and 300 Czech Sokol members were also present.

LUCIJA BALIKIĆ (Vienna) and VOJTĔCH POJAR (Vienna) introduced the concept of plastic nationhood, whereby politics was based on an organicist concept of the nation. In this respect, Sokol was seen as an agent who shapes the national body. According to Balikić and Pojar, the concept enables the history of the Sokol to be cast in a new way, shifting the focus to social practices and the promotion of nationalist eugenics. In this way, biopolitics was brought into the debate about the role of associations in the Habsburg Empire. When the Sokol movement began in the 1860s, its most important component was aesthetics. By the turn of the century, the focus had shifted to health. Eugenics was a key expert discourse within the medicalized framework of plastic nationhood. The relevant knowledge was circulated between physicians and trainers via association periodicals, lectures, translations, and scholarly exchanges. Sokol medical journals discussed alcoholism, fatigue, and the position of women within the association. For example, Sokol eugenicists recommended cycling (good not just for the body but they claimed, also for the quality of future generations, measured Sokol members, and studied the effect of mass gymnastics on women’s bodies. These practices, which were mainly promoted by medical doctors, were challenged and questioned by their colleagues.

In Poland, unlike in other countries, Sokol is nowadays considered a conservative organization. KAMIL RUSZAŁA (Cracow) showed its development in partitioned Poland. In the Russian territory, the first branches of Sokol emerged after the 1905 revolution and became illegal and secret a year later, after the order to liquidate the organization. The first Sokol branch in the Prussian part of Poland was established in 1884 in Wroclaw. In Silesia, there were 23 Sokol associations prior to 1914. By 1920, their number had increased to 265. In Galicia, the first Sokol branch was established in 1867 in Lviv/Lwow/Lemberg. The Ukrainian response was to establish the Ukrainian Sokil. At first, Sokol was seen as a national movement. Intellectuals in Cracow, in particular, considered it to be a liberal association. However, at the turn of the century, Sokol members were also enrolled in the National Polish League. After 1918, the right-wing leadership of Sokol pursued centralization, with a new centre in Warsaw.

IRINA SIROTKINA (London) discussed the development of the Sokol organization in Russia. She started by asking whether Sokol was a civil society, a paramilitary organization, or an association that championed civil liberties. Around 1910, the Russians adopted Sokol gymnastics, replacing the German model as the official system of physical education in the army and at schools. Sokol referred to the idea of Slavic brotherhood, which would serve to consolidate the Empire as a Slavic state. In the context of Soviet Russia, exercises at manifestations resembled Sokol ones, as depicted in a 1939 short film that shows a parade of young athletes at Red Square in Moscow.3

Conference overview:

Welcoming of the participants / Opening remarks of the Director of CEFRES and the organizers

Keynote lecture 1

Balázs Trencsényi (Vienna): Transnational Histories of Nationalism in East Central Europe
Discussion

Keynote lecture 2

Petr Roubal (Prague): Can the People Betray? Continuities and Conflicts in Post-War Mass Gymnastics

Biopolitics, Nationalism, Supranationalism. Part 1 - Transnational Nationalism: Sokol and the Concepts of Slavic Commonality

Isidora Grubački (Ljubljana): The Yugoslavist Orientation of Feminism in Interwar Yugoslavia: The Case of Zofka Kveder

Miklós Tömöry (Budapest): Serbian Youth Movement, Military Culture in Novi Sad and the Beginnings of Serbian Sokol

Dušan J. Ljuboja (Budapest): Pan-Slavism as an Idea: A Brief Overview of its Main Transformations in the 19th and 20th Centuries

Biopolitics, Nationalism, Supranationalism. Part 2 - Dis/continuities Post-1945

Paul Batcabe-Lacoste (Paris): The Peace Race: A Tour de France in the Eastern Bloc (1952–1957)?

Fabio Giomi (Paris): A Radical Youth: Analyzing Catholic Associational Life in Interwar Yugoslavia through the Memoirs of Marica Stanković

East Central Europe’s Special Issue contributors’ presentations. Part 1

Jovana Papović (Paris): The Sokol and the Shaping of Yugoslav Youth

John Paul Newman (Maynooth): The Moravian Sokol in the Interwar Period

East Central Europe’s Special Issue contributors’ presentations. Part 2

Vladana Putnik Prica (Belgrade): The Role of Architecture in Shaping the Sokol Visual Identity in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia

Ivaylo Nachev (Sofa): The Yunak Societies in Interwar Bulgaria (1918–1939)

Lucija Balikić / Vojtěch Pojar (Vienna): Plastic Nationhood: Eugenic Thought and Initiatives in the post-Habsburg Sokol

East Central Europe’s Special Issue contributors’ presentations. Part 3

Kamil Ruszała (Krakow): Sokół in Partitioned Poland and Early Interwar Period

Irina Sirotkina (London): From Prague to Russia: The Sokol’s Turbulent Flight to the East

Planning for the future project and publication
Moderation: John Paul Newman

Note:
1 Balázs Trencsényi: Transnational Histories of Nationalism in East Central Europe - YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi3ILfv9mo8 (20.12.2022).2]
2 For more see his book: Petr Roubal, Spartakiads. The Politics of Physical Culture in Communist Czechoslovakia, Prague 2019.
3 History Club, Cvetuwaq ünost' 1939 / Blooming youth, YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtMSvRuSkTE (20.12.2022).