Resistance, Collaboration, Adaptation… Some Notes on the Research of the Czech Society in the Protectorate

Resistance, Collaboration, Adaptation… Some Notes on the Research of the Czech Society in the Protectorate Stanislav Kokoška Following the establishment of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, the population of the Czech Lands was divided into three basic categories. Germans, the high- est category, became full Reich citizens; Czechs, who according to the Nazi le- gal expert Wilhelm Stuckart “were rather inhabitants of a peculiar kind”1 made up the second category; and fi nally in a third category were the Jews, to whom the Nuremberg Laws were soon applied and who therefore had no citizen rights. The fates of these population groups diverged and took different courses depending on the changing character of Nazi occupation policy and the restrictive measures introduced during the war. Czech historiography has yet to engage with questions of social change during the Second World War in any comprehensive way. For many years Czech historiography of the period focused rather narrowly on the repressive basis and policies of the Nazi occupying power and on the theme of the Czech resistance 1 KÁRNÝ, Miroslav – MILOTOVÁ, Jaroslava: Anatomie okupační politiky hitlerovského Německa v Protektorátu Čechy a Morava [Anatomy of the Occupation Policy of Germany in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia]. In: HERMAN, Karel (ed.): Sborník k prob- lematice dějin imperialismu [Collection on the Theme of the History of Imperialism], vol. 21: Anatomie okupační politiky hitlerovského Německa v „Protektorátu Čechy a Morava“. Dokumenty z období říšského protektora Konstantina von Neuratha [Anatomy of the Occu- pation Policy of Hitler’s Germany in the “Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia”. Docu- ments from the Time Period of Reichsprotektor Konstantin von Neurath]. Praha, Ústav československých a světových dějin ČSAV 1987, document no. 2, pp. 4–17. Resistance, Collaboration, Adaptation... 55 movement. The fi rst more ambitious attempt to deal with the economic and social developments in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was Václav Král’s three-volume Otázky hospodářského a sociálního vývoje v českých zemích 1938–1945 [Questions of Economic and Social Development in the Czech Lands 1938–1945] published over the years 1957–1959. Král marshalled a huge amount of mate- rial on the topic, especially on the development of industry in the Protectorate and the position of the working class, but he failed to rise above the ideological constraints and clichés of the time and the book has little value as historical interpretation. With the political and cultural thaw in the 1960s, the Czech historiography recovered somewhat from its earlier ideological tunnel vision in rela- tion to the Protectorate and managed to fi nd some new themes and new approaches to method and interpretation. Historians continued to focus primarily on the history of the resistance, but the spectrum of research came to include the history of Pro- tectorate government,2 the Protectorate press,3 Czech fascism4 and the genocide of the Czech Jews.5 Jan Tesař’s articles for example touched on questions of public opinion in the Protectorate,6 and others developed the theme of economic development in the years of the Second World War.7 The study of the topics raised in the 1960s continued, albeit in limited scope and more diffi cult conditions, during the “normalisation” regime, with the focus on such topics as the education system in the Protectorate8 or economic history.9 Furthermore, the research went deeper in some areas and included history 2 See e.g. ŠISLER, Stanislav: Příspěvek k vývoji a organizaci okupační správy v českých zemích v letech 1939–1945 [Paper on the Development and Organisation of the Occupa- tion Government in the Czech Lands 1939–1945]. In: Sborník archivních prací, vol. 13, no. 2 (1963), pp. 46–95. 3 See e.g. PASÁK, Tomáš: Problematika protektorátního tisku a formování tzv. skupiny ak- tivistických novinářů na počátku okupace [The Protectorate Press and Formation of the So- called Group of Activist Journalists at the Beginning of the Occupation]. In: Příspěvky k dějinám KSČ, vol. 11, no. 1 (1967), s. 52–80. 4 See e.g. PASÁK: Vývoj Vlajky v období okupace [The Development of Vlajka in the Period of the Occupation]. In: Historie a vojenství, vol. 10, no. 5 (1966), pp. 846–895. 5 See especially LAGUS, Karel – POLÁK, Josef: Město za mřížemi [City behind Bars]. Praha, Baset 1964. 6 TESAŘ, Jan: O metodě historického výzkumu veřejného mínění společnosti pod nacis- tickým režimem [On a Method of Historical Research into Public Opinion under the Nazi Regime]. In: Historie a vojenství, vol. 10, no. 1 (1966), pp. 83–97. 7 See especially PRŮCHA, Václav: Změny v sociální struktuře československé společnosti v letech 1938–45 [Changes in the Social Structure of Czechoslovak Society 1938–45]. Praha, Vy- soká škola ekonomická 1970. 8 See e.g. PASÁK, T.: Organizační a správní změny v českém školství v období nacistické okupace [Organizational and Administrative Changes in the Czech Education System during the Nazi Occupation]. In: VEBR, Lubomír (ed.): In memoriam Zdeňka Fialy: Z pomocných věd historických. Praha, Univerzita Karlova 1978, pp. 215–257. 9 Cf. e. g. GROBELNÝ, Andělín: Národnostní politika nacistů a český průmysl: Se zvláštním zřetelem k Moravě a Slezsku [Nazi Ethnic Policy and the Czech Industry: With a Special Em- phasis on Moravia and Silesia]. Ostrava, Profi l 1989. 56 Czech Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. I of industrial concerns,10 total labour mobilisation11 and other general features of Nazi occupation policy12 including the functioning of the Nazi apparatus of repression.13 In the 1990s research on the Protectorate broadened out again to include (apart from some specialized urban history)14 the systematic study of the Jewish experience and the Roma question in the Protectorate period, i.e. themes that in the years of “normalisation” had been pushed back to the margin of historical scholarship. Post-1989, however, the focus was primarily on the subject of the Czech-German relationship and its eventual denouement in the postwar transfer of the Germans out of Czecho- slovakia. Only two publications departed strikingly from this prevalent research trend: a collection of originally samizdat articles by Jiří Doležal on Czech culture under the Protectorate, now published in book form,15 and a monographic treatment of everyday life in the Protectorate co-authored by Jan Gebhart and Jan Kuklík.16 Not even the latter work, however, offered any major methodological advance in research on the history of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. It was a popularising, narrative account of a few themes from Protectorate history, and in any case did not deal with the last two years of the Protectorate and the radical social changes resulting from total mobilisation. The present state of historical knowledge and current directions in research are tellingly refl ected in a synthesis of Czechoslovak history 1938–1945 published in 2006 and 2008, again by the authorial duo Jan Gebhart and Jan Kuk- lík.17 The book is clearly dominated by interest in political history, which takes up a major part of the chapters devoted to the domestic and foreign resistance. This is why Detlef Brandes, reviewing the book, not only criticises the authors for lack of chronological balance (as has become a habit, substantially fewer pages are 10 See e.g. FRANĚK, Otakar: Dějiny koncernu brněnské Zbrojovky [History of the Brno Zbro- jovka Arms Factory Concern], vol. 3: Koncern brněnské Zbrojovky v letech 1939–1945 [Brno Zbrojovka Arms Factory Concern 1939–1945]. Brno, Blok 1973. 11 See especially MAINUŠ, František: Totálně nasazeni (1939–1945) [The Totally Mobilised (1939-1945)]. Praha, Mladá fronta 1974. 12 See e.g. KÁRNÝ, Miroslav: K politické autonomii Konstantina von Neuratha [On the Politi- cal Autonomy of Konstantin von Neurath]. In: Sborník k dějinám imperialismu, vol. 18. Pra- ha, Ústav československých a světových dějin ČSAV 1985, pp. 241–293 and other articles by the same author. 13 See especially SLÁDEK, Oldřich: Zločinná role gestapa: Nacistická bezpečnostní policie v českých zemích 1938–1945 [The Criminal Role of the Gestapo: Nazi Security Police in the Czech Lands 1938–1945]. Praha, Naše vojsko 1986. 14 Cf. e.g. the excellent edition of Vojtěch Šustek and Alena Míšková Josef Pfi tzner a protektorát- ní Praha v letech 1939–1945 [Josef Pfi tzner and Prague during the Protectorate 1939–1945], vol. 1–2. Praha, Archiv hlavního města Prahy 2000 and Scriptorium 2001. 15 DOLEŽAL, Jiří: Česká kultura za protektorátu: Školství, písemnictví, kinematografi e [Czech Culture under the Protectorate: Education, Literature, Cinematography]. Praha, Národní fi lmový archiv 1996. 16 GEBHART, Jan – KUKLÍK, Jan: Dramatické i všední dny protektorátu [Dramatic and Ordi- nary Days of the Protectorate]. Praha, Themis 1996. 17 GEBHART – KUKLÍK: Velké dějiny Zemí koruny české [History of the Lands of the Bohemi- an Crown], vol. XVa and XVb: 1938–1945. Praha – Litomyšl, Paseka 2006 and 2008. Resistance, Collaboration, Adaptation... 57 devoted to the period from the summer of 1942 to the summer of 1944), but also argues that Czech historiography has still in practice failed to explore “everyday life in the Czech Lands or the opinions and moods of that great majority of the population that neither collaborated nor took part in the Resistance.”18 Protectorate Society as a Subject of Research It is generally true that in itself political history does not provide a suffi cient expla- nation of historical events. By its very focus on key fi gures at the summit of political decision-making it tends to eliminate from the account all other actors, who are consigned to the position of the anonymous homogenous mass. Historical change thus tends to be reduced to a mere clash of ideas embodied in the thoughts, beliefs and actions of leading personalities.

Load more