T. G. Masaryk pp 147-171 | Cite as

Advocate of Czech Independence

  • H. Gordon Skilling
Part of the St Antony’s/Macmillan Series book series


Masaryk’s attitude toward Austria-Hungary, the empire of which Bohemia and Moravia formed a part, was a changing one and reflected mixed feelings. From the beginning of his political career he never ceased demanding political independence (samostatnost or nezávislost) for the Czech nation. This meant, in his mind, cultural, economic and social independence, or territorial autonomy within the framework of the Monarchy. In fact in the early years, and even later, he repeatedly asserted that complete political independence, i.e. separation from the Monarchy, was excluded by the smallness of the nation and its geographic location.


Foreign Policy Progressive Party Moral Courage Political Independence Small Nation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See also Masaryk, Palackého idea národa českého (Prague, 1947), pp. 39–40.Google Scholar
  2. 4.
    These include Masaryk, Karel Havlíček (Prague, 1896), chaps XIV, XVII, XVIII, pp. 460–80;Google Scholar
  3. Otázka sociální (7th edn, Prague, 1948), II, chap. 8;Google Scholar
  4. Rusko a evropa (Prague, 1919), I, p. 333–46;Google Scholar
  5. ‘Zur deutsch-böhmischen Ausgleichsfrage’, Die Zeit (Vienna), IV, 25 April 1896,Google Scholar
  6. also in Czech, ‘Dohodnutí Čechů s Němci’, in Anketa Rozhledů, V, 1896, pp. 418–25;Google Scholar
  7. the latter reproduced in J. B. Kozák (ed.), Masaryková práce (Prague, 1930), pp. 114–21;Google Scholar
  8. ‘Humanity and Nationality’, Naše doba, IV (1897), pp. 193–205, plus an editorial note also probably written by Masaryk, ibid., pp. 256–9;Google Scholar
  9. published in A. von Czedik, Zur Geschichte der k. k. oesterreichischen Ministerien, 1861–1920 (Teschen, Vienna and Leipzig, 1917–1920), IV, pp. 226–34, also published in Čas, 24 December 1907;Google Scholar
  10. See also Miroslav Trapl, Vědecké základy Masarykovy politiky (Brno, 1946), chaps. 5, 6, 7;Google Scholar
  11. Roman Szporluk, The Political Thought of Thomas G. Masaryk (Boulder and New York, 1981), chap. V;Google Scholar
  12. Roland J. Hoffmann, T. G. Masaryk und die tschechische Frage (Munich, 1988), pp. 21–2, 449–61;Google Scholar
  13. František Kaufman, ‘T. G. Masaryk and the Problem of National Identity’, Kosmas, IV, 2 (Winter, 1985), pp. 71–81;Google Scholar
  14. in Czech, in Masaryk a soucašnost, ed. Milan Machovec, Petr Pithart and Miloš Pojar (Prague, 1992) (originally published in samizdat, 1980), pp. 118–27;Google Scholar
  15. Zdeněk Suda, ‘The Theories of Nation in the Work of T. G. Masaryk and Emanuel Rádl’, in Josef Novák, ed., On Masaryk, Texts in English and German (Amsterdam, 1988), pp. 317–32.Google Scholar
  16. 9.
    Masaryk, Havlíček, pp. 327, 330; Česká otázka/NNK, pp. 189, 263–4; The Development of the Modern Science of Socialism’, Nová doba (Pilsen), XII, no. 12, 12 February 1907, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
  17. 13.
    partial texts in Jiří Kovtun, Slovo má poslanec Masaryk (Munich, 1985), pp. 83ff. and 111ff.Google Scholar
  18. An English translation of the latter is given in George J. Kovtun, The Spirit of Thomas G Masaryk, 1850–1937: An Anthology (London, 1990), pp. 53–60.Google Scholar
  19. 14.
