Search

Start Over Rights policy:public Date Unknown

192. „Jak se to tedy mělo dělat jinak?”

Creator:
Křen, Jan and Seifter, Pavel
Type:
article and TEXT
Language:
Czech
Description:
Oba historici, tentokrát jako pamětníci, si kladou otázku, které se dotkl Petr Pithart ve své memoárové knize Devětaosmdesátý (Praha, Academia 2009): co se dalo udělat, aby se na konci roku 1989 v Československu zabránilo svévolnému ničení a rozkrádání materiálů Státní bezpečnosti a jiných archivních dokumentů? Zpochybňují přitom Pithartovo konstatování, že tento stav byl důsledkem daných společenských poměrů a že nebylo možné jej zásadně ovlivnit. Řešení podle jejich přesvědčení nabízela Historická komise Občanského fóra, jejímiž členy sami byli a jejíž koncepční návrhy na zabezpečení a uchování archivních dokumentů i další aktivity z prosince 1989 a ledna 1990 připomínají. Zamýšlejí se také nad tím, proč tyto návrhy nebyly v Koordinačním centru Občanského fóra vyslyšeny., In this contribution, the authors, both historians, but this time as eye-witnesses, ask the question that Petr Pithart touched upon in his memoirs, Devětaosmdesátý (Eighty-nine; 2009): What could have been done to prevent the widespread destruction and theft of secret-police files and other archive records in Czechoslovakia in late 1989? The authors cast doubt on Pithart’s claim that this state of affairs was a result of the situation in society and that it was impossible to influence it in any fundamental way. The solution, the authors believe, was offered by the Historical Commission of the Civic Forum, of which they were members, whose draft proposals for the security and preservation of archive records, as well as other work from December 1989 and January 1990, they discuss here. They also discuss why these proposals were not given a fair hearing in the Coordinating Centre of the Civic Forum., and Diskuse
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ and policy:public

195. „Je to bezesporu trápení cestovat touto zemí v takové zimě.“ Andaluský rytíř Pero Tafur v Čechách, ve Slezsku a na Moravě (1438-1439)

Creator:
Jaroslav Svátek
Format:
print, bez média, and svazek
Type:
model:article and TEXT
Subject:
II. Habsburský, římskoněmecký císař, Albrecht, 1397-1439, Šlik, Kašpar, asi 1400-1449, Tafur, Pero, asi 1410-1484, středověká společnost, cestovatelé, kavalírské cesty, medieval society, travellers, grand tours, Vratislav (Polsko), Wrocław (Poland), medieval voyager, 8, and 930
Language:
Czech
Description:
This article charts the path and the activity of the Andalusian nobleman Pero Tafur in the Czech lands at the end of 1438 and beginning of 1439. The visit formed part of his extensive four-year journey across European countries, the Middle East, and the Mediterranean. The main motive was to meet with King of the Romans and of Bohemia Albert II. The meeting occured in February 1439 in Wroclaw, where Tafur arrived via Prague and Saxony in the entourage of the royal chancellor Kaspar Schlick, and from there he continued through Moravia to the south to Austria. The rather obscur testimony of the well-travelled knight is not only a remarable document of this monarch as a person and the contemporary historical context of Albert´s brief reign, but also provides an interesting image of Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia in the atmosphere of the slowly extinguishing Hussite wars., Jaroslav Svátek., and Obsahuje literaturu a odkazy pod čarou
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ and policy:public

196. "Je to boj přírody o život & smrt...": lékaři ve službách Schwarzenbergův letech 1780-1830

