Early life, education and social contacts of the Czech-born Egyptologist Jaroslav Černý (who identified himself as a citizen of Czechoslovakia in his lifetime) are shown in the context of his family history, social expectations and developing academic practices in Austria-Hungary and early Czechoslovakia. Černý’s family aspired to be considered middle class in terms of social interaction, although they lived in straitened circumstances exacerbated by the economic austerity of the First World War era. Černý himself trained as a Classical scholar and later as an Egyptologist at Prague University, but did not fit the role model combining a teaching career (which offered sustenance) with a university Privatdozent role (which offered participation in the academic community), which was the practice accepted in his teachers’ generation. Instead, he embarked on a career in financial services, alongside pursuit of his academic studies that soon encompassed major European museum collections with Egyptian exhibits and put him in contact with the international Egyptological community. His solution was appreciated by his sponsors, including major political and financier figures of the then Czechoslovakia, as being practical as well as showing single-minded determination. It is also suggested that the skills developed during his years in portfolio work were later applied to his research. Translated by Hana Navrátilová and Paul Sinclair and Překlad redumé: Hana Navrátilová and Paul Sinclair
Different European states had different attitudes towards Jews and their social standing. In the Habsburg monarchy, several hundred people of the Jewish faith were ennobled between 1789 and 1918 (both in Austria and later in Hungary), while Jews were granted equal social status in 1867. In Prussia the social status of Jews had improved since the rule of Frederick II and in 1812 they were able to become Prussian citizens. However, Jewish emancipation reached a high point in July 1869 when a law on equal religious rights was declared in Prussia as well as in all the states of the North German Confederation. However, in Prussia the issue of granting aristocratic titles to people of the Jewish faith or of Jewish origin was, of course, more vexed and the ennoblement of these people was very rare.
The study aims at presenting the development of research on the upper level of bourgeois society in Czech historiography. It focuses on the comparison of crucial terms used in these discussions, such as patriciate, notables and elites., Josef Kadeřábek., and Obsahuje seznam literatury
Kniha přináší interpretaci dvojice indoevropských mytologických témat s důrazem na jejich komplexní historický a sociálně-kognitivní kontext. Zvolený přístup umožňuje jak přehodnotit tradiční interpretaci všeobecně známého mytologického cyklu, tak i zároveň uvést mytologické téma dosud neuchopené. V první časti knihy je diskutována látka indoevropského stvořitelského mýtu. Závěrem je tvrzení, že protoindoevropský kulturní prostor pravděpodobně vznikl jako důsledek předhistorického kargo kultu. Předprotoindoevropští lovci-sběrači reagovali na příchod afroasijských farmářů způsobem připomínajícím chování moderních domorodých populací, náhle konfrontovaných s přítomností západního industriálního světa. Z toho důvodu jsou stěžejní témata a motivy indoevropského stvořitelského mýtu interpretovány jako možné relikty ideologie předprotoindoevropského kargo kultu. Druhá část knihy je věnována vymezení nové indoevropské mytologické struktury, takzvaného mýtu o honu na čarodějnice. Prostřednictvím analýzy rozličných lokálních podob příběhu o konfliktu elity s démonickým vojskem vedeným čarodějnicí je identifikován základní vzorec tohoto narativu. Jeho sémantika je následně interpretována jako produkt sociálních a rodových nastavení archaických indoevropských společností. ,In this book an interpretation of two Indo-European mythological themes within their complex context is presented. Especially historical and socio-cognitive aspects of their background are considered. By means of this approach an innovative interpretation of an otherwise traditional mythological structure is proposed as well as a new one introduced. In the first part of the book the matter of well-known Indo-European creation myth is discussed. It is hypothetically concluded that Proto-Indo-European cultural area originated in prehistoric Cargo Cult. Pre-Proto-Indo-European hunters-gatherers reacted to the appearance of technologically advanced Afro-Asiatic farmers in a way similar to a response of traditional societies abruptly confronted with the presence of the western industrial world. Certain motives and themes of Indo-European creation myth are then interpreted as possible semantic relics of Pre-Proto-Indo-European Cargo Cult ideology.In the second part an attempt to present the brand new Indo-European mythological structure, so called witch-hunting myth, is made. Various local manifestations of narrative dealing with the conflict of elites with the demonic army led by a female witch are analyzed. A basic sujet pattern is identified and then interpreted as an outcome of archaic Indo-European societies' social and gender setting.
The paper offers a synthetic overview of the historical and social sciences writings on 19th and 20th century Romanian elites. Following the original local sociological constructs developed
during the interwar period, the early socialist regime stopped almost all research on the topic for the next two decades. The interest rose again slowly in the 1970s and 1980s, when preliminary investigations highlighted some of the future research subjects: intellectuals,
economic, and political elites. After 1989, historians were the first to enter the field, opening workshops on the previously mentioned categories, and more recently on ecclesiastical, military, and administrative elites. Social and political scientists followed shortly, focusing mainly – but not exclusively – on the socialist and post-socialist elites. Despite the flourishing period of the last two decades, and the generally positive trend, the historical research on elites in Romania produced mainly empirical studies. The methodological and theoretical framework was left unapproached, partly due to a lack of tradition, partly because of the low level of collaboration between historians and social scientists.