    See also Masaryk’s lecture in London in 1915, The Problem of Small Nations in the European Crisis (London, 1916).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    See also Masaryk, Havlíček (2nd edn, 1904), p. 142.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    See Butter, ‘Zahraniční politika T. G. Masaryka’, Zahraniční politika, 18, no. 14 (1939), pp. 124–5, 132.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Čas, 18 May 1900, cited in Evžen Štern, Názory T. G. Masaryka (Prague, 1910), p. 49.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    For brief summaries of state right in Czech politics, see Skilling, ‘The Politics of the Czech Eighties’, in Skilling and Peter Brock, The Czech Renascence of the Nineteenth Century (Toronto, 1970), pp. 259–62;Google Scholar
  24. Bruce M. Garver, The Young Czech Party 1874–1901 and the Emergence of a Multi-party System (New Haven, 1978), pp. 49–59, 71, passim;Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    See Jaroslav Houser, ‘Stáoprávní program na přelomu století’, Právně historické studie, 15 (Prague, 1971), pp. 45–62.Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    Karel Kramář, České státní právo (Prague, 1896);Google Scholar
  27. Das böhmische Staatsrecht (Vienna, 1896), pp. 10, 20, 34 and passim.Google Scholar
  28. For other expositions of state right, see Alois Rašín, České státní právo (Prague, 1891) (Progressive);Google Scholar
  29. B. Pacák and J. Kaizl, O státoprávní programu české (Prague, 1896)Google Scholar
  30. and Josef Herold, O státoprávní programu českém (Prague, 1896) (both Young Czech);Google Scholar
  31. Józa Skalák, Přirozená práva národů (Prague, 1897) (Social Democrat);Google Scholar
  32. Václav Choc, České státní právo (Olomouc, 1900) (National Socialist);Google Scholar
  33. Antonín Hajn, ‘Státoprávní politika v přitomnosti i budoucnosti’, in Lad. Machác et al., Státoprávní politika (Prague, 1903) (State Right Progressive);Google Scholar
  34. Antonín Hajn, Výbor prací 1889–1909, (Prague, 1913), III, pp. 49–69 (State Right Progressive);Google Scholar
  35. Josef Fořt, O českém problému státoprávním (1913) (Young Czech).Google Scholar
  36. 28.
    Kramář, Poznámky o české politice (Prague, 1906);Google Scholar
  37. Kamil Krofta, Politická postava Karla Kramáře, edited by Karel Hoch (Prague, 1936), pp. 22–3).Google Scholar
  38. 30.
    For their later position see Zdeněk Šolle and Alena Gajanová, Po stopě dějin, Češía Slováci v letech 1848–1938 (Prague, 1969), pp. 117–22.Google Scholar
  39. 38.
    Masaryk, Pravo přirozené a historické (Prague, 1900).Google Scholar
  40. See also Masaryk’s criticism of the inconsistency of the Young Czechs on state and natural right in Desorganisace mladočeské strany (1903), pp. 19–30.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Edvard Beneš, Le problème autrichien et la question tchèque (Paris, 1908), p. 229;Google Scholar
  42. Louis Eisenmann, Le Compromis Austro-Hongrois de 1867; Étude sur le dualisme (Paris, 1904), p. 668.Google Scholar
  43. See also Josef Redlich, Öesterreichische Regierung und Verwaltung im Weltkrieg (Vienna, 1916), espec. pp. 25–30, 34–5.Google Scholar
  44. For contemporary Czech constitutional analysis, see articles by Dobroslav Krejči and F. Vavrínek, in Zdeněk Tobolka, (ed.), Česká politika (Prague, 1906–1913), II, 2, pp. 1–14, 77ff, 45 Iff, 723ff.Google Scholar