Creator:
Grubhoffer, Václav
Format:
print, bez média, and svazek
Type:
model:article and TEXT
Subject:
Schwarzenbergové (rod), 18.-19. století, dějiny lékařství, history of medicine, schwarzenberští lékaři, Schwarzenbergs' physicians, 8, and 94(437)
Language:
Czech and English
Description:
From the 1780s on, the court of the Princes of Schwarzenberg generally maintained four or five personal doctors. These privileged positions were frequently held by individuals who also practised as municipal or county physicians. In their castles in Bohemia the Schwarzenbergs also employed surgeons and apothecaries, and in line with the professionalization of medical care during the Enlightenment they attached great importance to the training of health workers. In the first three decades of the 19th century health care in the context of the Schwarzenberg primogeniture became even more specialized and the number of medical staff on the various Schwarzenberg estates increased. In addition to their own physicians, the Schwarzenbergs also entrusted their health needs to eminent medical experts drawn primarily from the Habsburg court and the University of Vienna and later, from the 1830s on, to many doctors working in the Czech Lands. This study considers the relationship between the high nobility as representatives of social elites on the one hand and the Enlightenment medicalization of society with its professionalization of health care on the other. It maps the structure of medical care within one aristocratic family and their estates and its transformation over a fifty‐year period. It also attempts to discover who the Schwarzenbergs’ doctors were and what socio‐cultural background they came from., Václav Grubhoffer., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ and policy:public

198. „Je třeba vyrovnat se s řáděním pravicových živlů"

Creator:
Vondrová, Jitka
Type:
article and TEXT
Language:
Czech
Description:
V této edici Jitka Vondrová předkládá dosud neznámý elaborát historika Václava Krále nazvaný „Informace o stavu československé historiografie“, který byl předán 21. srpna 1969 – tedy v den prvního výročí invaze armád Varšavské smlouvy do Československa – na sovětském velvyslanectví v Praze a určen v prvé řadě do rukou tajemníka pro ideologii Ústředního výboru Komunistické strany Sovětského svazu Pjotra I. Děmičeva. Editorka dokument objevila v materiálech oddělení propagandy ÚV KSSS v Ruském státním archivu pro nejnovější dějiny (Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj archiv novejšej istorii) v Moskvě. Obsahem dokumentu je hodnocení poměrů ve zdejší historiografii nejnovější doby z krajně dogmatických pozic. Pisatel „odhaluje“ mocnou nátlakovou skupinu, respektive „teroristický gang“ mezi historiky, která se s pomocí „reakčních živlů“ v ústředních orgánech KSČ (tedy reformních komunistů) pokouší ovládnout mocenské pozice v historiografii a zvrátit výklad československých dějin ve 20. století od pojetí marxistického k buržoaznímu ve smyslu masarykovské ideologie. Za vůdce této skupiny označuje Milana Hübla a Jana Křena, mezi další její protagonisty řadí například Viléma Prečana, Milana Otáhala, Karla Bartoška nebo Václava Kurala. Identifikuje také centra „kontrarevoluce v historiografii“, zejména Ústav dějin KSČ, Vysokou školu politickou ÚV KSČ, oddělení nejnovějších dějin v Historickém ústavu ČSAV a Českou historickou společnost. Závěrem uvádí konkrétní návrhy na reorganizaci jednotlivých historických institucí a doporučuje propustit a zcela vykázat z odborné sféry přibližně sto čtyřicet historiků. V obsáhlém úvodním komentáři editorka zasazuje dokument do kontextu politických aktivit radikálně levicového křídla v Komunistické straně Československa po srpnu 1968 a také do souvislostí tehdejšího vývoje československé historiografie a kariéry autora dokumentu. Václav Král (1926–1983) byl marxistický historik skálopevně dogmatického myšlení a zabýval se nejnovějšími československými dějinami, zejména obdobím zániku první republiky a německé okupace. Svou kariéru započal v padesátých letech, v roce 1962 se stal ředitelem Československo-sovětského institutu. Během šedesátých let se však ideologická schémata, jimiž nahlížel na dějiny, stávala předmětem kritiky a Král se odborně ocital v izolaci od hlavního proudu československého dějepisectví, jehož protagonisté usilovali o restituci historiografie jako kritické vědy a její osvobození od přímé závislosti na politice. Jeho šance znovu přišla po vpádu intervenčních vojsk, kdy se intenzivně zapojil do činnosti krajní levice, v komunistické straně. Ta sloužila jako přímá páka sovětského vlivu, předkládala radikální požadavky na odsouzení „pražského jara“ jako kontrarevoluce a odvolání všech jeho stoupenců a tlačila i nového generálního tajemníka ÚV KSČ k zaujímání stále konformnějších prosovětských stanovisek. Václav Král si přitom ve svém elaborátu vyřizoval i osobní účty s historiky, kteří ho kritizovali. Brzy poté sám nemilosrdně realizoval politiku čistek v praxi v Československo-sovětském institutu a v Historickém ústavu. V čase „normalizace“ pak svou pozici historického prominenta dále upevnil, když se stal předsedou vědeckého kolegia ČSAV, vedoucím katedry historie na Filozofické fakultě Univerzity Karlovy a byl jmenován profesorem., In this edition, Jitka Vondrová presents a hitherto unknown report by the historian Václav Král (1926–1983). Entitled “Informace o stavu československé historiografie” (Information on the State of Czechoslovak Historiography), the report was presented at the Soviet Embassy, Prague, on 21 August 1969 (on the first anniversary of the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact intervention in Czechoslovakia), and was intended primarily for Piotr N. Demichev, Secretary for Ideology at the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). Vondrová discovered the document amongst material of the Propaganda Department of the CPSU in the Russian State Archive of Contemporary History, Moscow. The document is an assessment of the state of Czechoslovak contemporary history from extremely dogmatic positions. Král “exposes” a powerful interest group, which he portrays as a “terrorist gang,” amongst the historians. With the help of “reactionary elements” in the central organs of the Czechoslovak Communist Party (that is, the reform Communists) the group was trying to gain the upper hand in historiography and return the interpretation of Czechoslovak history in the twentieth century from the Marxist conception to the bourgeois in the sense of Masarykian ideology. He calls Milan Hübl (1927–1989) and Jan Křen (b. 1930) the leaders of the group, which included Vilém Prečan (b. 1933), Milan Otáhal (b. 1928), Karel Bartošek (1930–2004), and Václav Kural (b. 1928). He also identifies the centre of “counter-revolution in historiography,” particularly the Institute of History of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, the Party University, the Department of Contemporary History in the Institute of History at the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, and the Czech Historical Society. He concludes with some concrete proposals for the reorganization of the individual institutions of historical research, and recommends dismissing about 140 historians and banning them from the field altogether. In a comprehensive introduction, the editor puts this document into the context of the political activities of the radically left wing of the Czechoslovak Communist Party after the Soviet-led occupation in late August 1968 and also into the context of contemporaneous developments in Czechoslovak historiography and the career of the author of the document. Král was a dogmatic Marxist historian of contemporary Czechoslovak history, particularly of the end of the First Republic and the German occupation. His career began in the 1950s, and in 1962 he became head of the Czechoslovak-Soviet Institute., In the 1960s, however, the ideological models he employed in historiography came under criticism, and Král found himself isolated from the mainstream of Czechoslovak historiography as the leading historians endeavoured to have historiography restored as a critical discipline free from direct dependence on politics. Král was given another chance after the Soviet-led military intervention, when he became seriously involved in the extreme left wing of the Communist Party. A direct instrument of Soviet influence, this wing of the CPCz put forward radical demands for the condemnation of the “Prague Spring” as a counter-revolution and for the dismissal of all those who supported it. It also put pressure on the new general secretary of the Central Committee of the CPCz to take up increasingly conformist, pro-Soviet positions. In his report, Král is also settling personal accounts with historians who criticized him. Soon after writing it, he himself mercilessly carried out the policy of purges in the Czechoslovak-Soviet Institute and the Historical Institute. In the period of “Normalization” he then shored up his own position as a prominent historian when he became Chairman of the Academic Board of the Czechoslovak Academy and Head of the Department of History at the Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague, and was also given a professorship., and Dokumenty
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ and policy:public

199. "Jednou to padne samo": k historii etnického soupeření o "nejmenší jazykový ostrov" meziválečného Československa

