Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.4
A. Peretyatko
The 1860s were marked by aggravation of national issues in the Austrian Military Frontier and in Russian Don Host. This paper undertakes an attempt to compare the processes that took place among the Don Cossacks and Austrian Grenzers at that time. The author shows that in both cases there were three variants of identity: state (as loyal servants of their emperor), corporate (as Cossacks/Grenzers), and national (as Russians/Croats/Serbs etc.). Historically, these identities complemented each other without being juxtaposed in direct contradiction; moreover the isolation of Cossacks and Grenzers, as well as their clear association with particular territory by the middle of the nineteenth century had already brought into their corporate identity traits of another, national, identity. However, by the 1860s, the economic problems of the Military Frontier and Don Host Oblast became so acute, that the issue of the abolishment of their special militarised status was discussed. In given circumstances, the imperial governments tried to establish dialogues with the Cossacks and Grenzers, which however led to unexpected consequences and greatly destabilised the situation. In fact, subsequently both at Don and at the Military Frontier a public struggle started between the proponents of convergence of local populace with their respected nations, and the people who considered that the Cossack/Grenzer estate status had to be preserved no matter the cost. As a result, by the 1870s the corporate identity of the Cossacks and Grenzers was increasingly becoming not an addition, but an alternative to their historical national identity, which created preconditions for the emergence of new political nations, although this did not occur.
{"title":"Self-Identification of Don Cossacks and Austrian Grenzers in the Context of Government Policy of the 1860s in the Russian and Austrian Empires","authors":"A. Peretyatko","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.4","url":null,"abstract":"The 1860s were marked by aggravation of national issues in the Austrian Military Frontier and in Russian Don Host. This paper undertakes an attempt to compare the processes that took place among the Don Cossacks and Austrian Grenzers at that time. The author shows that in both cases there were three variants of identity: state (as loyal servants of their emperor), corporate (as Cossacks/Grenzers), and national (as Russians/Croats/Serbs etc.). Historically, these identities complemented each other without being juxtaposed in direct contradiction; moreover the isolation of Cossacks and Grenzers, as well as their clear association with particular territory by the middle of the nineteenth century had already brought into their corporate identity traits of another, national, identity. However, by the 1860s, the economic problems of the Military Frontier and Don Host Oblast became so acute, that the issue of the abolishment of their special militarised status was discussed. In given circumstances, the imperial governments tried to establish dialogues with the Cossacks and Grenzers, which however led to unexpected consequences and greatly destabilised the situation. In fact, subsequently both at Don and at the Military Frontier a public struggle started between the proponents of convergence of local populace with their respected nations, and the people who considered that the Cossack/Grenzer estate status had to be preserved no matter the cost. As a result, by the 1870s the corporate identity of the Cossacks and Grenzers was increasingly becoming not an addition, but an alternative to their historical national identity, which created preconditions for the emergence of new political nations, although this did not occur.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"61 14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79718820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.6
Anna Hausenblasová
In the 1930s, there were several changes in contacts between the Czechoslovak Republic and the Soviet Union. Russian emigration no longer had such a strong influence on the opinions of Czechoslovak society. On the other hand, the influence of the so-called left intelligentsia (inclined to the Soviet Union) was increasing under the growing threat of aggression from Nazi Germany. In 1935, Czechoslovakia officially recognized the existence of the Soviet Union; in terms of mutual relations, it represented a huge step. Several agreements were concluded, illegal and semi-legal contacts and connections became legal, and frequently they were further developed directly under the patronage of government representatives. The contacts between the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia were not of exclusively political character: there were intensive contacts between the two states in the cultural sphere. Several organizations helped to maintain cultural relations, some of which were founded directly with the aim of establishing and developing contacts and cultural cooperation with the USSR, while others were supported these activities indirectly; the purpose of their work was to present the cultural development of other states, including that of the USSR, to the Czechoslovak public. Many of these organizations also hosted cultural and discussion evenings exhibitions, concerts, and lectures to inform the public of news from the Soviet Union. This article presents an analysis of the activities of the Society for Economic and Cultural Relations with the USSR, the Union of Friends of the USSR, “Left Front”, “Artistic Talk”, and the Painters’ Association “Manes” in the context of the political and historical situation of the 1930s in Czechoslovakia. The development of these relations was interrupted by the Munich events and the subsequent proclamation of the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.
{"title":"Organisations which influenced the perception of Soviet culture in Czechoslovakia in the 1930s","authors":"Anna Hausenblasová","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.6","url":null,"abstract":"In the 1930s, there were several changes in contacts between the Czechoslovak Republic and the Soviet Union. Russian emigration no longer had such a strong influence on the opinions of Czechoslovak society. On the other hand, the influence of the so-called left intelligentsia (inclined to the Soviet Union) was increasing under the growing threat of aggression from Nazi Germany. In 1935, Czechoslovakia officially recognized the existence of the Soviet Union; in terms of mutual relations, it represented a huge step. Several agreements were concluded, illegal and semi-legal contacts and connections became legal, and frequently they were further developed directly under the patronage of government representatives. The contacts between the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia were not of exclusively political character: there were intensive contacts between the two states in the cultural sphere. Several organizations helped to maintain cultural relations, some of which were founded directly with the aim of establishing and developing contacts and cultural cooperation with the USSR, while others were supported these activities indirectly; the purpose of their work was to present the cultural development of other states, including that of the USSR, to the Czechoslovak public. Many of these organizations also hosted cultural and discussion evenings exhibitions, concerts, and lectures to inform the public of news from the Soviet Union. This article presents an analysis of the activities of the Society for Economic and Cultural Relations with the USSR, the Union of Friends of the USSR, “Left Front”, “Artistic Talk”, and the Painters’ Association “Manes” in the context of the political and historical situation of the 1930s in Czechoslovakia. The development of these relations was interrupted by the Munich events and the subsequent proclamation of the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84338570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.7
A. Stykalin
The historical experience of Hungarian-Romanian relations in previous eras affected the relations of the Hungarian national minority of Transylvania with the Romanian communist authorities from the 1950s to the 1980s. The concept of Romania as a unitary national state excluded the idea of Hungarian territorial autonomy even within its narrowest borders; Transylvanian Hungarians were declared an integral part of the Romanian political nation. This caused growing resistance from the consolidated Hungarian minority with a highly developed national identity and with the intelligentsia, which perceived itself as the guardian of the 1000-year-old Hungarian state and cultural traditions in Transylvania. The reaction of the Transylvanian Hungarian intelligentsia to the growing Romanian nationalist challenge changed as the Ceauşescu regime evolved, giving rise to different behavioral strategies. In the late 1960s, when Romania’s independent policy was internationally recognised the dominant attitude was to influence the situation through dialogue with the authorities. Later, from the end of the 1970s, the participation of Transylvanian Hungarians in the Romanian dissident movement intensified. The policy of the K.d.r regime concerning the Hungarians in Romania also changed depending on the state of Hungary–Romania relations.
{"title":"The Hungarian Community of Transylvania in Its Relations With the Romanian Communist Authorities From the 1950s to the 1980s","authors":"A. Stykalin","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.7","url":null,"abstract":"The historical experience of Hungarian-Romanian relations in previous eras affected the relations of the Hungarian national minority of Transylvania with the Romanian communist authorities from the 1950s to the 1980s. The concept of Romania as a unitary national state excluded the idea of Hungarian territorial autonomy even within its narrowest borders; Transylvanian Hungarians were declared an integral part of the Romanian political nation. This caused growing resistance from the consolidated Hungarian minority with a highly developed national identity and with the intelligentsia, which perceived itself as the guardian of the 1000-year-old Hungarian state and cultural traditions in Transylvania. The reaction of the Transylvanian Hungarian intelligentsia to the growing Romanian nationalist challenge changed as the Ceauşescu regime evolved, giving rise to different behavioral strategies. In the late 1960s, when Romania’s independent policy was internationally recognised the dominant attitude was to influence the situation through dialogue with the authorities. Later, from the end of the 1970s, the participation of Transylvanian Hungarians in the Romanian dissident movement intensified. The policy of the K.d.r regime concerning the Hungarians in Romania also changed depending on the state of Hungary–Romania relations.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81973171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.10
A. Silkin
The article deals with the Democratic Party, founded in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in 1919. The party existed until the early years after the Second World War. However, despite more than 30 years of history, in the first half of the 1920s the inability of the party to fulfill its original mission, as its founders saw it, was manifested. That predetermined the split of the Democratic Party in 1924. One after another, the founders of the party abandoned the fundamentalist Yugoslavism that characterized the first program of the party and its activities in the early 1920s. Not only did the democrats show a utilitarian approach to their own Yugoslavist credo, but so did almost everyone who hoped to occupy certain positions of power in the 1920s. Politicians had to balance the need to swear allegiance to the supranational ideology that laid the foundation of Yugoslavia with the desire to match the marginalized “narrow tribal” sentiments of voters. What happened to the democrats in the period under review is of particular interest, because it clearly demonstrates how quickly Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian leaders lost their barely acquired faith in the idea of the national unity of the Yugoslavians — an idea that turned out to be incapable of ensuring political mobilization of the masses.