  45. For a more recent analysis, see Robert A. Kann, The Multinational Empire; Nationalism and National Reform in the Habsburg Monarchy, 1848–1918 (New York, 1950), 2 vols.Google Scholar
  46. 42.
    in Adolf Srb, Politické dějiny národa českého od počatku doby konstitučni (Prague, 1926), vol. 2, pp. 382–5;Google Scholar
  47. that of 22 June 1907, Zdeněk Tobolka, Politické dějiný československého národa od r. 1848 až do dnešní doby (Prague, 1936), III, 2, pp. 488–9.Google Scholar
  48. 45.
    Herold, ‘Reform of the Provincial Constitution’, Česká revue (1907–8), 7, pp. 256–62, 339–45, 428–32, 468–73.Google Scholar
  49. For an extended listing of provincial powers, see his lecture, Herold, Reforma zemského zřízení král. českého (Prague, 1908) pp. 15–16.Google Scholar
  50. 52.
    Hajn, Ku programu pokrokové strany českoslovanské (Pardubice, 1905), pp.40–59.Google Scholar
  51. 54.
    Among the host of books dealing with the language question, see, for a good brief summary, Robert A. Kann, The Multinational Empire, Nationalism and National Reform in the Habsburg Monarchy 1848–1918 (2 vols, New York, 1950, reprinted in 1964 and 1970) I, 191–215.Google Scholar
  52. See also Heinrich Münch, Böhmische Tragödie; das Schicksal Mitteleuropas im Lichte des tschechishche Frage (Brunswick, 1949), pp. 700–26;Google Scholar
  53. 59.
    Trapl, Masarykův program. Demokracie-Socialismus-Českd otázka (Brno, 1948), pp. 167—77;Google Scholar
  54. George J. Kovtun, ‘Thomas G. Masaryk’s Road to Revolution’, in Miloš Čapek and Karel Hrubý (eds), T. G. Masaryk in Perspective. Comments and Criticism (n.p., 1981), pp. 139–69;Google Scholar
  55. Jaroslav Werstadt, Od ‘české otázky’ k ‘nové evrope’, Linie politickeho vyvoje Masaryka (Prague, 1920), pp. 19–29.Google Scholar
  56. also in Hlavác, Frantisek Josef 1 (Prague, 1933), chap. 28.Google Scholar
  57. Zdeněk Šolle, ‘Masaryková cesta k Nové Evropě, in Masaryk a myšlenka evropské jednoty (Prague, 1992), pp. 40–59.Google Scholar
  58. 60.
    long excerpts are given in Jan Herben, T. G. Masaryk (Prague, 1926), I, pp. 116–23 and Kozák (ed.), Masaryková práce, pp.80–5.Google Scholar
  59. 61.
    and in German by Ernst Rychnowsky, Masaryk (2nd edn, Prague, 1930).Google Scholar
  60. 67.
    The latter is also cited by J. Doležal, Masarykova cesta životem (2 vols, Brno, 1920–21), I, p. 51.Google Scholar
  61. 70.
    Masaryk, Americké přednášky (Prague, 1929), pp. 90–2.Google Scholar
  62. 79.
    The last sentence, from the speech of 22 February, was given in Masaryk, Rakouská zahraniční politika a diplomatic (Prague, 1911), p. 75Google Scholar
  63. 86.
    Masaryk, Světová revoluce (Prague, 1925), p. 40;Google Scholar
  64. The Making of a State, Memories and Observations, 1914–1918 (London, 1927), pp. 46–7.Google Scholar
  65. 93.
    Gustav Kolmer, Parlament und Verfassung in Oesterreich (Vienna, 1908–10), Vol. 8, pp. 25–6.Google Scholar
  66. 94.
    Karel Pichlík, Zahraniční odboj 1914–1918 bez legend (Prague, 1968), pp. 26, 36–8.Google Scholar
  67. 97.
    Kamil Krofta, Politická postava Karla Kramáře (Prague, 1930), pp. 422–4.Google Scholar
  68. 99.
    B. Šantrůček, Masaryk a Klofáč (Prague, 1938), pp. 389–97;Google Scholar

Copyright information

© H. Gordon Skilling 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Gordon Skilling
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations