THE ROLE OF EDUCATION AND
UNIVERSITIES IN MODERNIZATION
PROCESSES IN CENTRAL AND
SOUTH - EASTERN EUROPEAN
COUNTRIES IN 19™ AND 20™ CENTURY
IQBHDOdA
VPOGLEDI

The Role of Education and Universities
in Modernization Processes in Central
and South-Eastern European Counties
in 19th and 20th Century
Edited by
Peter Vodopivec
and
Aleš Gabrič
Ljubljana 2011
© Institut za novejšo zgodovino, 2011
Editors: Peter Vodopivec and Aleš Gabrič
Publishers: Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino, Ljubljana
Zentrüm für Soziale Innovation Wien — Avstrijski znanstveni
institut v Ljubljani
Layout and typesetting: Barbara Bogataj Kokalj
Printed by: Medium d.o.o.
Print run: 400
CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji
Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana
378.4:316.42(4)«18/19«(082)
94(4)«18/19«(082)
The ROLE of Education and Universities in Modernization
Processes in Central and South-Eastern European Countries in 19th
and 20th Century / edited by Peter Vodopivec and Aleš Gabrič. -
Ljubljana : Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino : Avstrijski znanstveni
institut ; Wien : Zentrum für Soziale Innovation, 2011. - (Zbirka
Vpogledi ; 3)
ISBN 978-961-6386-31-9
1. Vodopivec, Peter
258141440
© 2011, Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication maybe reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the permission of the Publisher.
I I I I I I □ I ■
Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino
CONTENTS
5 Peter Vodopivec and Aleš Gabrič, Introduction
7 Miroslav Polzer, Universities and Societal Change in Central and South-
Eastern European Countries - Yesterday - Today - Tomorrow
9 Diana Mishkova, Education and Universities in the Modernization and
Europeanization Processes in South-Eastern Europe: Some Reflections on
Interpretation and Methodology
19 Iskra Iveljić, The Role o f Education in Modernizing Croatia in the 2nd Half o f
the 19th Century
35 Ljubinka Trgovčević, High School, University o f Belgrade and Modernization
o f Serbia (1863-1914)
53 Roumiana Preshlenova, Emancipation through Education: Some Bulgarian
Experience since the 19th Century
63 Peter Vodopivec, Educated Elites in Slovene Regions before WWI - between
National Aspirations and Social and Political Conservativism
73 Svetlana Slapšak, Thinking Big in Vienna: Balkan Students Inventing
Yugoslavia before WWI
83 Peter Urbanitsch, The Creation o f Higher Technical and Vocational Schools in
Cisleithania in the last Decades o f the 19th Century (with special regard to the
South-Slav Lands). An Instrument fo r Modernizing the Austrian Educational
System?
103 Žarko Lazarevič, Education and Economic Development in Slovenia (Some
Observations up to WWII)
115 Ernst Bruckmüller, Der Zugang zu den Hochschulstudien im alten Österreich
139 Predrag Markovič, University EducatiomA Shortcut to Modernity or a Blind
Alee? Student Political Activism as an Agent o f Modernization
153 Aleš Gabrič, From Gender Segregation to Gender Equality in the School
System
163 Mitja Sunčič, Towards Educational Typology o f Slovene Industrial
Entrepreneurs
181 Željko Oset, Acceptance o f Modern Scientific Achievements in Slovene
Communication Network. Example o f Evolution Theory and the Formation
Process o f Slovene Technical Terminology
199 Notes on Contributors
Peter Vodopivec and Aleš Gabrič
Introduction
For some time, the researchers studying various aspects of social and
economic development in the 19th and 20th century have been pointing at the
crucial role of education, schooling system and high-education institutions in
the processes of social and economic modernisation and political and social
démocratisation. These processes could not take place without the spread of
literacy, professionalization and communication using written language and
media; and neither without the formation of educated and business elites,
which became an indispensable dynamic factor of social, economic and cultural
changes. In particular in the countries and nations with only weak urban middleclass
population and slow development of non-agrarian economy (small trades
and industry), educational institutions and universities were one of the most
important factors of social mobility and transformation, which paved the way
for the emergence of urbanized middle-class population and modern social and
economic flows. In the 19th century, a large part of higher-education and university
students were schooled outside their home environment; until 1918 students in
the Habsburg monarchy were mostly schooled at the university centres within
the monarchy, whereas the students from the South-Eastern European countries
attended also Western European universities. Afterwards, they all conveyed their
knowledge and economic, social and political development views to the local
and wider national environment. With gradual establishing of higher-education
and university institutions in the environments and countries where they had not
existed before, new scientific and university centres started to emerge in Central
and South-Eastern Europe in the second half of the 19th century; they accelerated
the formation of educated elites and encouraged their modernisation efforts.