{"title":"Democratic Party in the Early Years of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. “The Only Party of All Tribes, All Religions and All Classes”","authors":"A. Silkin","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.10","url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the Democratic Party, founded in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in 1919. The party existed until the early years after the Second World War. However, despite more than 30 years of history, in the first half of the 1920s the inability of the party to fulfill its original mission, as its founders saw it, was manifested. That predetermined the split of the Democratic Party in 1924. One after another, the founders of the party abandoned the fundamentalist Yugoslavism that characterized the first program of the party and its activities in the early 1920s. Not only did the democrats show a utilitarian approach to their own Yugoslavist credo, but so did almost everyone who hoped to occupy certain positions of power in the 1920s. Politicians had to balance the need to swear allegiance to the supranational ideology that laid the foundation of Yugoslavia with the desire to match the marginalized “narrow tribal” sentiments of voters. What happened to the democrats in the period under review is of particular interest, because it clearly demonstrates how quickly Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian leaders lost their barely acquired faith in the idea of the national unity of the Yugoslavians — an idea that turned out to be incapable of ensuring political mobilization of the masses.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75543213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.2
Anastasia A. Zhdanovskaya
The focus of this article is the history of the Union for the Study of the History of Germans in Bohemia. This voluntary association operated in the Czech Lands and Czechoslovakia from 1862 to 1938. The Union emerged in an era of increasing nationalisation of public life in this region and became one of the many associations that attracted a particular national community. Such associations are often called “national defence unions”, which implies a focus on preserving the national core identity and specific parts thereof. Nevertheless, the objectives of the Union were formulated with an emphasis on purely scientific activities that would shed light on various aspects of German–Bohemian history, as well as allow for systematic collection of sources. In this article, the author attempts to answer the question of whether the scientific and educational mission of the Union could remain the same in such a tense context for Bohemian Germans. This issue is considered from different angles: the tasks of the organization, the specific results of its activities, the scale and transformation of its structure, its affiliation with German political activists, and the main product of the Union’s activities — its publication activity — are analysed. The latter is addressed by quantitative indicators, which allows us to see the true scale of the controversy and topicality of the Union’s materials. The result of the research is the conclusion that despite the complex sociopolitical context and the relevance of the request for an “appropriate” Bohemian history, the Union retained its focus on local research and over time became more and more professional, contrary to the spirit of the time, losing touch with pressing political tasks.
{"title":"Science, Politics, or Propaganda? From the History of the Union for Research of the History of Germans in Bohemia","authors":"Anastasia A. Zhdanovskaya","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.2","url":null,"abstract":"The focus of this article is the history of the Union for the Study of the History of Germans in Bohemia. This voluntary association operated in the Czech Lands and Czechoslovakia from 1862 to 1938. The Union emerged in an era of increasing nationalisation of public life in this region and became one of the many associations that attracted a particular national community. Such associations are often called “national defence unions”, which implies a focus on preserving the national core identity and specific parts thereof. Nevertheless, the objectives of the Union were formulated with an emphasis on purely scientific activities that would shed light on various aspects of German–Bohemian history, as well as allow for systematic collection of sources. In this article, the author attempts to answer the question of whether the scientific and educational mission of the Union could remain the same in such a tense context for Bohemian Germans. This issue is considered from different angles: the tasks of the organization, the specific results of its activities, the scale and transformation of its structure, its affiliation with German political activists, and the main product of the Union’s activities — its publication activity — are analysed. The latter is addressed by quantitative indicators, which allows us to see the true scale of the controversy and topicality of the Union’s materials. The result of the research is the conclusion that despite the complex sociopolitical context and the relevance of the request for an “appropriate” Bohemian history, the Union retained its focus on local research and over time became more and more professional, contrary to the spirit of the time, losing touch with pressing political tasks.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"82 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80303944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.4