Creator:
Lozoviuk, Petr and Křížová, Markéta
Format:
print
Type:
model:internalpart and TEXT
Language:
Czech
Description:
The present study aims at sketching some aspects of the last phase of existence of one mixed Czech-German community (Karlov-Libinsdorf), on the basis of ethnographic and historical sources. It offers a reflection of a more general process from the point of view of a local microlevel, a process that finally resulted in the ethnic homogneization of the Czech lands. The analysis of the controversy fo r national character of the community is being realized, on the one hand, through the study of the competition for the character of national schools in the locality, and, on the other hand, through the symbolical importance that the contesting parties ascribed to the existence of this mixed enclave. As a result of the general ethnic homogneization, the inhabitants of the naturally double-language community were confronted with the necessity of the unequivical declaration of their ethnicity. The nacionalization of the collective identity of the local inhabitants and the necessity of the „actualization“ of this identity according to the political situation of the moment was being imposed through the general social context and through the movement of „ethnic defense“ that was being incited from the outside, by the representants of the „defense associations“ The possible alternatives, however, were in competition one to another and, at the same time, they were inconsistent with the „traditional“ local (i.e. non-ethnic) identity. This dilemma hadbeen „imported“ from the outside, from the makrosocial level, but had to be solved on the level of local everyday life. In the situation of real existence of two different (ethnic) linguistic groups in the community under study, however, didn't exist the need to express the social reality through explicitly ethnical cathegories. If this expression was realized, it was in the direction to the outside, especially as a reaction to the demands from part of the State administration to define unequivocally the ethnic denomination - for example, for the use of the population censuses at the times of the Austria-Hungary and the Czechoslovak Republic or during the Protectorate when asking for the citizenship of the Protectorate or of the Reich - or in connexion with the regular interventions of the nationally outspoken activists. Similarly, also the institutionalized form of the „national struggle“ that seemingly found its possibility for expression in creating theparallel social structures in the community acquired such imposed character. There are many arguments for the assumption that the rivalry of the nationalist associations didn’t stem from the authentic local conditions. The local inhabitants could not be labeled as the ori and ginators of the conflicts with nationalist bacground, even though they have been sometimes perceived as the actors of such conflicts. We can sum up that the nationalization of the social ties didn’t occur spontaneously and represents rather a product of the interventions to the life of the community and a response to the ethnic enunciation imposed from the outside
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ and policy:public

200. „Jen trochu blíže, Hrdobci...” aneb ne každý hovnivál válí

Creator:
František Sládeček
Type:
article, články, journal articles, model:article, and TEXT
Subject:
Zoologie, entomologie, brouci, životní prostředí, entomology, beetles, environment, 2, and 59
Language:
Czech
Description:
Biologie dekompozitorů byla vždy tak trochu na druhé koleji širšího vědeckého i veřejného zájmu. Není se trochu čemu divit – než se přehrabovat v něčem nevábném, je pohodlnější pozorovat zvířata na rostlinách či jejich predátory. Nicméně dekompozitoři si naši pozornost zaslouží už jen tím, že po nás uklízejí, ať jde o kontinuální úklid koprofágů, tak o jednorázový úklid, který po nás provedou nekrofágové, a tím pomáhají udržovat to krásné a přitažlivé v chodu a stabilitě. Z koprofágů se již od věků pyramid těší jisté pozornosti koprofágní brouci, nicméně za poslední léta o nich v naší literatuře mnoho slyšet nebylo. Cílem tohoto článku je tedy představit širší veřejnosti tyto koprofágní brouky s jejich osobitou a zajímavou ekologií, která zajímavě ovlivnila jednu lidskou kulturou., Dung beetles are introduced as an important and interesting ecological group. Their ecology, what they eat and their impact on human culture and society are reviewed. Although they are no longer considered to be a deity, dung beetles still prove to be highly beneficial for both nature and human society, thanks to their degradation of dung., and František Xaver Jiří Sládeček.
Rights:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ and policy:public

Limit your search

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »

Show values starting with
more »