This publication includes the contributions presented at the symposium
“The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization and Europeanization
Processes in Central and South-Eastern European Countries in the 19th and 20th
Century” organised by the Institute of Contemporary History and the Austrian
Science and Research Liaison Office in Ljubljana on 26 and 27 November 2009. The
main purpose of the symposium was to present and compare the latest research
on this subject and encourage discussions on how modernity was perceived,
understood and put into effect by the educated elites in the Central European
and South Eastern European countries with in many aspects different, but also
comparable social, cultural and national historical experiences. The diversity of
approaches proposed by the authors of the papers clearly reveals the complexity
of this subject, which could be studied from many various perspectives and in
various manners.
The organisation of the symposium and publishing of the collection of papers
was made possible by the financial support of the Austrian Science and Research
Liaison Office in Ljubljana and its director Dr. Miroslav Polzer, Slovenian
Research Agency and the Institute of Contemporary History in Ljubljana.


Diana Mishkova
Education and Universities in the
Modernization and Europeanization
Processes in South-Eastern Europe:
Some Reflections on Interpretation and
Methodology
The role of education and universities in the modernization processes in the
Central and South-Eastern Europe has often been taken for granted and selfevident.
The precedence of this association can be approached from two different
angles: from the point ofview of the state which created the institutional framework
and set the direction for the operation of the educational establishment, and from
the point of view of the university graduates’ who saw their function either as
(high) state employees and social transformers ‘from above’ or, alternatively, as
critics of the ‘reckless’ Europeanization and state-led modernization. What was
common to these different viewpoints was their Western referentiality: in their
crux was the question about the transfer and re-conceptualization of modernity
and Europeanness, which in turn raised the critical issue about ‘foreign forms’
and ‘local substance’, hence about authenticity and identity. That applied to both
imperial and national frameworks, even though it will be clear that the locus
classicus of the education-modernization nexus was the nation-state. In what
follows, I will attempt to take stock of these different aspects of the problem with
the aim to chart some of what seems to me to be the major intersections between
education and modernization as an area of research.
I.
As a top-down transformation meant to trigger emulation of and facilitating
‘catching-up’ with the ‘advanced’ Western world, modernization depended heavily
on such powerful instruments for social engineering as education. To begin with,
the emerging nation-states, following in the footsteps of or in reaction to the
policies of the erstwhile modernizing empires, had major stakes in promoting
modern education, educational institutions and legislation for the sake of their
proper functioning.1
Education was one of the first, if not the very first, modernized social
sphere where Western-European standards were adopted and institutionalized.
Thus, education and universities themselves were among the first ‘modern and
‘European institutions in Central and South-Eastern Europe. The consistently
high number of state-sponsored scholarships in foreign schools and universities
prior to the establishment of national universities, and later the priority which the
state attributed to the creation of nationalized networks of secondary and high
schools qua state institution, also bear witness to the key position assigned to
education (esp. to higher education) for the cultivation of a ‘state-building elite.’ It
was not just a bureaucratic elite, but one saddled with the task to institutionalize
and nationalize sciences, thus providing a proper - that is, ‘rational’, ‘scientific’,
‘legitimate’ - basis for the nationalization and modernization of society.2
Closely related to that was the disproportionate role of the (university)
educated elites’ in defining the course of the state-led modernization and the
boundaries of the community entitled to it: in “disciplining the people internally,
and enforcing the rules and boundaries of the constituent people”.3 This role was
played out primarily in two directions.
The first involved a direct political commitment. In Central and South-
Eastern Europe, intellectual professionalism entailed - and indeed made sense
above all else in terms of - the ability to win over and exert political power and
responsibility. This was true not only for relatively egalitarian societies, such as
the Serbian and the Bulgarian, but also for those endowed with traditional elites,
such as the Romanian and the Greek, where modern higher education served as
a vehicle for smooth transition of political power from the hands of the boyars or
local tzakia into those of their (mostly foreign-educated) sons, from whose ranks
the incipient national bourgeoisie was basically recruited.4 Modern political
1 While being perfectly aware of the significant role of education and universities for the
modernization of multiethnic empires such as the Habsburg and the Ottoman in the nineteenth
and the early twentieth centuries, here I shall focus primarily on the national (and crossnational)
contexts as this will allow me to trace with bigger clarity and consistency the abovementioned
aspects of the relationship.
