Model státu středoevropského typu: koncept na pomezí tradice a inovace (Ke kontinuitě a diskontinuitě v české historiografii po r. 1948)

Model of the Central European Medieval State: between innovation and tradition? Towards the continuity and discontinuity in history of Czech historiography after 1948

Author introduces his text with discussing the role of older generations of historians who never were members of Communist Party, though kept or reached important positions in a system of "new communistic research", and position of new generation of young communists who didn't hesitate their contacts with the Communist party to build their careers. Although the author acknowledges the discontinuities in the development of the historiography after 1948, he also emphasizes the factors that enable us to see the historiography in Czechoslovakia as continuous – apart from the personal continuity we can follow not just the theoretical attempts to justify the common roots of "burgeois" and "Marxist" historiography based on generally accepted techniques of historiography, but also continuity in studied topics. Within this environment the membership in Communist party and knowledge of Marxist orthodoxy were not the only preconditions of the success and we can easily follow the struggles between different fractions within the historiographical field. František Graus and his career is very good example of this situation.
It was František Graus, who built the foundations of the concept of specific model of the state in Central Europe in early middle ages (10th – 12th c.). Following text is focused on the analysis of the language of his theses and thesis of his pupils (D. Třeštík) and their contemporaries (R. Nový) who took the model over and helped to develop it. The analysis demonstrates that the authors shared the idea of centralized power represented by strong "avant-garde" ("družina", retinue) that through the planed actions organizes the social space. Author also demonstrates the early success of this model in Czech historiography and suggest for better understanding of this success to focus further research on communicative channels of the historiography in Communist era.