Nenad Đ. Ninković
Among the dioceses of the Archbishopric of Karlovci (Metropolitanate), Buda was the smallest in terms of number of adherents. Its significance, however, was disproportionate to its size. During the eighteenth century, there were several influential Serbian bishops (such as Sinesije Živanović, Sofronija Kirilović, and Arsenije Radivojević) and archbishops (including Vikentije Jovanović, Isaija Antonović, and Pavle Nenadović) in the Habsburg Monarchy who came from the Diocese of Buda. In the Diocese of Buda, the class of merchants, traders, and the educated were more sophisticated than in any other Orthodox diocese in Hungary. This left a significant impact on Serbian history because they played an important role in the assemblies, which were the Serbs’ most important secular institution within the Habsburg Monarchy. This paper will first consider the beginnings of the Diocese of Buda, which was formed during the mid-16th century when Hungary was part of the Ottoman Empire. Then the development of the diocese will be analyzed, starting from 1695, when it was established according to the Privileges of Emperor Leopold I, until 1791, when it was headed by Dionisije Popović (Papazoglu), who until then had been the Metropolitan of Belgrade, and under whom a new period in the diocese’s history began. The paper will then address the history of Orthodox church building, the influence of bishops both inside and outside the Diocese of Buda, and the considerable differences between the northern and southern parts of the diocese.
{"title":"The Serbs in the Centre of the Hungarian State: The Diocese of Buda in the Eighteenth Century","authors":"Nenad Đ. Ninković","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.4","url":null,"abstract":"Among the dioceses of the Archbishopric of Karlovci (Metropolitanate), Buda was the smallest in terms of number of adherents. Its significance, however, was disproportionate to its size. During the eighteenth century, there were several influential Serbian bishops (such as Sinesije Živanović, Sofronija Kirilović, and Arsenije Radivojević) and archbishops (including Vikentije Jovanović, Isaija Antonović, and Pavle Nenadović) in the Habsburg Monarchy who came from the Diocese of Buda. In the Diocese of Buda, the class of merchants, traders, and the educated were more sophisticated than in any other Orthodox diocese in Hungary. This left a significant impact on Serbian history because they played an important role in the assemblies, which were the Serbs’ most important secular institution within the Habsburg Monarchy. This paper will first consider the beginnings of the Diocese of Buda, which was formed during the mid-16th century when Hungary was part of the Ottoman Empire. Then the development of the diocese will be analyzed, starting from 1695, when it was established according to the Privileges of Emperor Leopold I, until 1791, when it was headed by Dionisije Popović (Papazoglu), who until then had been the Metropolitan of Belgrade, and under whom a new period in the diocese’s history began. The paper will then address the history of Orthodox church building, the influence of bishops both inside and outside the Diocese of Buda, and the considerable differences between the northern and southern parts of the diocese.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73586169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.5
G. Vasin
The nineteenth century history of the Buda Diocese, one of the most important administrative-territorial units of the Serbian Orthodox Karlovci Metropolis, was filled with turbulent and dynamic events, as was that of the Serbs within the Habsburg monarchy. Since the diocese was located in the very centre of the Hungarian part of the empire, its position was difficult and significantly affected by events taking place on the central political stage of the country. The number of Serbs living on the territory of the monarchy was not large, which limited their opportunities and available resources. Events such as the Napoleonic wars, the revolution of 1848–1849, and attempts to resolve the national question in the second half of the nineteenth century all had a significant impact on the life of the diocese as a church unit. Many political decisions that determined the development of the empire and the position of its population were reflected in the Serbian church and its parishioners throughout the monarchy. The diocese was under the vigilant control of the Hungarian authorities, the numerous testimonies of which, at critical historical moments, increased the drama and instability of the daily life of the Serbs of the Buda Diocese.
{"title":"Serbs in the Centre of the Hungarian State: The Diocese of Buda in the long Nineteenth Century","authors":"G. Vasin","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.5","url":null,"abstract":"The nineteenth century history of the Buda Diocese, one of the most important administrative-territorial units of the Serbian Orthodox Karlovci Metropolis, was filled with turbulent and dynamic events, as was that of the Serbs within the Habsburg monarchy. Since the diocese was located in the very centre of the Hungarian part of the empire, its position was difficult and significantly affected by events taking place on the central political stage of the country. The number of Serbs living on the territory of the monarchy was not large, which limited their opportunities and available resources. Events such as the Napoleonic wars, the revolution of 1848–1849, and attempts to resolve the national question in the second half of the nineteenth century all had a significant impact on the life of the diocese as a church unit. Many political decisions that determined the development of the empire and the position of its population were reflected in the Serbian church and its parishioners throughout the monarchy. The diocese was under the vigilant control of the Hungarian authorities, the numerous testimonies of which, at critical historical moments, increased the drama and instability of the daily life of the Serbs of the Buda Diocese.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74811969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.8
Aleksandr M. Dronov
Josip Juraj Strossmayer is a major political figure in nineteenth century Croatian history, and he represents the archetype of a cleric-politician. As one of the ideologists of the Croatian People’s Party (the narodniaks), he advocated the reconstruction of the Habsburg monarchy on a federalist basis and considered the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia to be politically equal not only with Hungary, but also with Austria. Interested in religious philosophy, Strossmayer developed a “code of honour” for a narodniak-politician, based on political morality. Such morality was based on the “crystal” honesty of the people's representative towards himself and the voters, which meant following his principles to the end. In practice, the main criterion for compliance with this morality was the defence of the rights of the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia, and more broadly the southern Slavs of the Habsburg monarchy in relation to Hungary and Austria; in other words, every manner of resistance to Magyarisation and Germanisation. He followed this principle himself throughout the entire period of his major political activity (1860–1873), which eventually led to his disillusionment with politics and the realization of his own powerlessness to influence the situation in unfavourable political conditions in the Monarchy. Nevertheless, despite personal political setbacks and the associated attacks of political opponents in the press, he didn’t depart from his beliefs, but remained faithful to them, even when they ceased to be shared by the majority of his party colleagues. Croatian-Hungarian relations after 1868 he considered far from the ideal of political morality, mainly because of their inequality.
Josip Juraj Strossmayer是19世纪克罗地亚历史上的重要政治人物，他代表了神职政治家的原型。作为克罗地亚人民党(民粹派)的理论家之一，他主张在联邦制的基础上重建哈布斯堡王朝，并认为克罗地亚和斯拉沃尼亚王国在政治上不仅与匈牙利平等，而且与奥地利平等。由于对宗教哲学很感兴趣，斯特罗斯迈尔为民粹派政治家制定了一套基于政治道德的“荣誉准则”。这种道德是建立在人民代表对自己和选民的“水晶”诚实的基础上的，这意味着要坚持他的原则到底。在实践中，遵守这一道德的主要标准是捍卫克罗地亚和斯拉沃尼亚王国的权利，更广泛地说，是捍卫哈布斯堡王朝对匈牙利和奥地利的南斯拉夫人的权利;换句话说，就是对Magyarisation和Germanisation的各种抵抗。在他主要的政治活动(1860-1873)的整个时期，他一直遵循这一原则，这最终导致他对政治的幻想破灭，并意识到他自己无力在不利的政治条件下影响君主制的局势。然而，尽管他个人在政治上遭遇挫折，并在媒体上受到政治对手的攻击，但他并没有偏离自己的信仰，而是始终忠于自己的信仰，即使他的大多数党内同事不再认同他的信仰。他认为克罗地亚和匈牙利在1868年之后的关系与理想的政治道德相去甚远，主要是因为两国的不平等。
{"title":"Josip Juraj Strossmayer’s “Political Morality” in the Context of Croatian-Hungarian Relations in the 1860s and early 1870s","authors":"Aleksandr M. Dronov","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.8","url":null,"abstract":"Josip Juraj Strossmayer is a major political figure in nineteenth century Croatian history, and he represents the archetype of a cleric-politician. As one of the ideologists of the Croatian People’s Party (the narodniaks), he advocated the reconstruction of the Habsburg monarchy on a federalist basis and considered the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia to be politically equal not only with Hungary, but also with Austria. Interested in religious philosophy, Strossmayer developed a “code of honour” for a narodniak-politician, based on political morality. Such morality was based on the “crystal” honesty of the people's representative towards himself and the voters, which meant following his principles to the end. In practice, the main criterion for compliance with this morality was the defence of the rights of the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia, and more broadly the southern Slavs of the Habsburg monarchy in relation to Hungary and Austria; in other words, every manner of resistance to Magyarisation and Germanisation. He followed this principle himself throughout the entire period of his major political activity (1860–1873), which eventually led to his disillusionment with politics and the realization of his own powerlessness to influence the situation in unfavourable political conditions in the Monarchy. Nevertheless, despite personal political setbacks and the associated attacks of political opponents in the press, he didn’t depart from his beliefs, but remained faithful to them, even when they ceased to be shared by the majority of his party colleagues. Croatian-Hungarian relations after 1868 he considered far from the ideal of political morality, mainly because of their inequality.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80837543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.5
Imre Ress
The article examines the consequences of the processes of disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and of making of national states for the archival heritage of the multiethnic empire of the Habsburgs. It is based on the provisions of the Saint-Germain and Trianon peace treaties concluded in 1919 and 1920 at Versailles concerning the intellectual and cultural heritage, as well as archival and published sources from Vienna and Budapest relating to the order of execution of these provisions. The victorious successor states that strove to divide the organically created archival heritage of the Monarchy and the funds of the Hungarian National Archives according to the territorial approach and ethnic principal, in order to satisfy the needs of national historiographies which needed additional resources for legitimisation of their independent statehoods. Both treaties provided for the application of the principle of provenance for the provision of archival services (or the transfer of documents), which were considered national intellectual property, but they did not provide a substantive explanation of these terms. Thus, this general regulation did not provide a solid legal basis for bilateral negotiations, so they were largely dependent on the balance of political power and economic considerations. From a historical perspective, the archival convention between Austria and Hungary turned out to be the most effective from a professional point of view, since in it the concept of national intellectual property, vaguely formulated in peace treaties, was not exclusively tied to the territory of a national state. In Austro-Hungarian relations, mutual recognition and use of the principle of common intellectual property allowed for cultural and academic interest in archival material outside its own territory, and at the same time guaranteed unrestricted access to information and the ability to influence the professional processing of archival material. The principles of the Baden Convention of 1926, progressive for their time, and the very adherence to its spirit, triumphed in international archival theory and practice in the 1960s as one of the possible models for resolving interstate archival disputes.
{"title":"Archival Legacy of Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and the National States","authors":"Imre Ress","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2020.3.5","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the consequences of the processes of disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and of making of national states for the archival heritage of the multiethnic empire of the Habsburgs. It is based on the provisions of the Saint-Germain and Trianon peace treaties concluded in 1919 and 1920 at Versailles concerning the intellectual and cultural heritage, as well as archival and published sources from Vienna and Budapest relating to the order of execution of these provisions. The victorious successor states that strove to divide the organically created archival heritage of the Monarchy and the funds of the Hungarian National Archives according to the territorial approach and ethnic principal, in order to satisfy the needs of national historiographies which needed additional resources for legitimisation of their independent statehoods. Both treaties provided for the application of the principle of provenance for the provision of archival services (or the transfer of documents), which were considered national intellectual property, but they did not provide a substantive explanation of these terms. Thus, this general regulation did not provide a solid legal basis for bilateral negotiations, so they were largely dependent on the balance of political power and economic considerations. From a historical perspective, the archival convention between Austria and Hungary turned out to be the most effective from a professional point of view, since in it the concept of national intellectual property, vaguely formulated in peace treaties, was not exclusively tied to the territory of a national state. In Austro-Hungarian relations, mutual recognition and use of the principle of common intellectual property allowed for cultural and academic interest in archival material outside its own territory, and at the same time guaranteed unrestricted access to information and the ability to influence the professional processing of archival material. The principles of the Baden Convention of 1926, progressive for their time, and the very adherence to its spirit, triumphed in international archival theory and practice in the 1960s as one of the possible models for resolving interstate archival disputes.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88092590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.10
Petr V. Moshechkov
The subject of the present study is the process of normalisation of the relations between the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia in 1933 — June 1934. Regarding the historiography of the problem it should be stressed that in the Russian as well as in the Czech and Slovak historiography exists a considerable part of scientific works which are concerned with this problem. Among them we can mark such works which were written in the 1950s — 1970s by Czechoslovak (A. Ort, V. Moulis, V. Olivová, V. Král) as well as Soviet (P. I. Rezonov, S. I. Prasolov, A. F. Kizchenko, I. A. Peters) historians. The modern Czech and Slovak works are presented by monographs and articles by A. Klímek, E. Kubů, B. Ferenčuhová, J. Dejmek, E. Voráček, D. Hubený and B. Litera. In contemporary Russian historical science the problem of Czechoslovak–Soviet relations in the middle of interwar period was studied by O. N. Ken and A. I. Rupasov. However, their studies are mainly concentrated on the circumstances of signing on 16 May 1935 of the Soviet-Czechoslovak treaty of mutual assistance on the background of the Franco-Soviet co-operation and the discussion of the project of the Eastern Pact. In this connection the main object of this study became the reconstruction of the process of talks which were carried on by Soviet diplomats with their Czechoslovak colleagues. The principal sources for this article are the materials presented in the fonds of the Archive of the foreign politics of Russian Federation and published in such collections as Documents and materials on the history of Soviet-Czechoslovak relations and Documents on the USSR foreign policy. The study shows that the politics led by Soviet as well as Czechoslovak governments toward each other, especially the adoption of concrete decisions, depended on the fluctuations, which took place in the European international policy.