2 During the first two decades following the liberation, almost every second Bulgarian studying
abroad received state support under one form or another, and the number of those among
them who attended higher schools was 3 times higher than the state-supported secondary or
professional students. The situation was comparable to that in post-1830 Serbia. The state thus
not only stimulated, it directed and controlled the flow, destination, and disciplinary profile of
those entitled to its support.
3 Ronald Suny - Michael Kennedy (eds.), Intellectuals and the Articulation o f the Nation (Ann
Arbor, 1999), p. 2.
4 A Romanian historian Elena Siupur had studied in detail this process of ‘re-qualifying’, via
education in Western universities, of the traditional social elite into intellectual elite “as a major
vehicle for preserving [its] political power” in the Romanian nineteenth-century context (Elena
Siupiur, “Les intellectuels roumains du XIXe siècle et la réorganisation de la classe politique et
du système institutionnel”, Revue Roumaine d ’Histoire XXXIV 1995, pp. 1-2, 75-95).
power and government, state and civil service became and for long remained the
privileged mainstay of the South-Eastern European intelligentsia. (Its autonomous
and critical function vis-à-vis the state, on the other hand, only gradually took
place and became more visible after the World War I, but never came to dominate
its ethos or employment as a social group.) Thus, both in terms of the place
assigned to the educated class in society and in view of the role it came to play,
the advent of modernity marked a radical transformation of its previous status
and function. To a large extent, Central and South-Eastern European projects of
modernity were those of the state-nurtured and state-oriented intelligentsia.
The second direction has everything to do with the double mediating function
which South-Eastern European university training and personnel saw as their
duty to perform: between the local (popular tradition and identity) and the
universal (modernity), and between the authority of Western expertise (think,
for example, of the Western contribution to ethno-sciences like Albanology,
Turkology, etc.) and the local ‘knowledge.’
The intimate connection between the professionalization of sciences and
the forging of a modern understanding of the nation and national belonging
exemplifies precisely this conceptual and cognitive transfer of modernity
through the mediation of education and science. The national disciplines’ from
archaeology and linguistics to anthropology and sociology became “necessary
tools of modern social solidarity and citizenship [without which] there could,
in a very literal sense, be no nation...”5 There are many good reasons to argue,
together with Anthony Smith, that “[t]he nation can only be imagined through
the medium of science.” Positivist criticism of romantic nationalism, which
came to a head in the second half of the nineteenth and the turn of the twentieth
centuries, on the other hand, coincided with the rise of biology, social psychology
and phenomenology in the social sciences (Freud, Nietzsche, Bergson) and thence
in politics, thus underpinning the crisis of rational liberalism and the beginning
o f‘post-rational’ politics. Biological determinants and naturalistic understanding
of all forms of social organization, peoples and states included, were largely the
product of these university-nourished counter-Romantic scientific trends. (Their
organizational hub was academic and intellectual networks, often gravitating
around authoritative scholars and disciplinary paradigms - an illuminating case
in point at the time discussed is the Leipzig-based German ethno-psychologist
Wilhelm Wundt, whose Balkan disciples formed a numerous cohort of highly
influential intellectuals with a conspicuous input in the modernity debates
between the two World Wars - which will be discussed further down.) At the
hands of the conservative Romanian Junimists the critique of the eclectics of
romantic science opened the way for an ethno-cultural understanding of the
nation; at the hands of democratically-minded intellectuals, such as Bogdan
5 Anthony Smith, The Ethnic Origins o f Nations (London, 1999), pp. 171-172.
Hasdeu in Romania or Ivan Shishmanov in Bulgaria, the democratization of
political life was associated with the rise of what they called “popular sciences”
such as ethnography and linguistics. There existed, on top of that, an intense
competition among disciplines for control over the symbolic representation of
the nation.
This being said, the issue about the relationship between education,
intelligentsia and modernization can only be treated diachronically. In the early
phases of national consciousness-raising and state-building, the freedom of
academics and intellectuals to legislate with impunity on the incipient nation was
at its highest. As later on intellectuality was becoming more widely dispersed
and mass politics and social nationness were taking root, this freedom was being
reduced.6 But academics and intellectuals remained, nonetheless, as convinced as
before of the political value of scholarship.
Finally, the singular notion commonly attached to ‘modernity’ could be
strongly misleading. There were as a matter of fact various competing notions
of modernization and Europeanization - different modernities and Europes,
that is to say. The examples here are numerous and, arguably, obvious: it is well
known that the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries signify a period of intense
debates over the nature and purpose of modernization. Any discussion of the
role of education and university in the modernization and Europeanization in
the Central and South-Eastern European societies ought to be - for that reason
- also a discussion of the transmission of knowledge and the thematization of
sciences in an emphatically transnational key. This would mean to see education
and university as steering the cultural transfer between ‘core’ and ‘peripheral’
cultures, as crucially partaking in the mechanisms of transmission, exchange and
interaction of ideas, paradigms and institutions across national borders, and as
being highly instrumental for the local translations and adaptations of intellectual
‘imports’.
II.
For all that I consider the processes of transmission, domestication and
subversion of notions of modernity and Europeanness - be them political,
ideological, economic, or conceptual - via schooling to be of central importance
to the theme of this symposium.
The process of cultural negotiation between the nineteenth- and twentiethcentury
European ‘core’ and ‘peripheries’ has been studied from various
perspectives. There is a series of works documenting the interaction of a given local
tradition with the centre mostly by scholars stemming from the respective East-
6 Ronald Suny - Michael Kennedy, op. cit., pp. 404-405.
Central or South-Eastern European cultures but sometimes also from academic
centers of the core’, who had surveyed the reception of ideas and institutions
coming from their respective countries. Many individual cases have already been
studied to some extent, the typical research projects being aimed at documenting
the itineraries of, say, Romanian or Bulgarian students in Germany in the latenineteenth
century, etc. But we have still not had more synthetic works since the
mid-twentieth century phase of the comparativist research, which was marked by
a strong sense of cultural superiority on the part of the European ‘great cultures’
and which commonly described the process of reception in unilinear terms.
With this in mind, what still remains on the agenda can, in the opinion of this
author, be summarized in the following few points.
First is the need to expose the inherent ambiguity of the actual intellectual
interaction in Europe, where the experience of the distance between the centres
and the ‘margins’ created a fascination but also certain uneasiness and resentment.
Much as the West had ‘framed’ Eastern Europe since the Age of Enlightenment,
the ‘Other Europe’ was creating Western Europe as the core’ where ‘things
happened’ and ‘universalities’ were born. The constitution of France or Germany
as universal Significant Others, for example, was anything but a single-handed
process: as a leading 1848 conspirator and later prime minister of the unified
Romanian Principality Dimitrie Brätianu put it, the pilgrims of any race or
faith who wanted “to pay homage to the Man in his full grandeur” should be
heading for France - “the one sacred land of all.” But such myths often coexisted
with invectives: the admiration for the universalizing power of a core culture
often alternated with resentment over its arrogance, ever insufficient support or
Realpolitik betrayals of its ‘universal’ values. More crucially and consequentially:
since the last third of the nineteenth century, and especially during the interwar
period, the West’s critical thought coalesced with a growing frustration on the
progressivist comparisons with, and ‘importations’ of, ‘Europeanness’, which
nurtured self-perceptions of ‘belatedness,’ ‘backwardness,’ ‘catching-up’, to
engender strong anti-European and anti-modernist local currents emphasizing
the autochthonist singularity, temporality and self-sufficiency of national culture
and development.
Modern education and university training in this sense were anything
but straightforwardly and unambiguously associated with a Western-type
modernization and Europeanization. They are better seen as providing the
modern framework of knowledge transfer and interaction which also made
possible the articulation and the trans-national validation of autochthonist
stances and autarchic policies - either as a form of ressentiment or by way of
assimilating Western currents which were critical of modernity; or, as most
frequently happened to be the case, both. The interwar history of Central
and South-Eastern Europe abounds with scholars-cum-politicians (or state
functionaries) exemplifying this relationship.
On the other hand, pursuing the ‘horizontal’ dimensions of the interaction,
such as the role of intra-regional mediation and transfer or the mechanisms
whereby some of the intellectual and ideological currents became paradigmatic
for certain similar cases, could provide us with a more sensitive picture of the
multifarious dialogue between European ‘cores’ and ‘peripheries’, as well as among
the different ‘peripheries.’ All in all, in mapping external ‘influences’, we would
do better if we avoided a simple (potentially essentialist) ‘borrowing’ model.
Instead, we should try to reveal the strategic way in which ‘marginal’ thinkers and
academic communities were using the ideological and scientific discourse of the
more or less ‘canonized’ West to solve local problems and appease local concerns.
The peculiarity of thinking at the margins is, probably, that it consciously seeks
resemblance to the ‘core’, Western theories that legitimize the Central- and
Eastern-European scholars as scholars, while trying to use the same theories for
purposes not necessarily commensurate with the original ones.
Thirdly, while every national academic tradition had established certain
interpretations of the various educational and cultural institutions - German,
French, British - which influenced their development, there has not been any
attempt to put these pictures together and establish the trans-national influence
of certain schools, figures or intellectual milieux from the perspective of an
encompassing European intellectual history. For such an agenda, two concepts
seem to be of central importance: transfer and networks.
Informing the emphasis on the concept of transfer is an increasing awareness
of the need to address the history of political and social modernity and thinking
in terms of a continuous dialogue between core’ and ‘peripheral’ traditions.7
Although in differing proportions, what we are confronted with under the
headline of conceptual or paradigm transfer has never been a one-way impact
(as commonly implied by notions such as ‘influence’, ‘import’, ‘assimilation’) but
a circulation of ideas where complex trajectories of interaction and modes of
involvement of the ‘recipient’ culture occupy the centre stage. Thus viewed, the
question is not one of how faithfully a ‘Western European’ practice, school of
thought, or institution had been assimilated outside its place of origin and in
this way resolving the issue of its ‘validity’ respectively. The question, the series
of questions as a matter of fact, should be about why certain ideas, currents,
paradigms etc. became paradigmatic for a variety of structural cases; which
were the versions or elements selected for local implementation; what were the
expectations pinned on them; with what success; and how should we account for
7 Transfer in this context would concern, e.g.: Professionalization and institutionalization of
sciences; Intellectual transfer: schools of thought, paradigms, concepts, scholarly and belleslettres
literature, major protagonists; Institutional transfer, with a special emphasis on state- and
education-building institutions; Notions of modern government and society: political transfer;
transfer of ideologies, theories, and models; Concepts of Europe and European belonging, of
center and periphery, notions of historical regions, etc.
the similarities and the differences in all that. The argument, in other words, calls
for bigger attention to the local articulations of a universalist philosophy or a
scientific paradigm, which is to say, doing justice to the autonomy of political and
cultural values and the timing of cultural transfer but also to social institutions
and cultural-political contexts.
This would not relativize, on the other hand, the disparity in radiation
and reception between the two ends of the cultural interaction. A number of
asymmetries - in vocabulary, conceptual creativity, innovation and authority -
constrained the non-Western societies’ intellectual autonomy. Paradigms were
being imported and then adjusted, sometimes beyond similarity, but always
claiming resemblance to the original, thus divesting local cultures of generative
and cognitive capability. And yet, if only by evoking the perennial battles over
the meaning and purpose of modernization, a great many of which were fought
by academics (cum intellectuals or politicians), not infrequently ex cathedra,
and almost all of which drew upon the authority of professional knowledge,
the cognitive gains of reversing the perspective and seeing Southeast-European
academia not as object but as agent of cultural attitudes and policies become
obvious.
In this sense, the channels mediating Western academic and intellectual
transfer constitute another key aspect. On the one hand, such intermediaries had
much to do with the hierarchies among the core cultures, particularly in terms of
the institutional models adopted for local implementation. Well-known is the role
of the Vojvodina Serbs schooled in the Habsburg lyceums and universities, whose
political culture and ideals for good government drew heavily on the cameralist’
tradition and bureaucratic institutional models, in setting up and staffing the
first modern governing institutions in Serbia. The oligarchic “Constitutionalist
regime”, which they upheld between 1842 and 1868, epitomized these Central
European values and models, as did the first liberal constitution of the Serbian
Principality of 1869, based largely on the (conservative) Prussian constitution
of 1850. Comparable was the role of the Albanians schooled in Southern Italy
for the crystallization of the first notions of modern rule among the Albanians
in the Empire. The close Bulgarian connections to the Serbian and Romanian
nationalists and liberals occured around the universities in Bucharest, Belgrade,
and Novi Sad. The Greek schools in Athens and Smyrna, Chios and Andros, as
well as the Serbian schools in Belgrade and Novi Sad deserve special mention in
this regard. Frequented by representatives of different nationalities, they played
a major role in the spread of new ideas and discoveries of the modern age, and
especially of French liberalism, throughout the Ottoman Empire.
Such intra-regional channels of transmission, moreover, often had a
determining impact on a country’s experience with modernity. The framework
for the entangled histories of the Greek and the Bulgarian nationalisms in the
first half of the nineteenth century was set by the Greek schools and academies;
it was the romantic Central European and Serbian, not the Western, scholarship
on Slavic history, languages and literature that defined the parameters of the
Bulgarians modern identity self-projection. And so on...
As for the educational or intellectual networks (or forms of socialization),
they acted as a sort of cultural-political République des Lettres on a trans-national
and trans-regional scale. Those that should specially concern us include: networks
built on a shared scholarly paradigm, intellectual authority, or joint schooling;
professional networks; personal networks; lobbyist (pressure) groups.
An important feature of all those networks and of the culture they disseminated
was their international, although not necessarily consensual, character. Quite often
their beginnings can be traced back to seminar courses and institutes in foreign
universities, around which widely international student communities took shape.
Their members could come from rival nationalist traditions, as was for example
the case with the University of Leipzig-based linguist and ethnographer of the
Balkans Gustav Weigands (1860-1931) Institute for Romanian Language (1893),
later transformed into an Institute for Balkan languages. Weigands seminars and
his establishment grew into veritable platforms for intraregional transfer: in the
Institute for Romanian Language, for example, Bulgarians studied Romanian
language and history and vice versa. The “Slavic Academic Society” (1878-
1898) was established by students in Leipzig University with the aim to foster
“the rapprochement among the Slav students living in Leipzig with the purpose
of exploring the life, literature and history of the Slav peoples”, while political
and social issues were excluded from the discussions.8 Staying with the German
examples, similar was the role played by the universities in Berlin (mainly by virtue
of the prominence of Slavic Studies there) and Munich (Byzantine Studies). Back
home the political and generally public role of the members of these networks
can hardly be exaggerated.9
In the earlier, nationally-awakening’ decades of the nineteenth century, such
educational, professional or personal networks of mostly lyceum or university
students often evolved into a wide international movement (or pressure group)
such as the liberal-romantic “Young Europe” movement (“Young Italy”, “Young
Czechs”, “United Serbian Youth”). The international nature of neither European
nationalism nor European liberalism or socialism could be fully understood
without considering the huge role of such ‘diasporic webs. Originally based
8 Veliko Jordanov, Laipzig i bulgarite [Leipzig and the Bulgarians] (Sofia, 1938), pp. 64-65, 75.
9 Out of 100 Bulgarian students who had attended or graduated from the University of Leipzig
between 1879 and 1899, 6 became ministers, 20 university professors, 35-40 high school
teachers, directors of secondary schools, or heads of departments and chief inspectors in the
Ministry of Education (see Veliko Jordanov, “Znachenieto na Laipzig za stopanskoto i kulturno
vuzrazhdane na bulgarite” [The Importance o f Leipzig fo r the Economic and Cultural Revival o f
the Bulgarians], YnunumeH npezned XL, 1941, p. 306.
on personal contacts and common intellectual socialization, their symbolic
magnetism and afterlife, as indicated by the much later “Young Turk” or “Young
Bosnia” movements for example, far surpassed the historical moment of their
first appearance on the political and ideological scene.
The record of (at least some) professional networks was no less impressive.
Paradoxically at first sight, ethnographers and folklorists - those whose
scientific’ findings, and often personal political involvement played a major role
in the new states’ validation of their national causes - sustained an unusually
wide international scholarly network and unusually intensive communication
between themselves, especially in the 1890s-1910s. Thus in collecting materials
for his ethnographic studies, Ivan D. Shishmanov (1862-1928), a founder of and
professor in Sofia University who had also served as a minister of education,
relied on and received the support of the leading regional scholars working in this
field - Nikolaos Politis (University of Athens), Bogdan P. Hasdeu and loan Bianu
(University of Bucharest), Milan Miličevič (Serbian Academy of Sciences) - even
if his interpretation did not necessarily agree with theirs.
The non-territorial and trans-national character of such networks needs to
be stressed especially as national historiographic canons, predictably, tend to
downplay it. More importantly still, taking full stock of such territorially floating
networks will make it possible to reveal the multi-layered scholarly, disciplinary
and intellectual interactions but also transfers of ‘modernity agendas’ across
national or even regional academic communities in their historical dynamism.
It would allow us to highlight the competition and interaction of different
universalist philosophies and modernities ‘exported’ from the West to the
European periphery. The intellectual and academic connections to France or
Germany, for example, often entailed rival political models and institutional
arrangements - e.g. republicanism vs. monarchism, social revolution vs. organic
evolution, liberalism vs. socialism - as well as competing alternative modernities.
Such a perspective, in other words, could help us re-conceptualise the shifting
divisions in Europe in the modern era by way of focusing on the historically
emerging networks of intellectual and political interaction and on the conditions
(institutional, structural, cultural-political) enabling cultural transfer.

Iskra Iveljić
The Role of Education in Modernizing
Croatia in the 2nd Half of the 19th Century
Historians are usually cautious scientists, careful not to simplify, sceptical of
too many generalizations and attentive to render the losers’ a well as the winners’
versions. Following this path I would like to hint at a dilemma to which I cannot
offer an unambiguous answer. Yet, I deem it quite important that a historian stays
well-aware of the intricacies and entanglements of the modernization theory.