本研究的主题是苏联和捷克斯洛伐克在1933年至1934年6月之间关系正常化的过程。关于这个问题的史学，应该强调的是，在俄罗斯以及捷克和斯洛伐克的史学中，存在着相当一部分与这个问题有关的科学著作。在这些作品中，我们可以看到捷克斯洛伐克(A. Ort, V. Moulis, V. olivov， V. Král)以及苏联(P. I. Rezonov, S. I. Prasolov, A. F. Kizchenko, I. A. Peters)历史学家在20世纪50年代至70年代所写的作品。现代捷克和斯洛伐克的作品由A. Klímek、E. kubdv、B. feren uhov、J. Dejmek、E. Voráček、D. Hubený和B. Litera的专著和文章呈现。在当代俄罗斯史学中，肯和鲁帕索夫研究了两次世界大战中期的捷苏关系问题。但是，他们的研究主要集中于在法苏合作的背景下于1935年5月16日签署苏联-捷克斯洛伐克互助条约的情况和对《东方条约》项目的讨论。在这方面，这项研究的主要目的是重建苏联外交官与其捷克斯洛伐克同事进行的会谈进程。本文的主要资料来源是俄罗斯联邦对外政治档案馆的资料，并发表在《苏联-捷克斯洛伐克关系史文件和资料》和《苏联外交政策文件》等文集中。研究表明，苏联和捷克斯洛伐克政府主导的相互政治，特别是具体决策的采用，取决于欧洲国际政策的波动。
{"title":"Czechoslovakia and the USSR in 1933 — June 1934: On the Way to Establishing Diplomatic Relations","authors":"Petr V. Moshechkov","doi":"10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31168/2619-0877.2021.4.10","url":null,"abstract":"The subject of the present study is the process of normalisation of the relations between the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia in 1933 — June 1934. Regarding the historiography of the problem it should be stressed that in the Russian as well as in the Czech and Slovak historiography exists a considerable part of scientific works which are concerned with this problem. Among them we can mark such works which were written in the 1950s — 1970s by Czechoslovak (A. Ort, V. Moulis, V. Olivová, V. Král) as well as Soviet (P. I. Rezonov, S. I. Prasolov, A. F. Kizchenko, I. A. Peters) historians. The modern Czech and Slovak works are presented by monographs and articles by A. Klímek, E. Kubů, B. Ferenčuhová, J. Dejmek, E. Voráček, D. Hubený and B. Litera. In contemporary Russian historical science the problem of Czechoslovak–Soviet relations in the middle of interwar period was studied by O. N. Ken and A. I. Rupasov. However, their studies are mainly concentrated on the circumstances of signing on 16 May 1935 of the Soviet-Czechoslovak treaty of mutual assistance on the background of the Franco-Soviet co-operation and the discussion of the project of the Eastern Pact. In this connection the main object of this study became the reconstruction of the process of talks which were carried on by Soviet diplomats with their Czechoslovak colleagues. The principal sources for this article are the materials presented in the fonds of the Archive of the foreign politics of Russian Federation and published in such collections as Documents and materials on the history of Soviet-Czechoslovak relations and Documents on the USSR foreign policy. The study shows that the politics led by Soviet as well as Czechoslovak governments toward each other, especially the adoption of concrete decisions, depended on the fluctuations, which took place in the European international policy.","PeriodicalId":30305,"journal":{"name":"Central European Political Studies Review","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90043812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：