When we discuss the modernization issue in the context of European history,
we are putting forward the Western European model/s and influences. Is it not
a way to project our present in the past? In this way, the search for pioneers
of modernization turns into the search for glorious ancestors and thus into
inventing our own tradition, to quote the famous phrase of E. J. Hobsbawm. We
are often keen on identifying our modern predecessors as early in the history
as possible and visualize modernization as a firm axis that connects our past,
present and future. This inevitably leads to simplification and reduction of the
past reality because we tend to identify and stress merely the processes, events or
personalities that bear significance to our own time, making the rest of the past a
foreign country.1 We revisit and repossess the past, only to subordinate it to our
present. Self-aggrandizement is inherent to that method and it often manifests
itself as overstressing of the importance of one’s own nation.2 A good example is
the interpretation of the Habsburg Monarchy, which was after 1918 often written
from the point of view of a particular nation or state. In other words, to deal
with my own nation and state, Croatian historiography sees Croatian history as
a centre, thus turning the Monarchy into its mere frame. Recently, the Habsburg
1 See David Lowenthal, The Past is a Foreign Country (London: Cambridge University Press, 1985).
2 Literature on this topic is abundant. I point to a rather personal article by Ferenc Glatz,
“Staat-Nation-Geschichtsschreibung”, in E. Busek.-G. Stourzh (eds.), Nationale Vielfalt und
gemeinsames Erbe in Mitteleuropa (Munich-Vienna, 1990), pp. 129-137.
legacy has been partly reinterpreted3 and thematized in the light of the broadened
European Union4.
Current political situation also plays a big role. The recent enlargement of
the EU has led to westernization of history, visible in the tendency to represent
the European history and identity as homogenous and Western Europe as the
nucleus of the whole European civilization. Many authors have warned against
this tendency. Wolfgang Schmale asserts that historians have constructed
common European structural elements even for the periods in which no
common European consciousness existed.5 Andreas Kappeler pleads for a greater
apprehension of the importance of Eastern Europe, and Gerald Stourzh ironically
comments that Europe does have its East6, just to mention some. A number of
other authors share these views.7
Still, this inevitable contamination of the past through elements of the present
does not mean that we should refrain from constructing bridges between the past
and the present.
*
Efforts of the reform elites during the Enlightenment to use education as an
instrument of progress are well known. Their general goals, such as dissemination
of knowledge and literacy were meant to change their recipients inwardly,
helping them to become better people and proper members of society. However,
educational reforms launched in the Habsburg Monarchy during enlightened
3 See Gary Cohen, “Nationalist Politics and the Dynamics of State and Civil Society in the
Habsburg Monarchy 1867-1914”, Central European History, Vol. 40, 2007; David Godsey,
Aristocratic Redoubt. The Austro-Hungarian Foreign Office on the Eve o f the First World War
(Indiana: Purdue University Press/West Laffayette, 1999). Others saw the fin de siècle crises of
identities as more intense in central European cities like Vienna, or even as a hint of postmodern
era. Jacques Le Rider, Das Ende der Illusion. Die Wiener Moderne und die Krisen der Identität
[German translation of Modernité viennoise et crises d'identité] (Vienna, 1990); Jean-Francois
Lyotard, Das postmoderne Wissen [German translation of La condition postmoderne] (Vienna,
1986).
4 Emil Brix, “Kakaniens Beitrag zur Erweiterung der Europäischen Union”, in Catherine
Bosshart-Pfluger et al. (eds.), Nation und Nationalismus in Europa. Kulturelle Konstruktion von
Identitäten. Festschrift fü r Urs Altermatt, (Stuttgart-Vienna, 2002), pp. 783-800.
5 Wolfgang Schmale, Geschichte Europas (Vienna-Köln-Weimar, 2001), pp. 13-15.
6 Andreas Kappeler, “Die Bedeutung der Geschichte Osteuropas für ein gesamteuropäisches
Geschichtsverständnis” in Gerald Stourzh (ed.), Annäherungen an eine europäische Geschichtsschreibung
(Vienna, 2002), pp. 43-55. Gerald Stourzh, “Statt eines Vorworts: Europa, aber wo
liegt es?”, in Gerald Stourzh (ed.), Annäherungen an eine europäische Geschichtsschreibung
(Vienna, 2002).
7 Norman Davies, Europe - A History., 2. ed. (London, 1997); Dan Diner, Das Jahrhundert
verstehen. Eine universalhistorische Deutung (Munich, 1999); E. J. Hobsbawm, “Die merkwürdige
Geschichte Europas”, in Wieviel Geschichte braucht die Zukunft?, German translation (Munich-
Vienna: Carl Hanser Verlag, 1998); Emil Brix, “Was bringt der Osten dem Westen? Der kulturellzivilisatorische
Beitrag Mittel- und Osteuropas für Europa”, in Enzyklopädie des Europäischen
Ostens (Klagenfort-Vienna-Ljubljana-Tuzla-Sarajevo, 2001), pp. 45-53.
absolutism did not encompass Croatia (and Hungary) to the same extent as
Austrian lands, so their practical results were rather meagre. Nevertheless, the
impetus towards secularization and the attitude that all children were entitled
to at least primary schooling regardless of their social, ethnic and confessional
status as well as gender, was a novelty. Of course, the same kind of education
was not on hand for all. According to Ratio educationum of 1777, there were
several categories of primary schools, the ones in the country lasted only one
year and provided pupils solely with basic skills of learning, writing, counting
and religious education. Most of the children did not attend school at all. The
major problems were poverty, lack of school buildings, educated teachers and
textbooks. Another impediment was the traditional understanding of education,
which did not allow introduction of new teaching methods and was still based
upon the primarily disciplinary role. In the country schools children of various
ages were all gathered in a single class, they did not have textbooks and learning
aids, and were mostly learning by heart, because little or no attention at all was
paid to explanatory methods. Since discipline and obedience were important
goals, physical punishment was regular. No wonder that few educated teachers
avoided country schools, where priests, retired soldiers or any available literate
person took their place.8 The situation in the town schools was better, but still far
from satisfactory.
The school practice in Croatia was in discrepancy with the evolution of
contemporary pedagogical ideas. The Enlightenment changed the attitude
towards children, and in the Habsburg Monarchy, the influence of German
enlightened philanthropists was felt. They promoted education in accordance
with the principles of humanity and childrens nature. Children should not be
suffocated through excess authority, teaching process must conform to childrens
age and it must have an amusing side in order to stimulate children’s interest and
curiosity. The result was also seen in children’s literature.9 The reform ideas that
promoted the new image of middle-class family and its values were subject to an
inherent criticism of nobility Since noblemen and priests were then still major
social forces, the reform ideas were not very welcome in the late 18th century
Croatia.
Even though new school-orders were introduced at the beginning of 19th
century (1806 Ratio educationis for Hungary), major reform impetus took
8 Syntehtical overview in Jaroslav Šidak, “Jedno stoljeće u razvoju hrvatskog školstva (1773-
1874)”, Zbornik za historiju školstva i prosvjete, 9, 1975, pp. 37-48. Basic documents: Antun
Čuvaj, Građa za povijest školstva Kraljevina Hrvatske i Slavonije od najstarijih vremena do
danas, vol. VII-X (Zagreb, 1911-1913).
9 One of the most popular books was Robinson der Jüngere by Johann Heinrich Campe, and
the journal Kinderfreund by Christian Felix Weisse. Even though a Kajkavian translation of
Campes book was published in Croatia (Anton Vranić, Mlaissi Robinzon (Zagreb, 1796)) the
translation of Weisse’s journal (Juraj Dijanić, Horvatzki detcepriatel (Zagreb, 1796)) never came
out of print.
place during the national revival («preporod») in the 1830s and 1840s. The
role of education in the land where over 90% of population were peasants
was tremendously important. Furthermore, heterogeneity of Croatian lands,
especially the non-existence of the language standard, turned education into
primary means to construct the modern nation. In the late 1830s and 1840s, a
lot was debated in the Croatian Sabor, among the priests and individual followers
of the «preporod» as to how to improve the school system. These debates were
often stirred by those in Hungary, resulting in Systema scholarum elementarium
(1845) which made elementary schooling obligatory and prolonged the duration
of country schools.
Major secondary schools were six-years “gymnasiums” in Zagreb, Varaždin,
Rijeka, Osijek, Karlovac and Požega, four of which belonged to Franciscans, who
often took over the former Jesuit institutions. “Gymnasiums” were elite schools
with classical and humanistic curriculum, which provided their pupils rather with
general knowledge than skills needed to exercise practical jobs. During the reign of
Joseph II, German language was introduced, but after his death Latin regained its
status. Yet, another language was being imposed since 1791 - namely Hungarian,
which in 1827 became an obligatory subject. Already in the late 18th century,
the majority of secondary school pupils came from the middle class, and about a
quarter of them from peasantry. Noblemen still prevailed in Zagreb and Varaždin.
Apart from secondary schools, there were a couple of vocational schools, such as
nautical school in Rijeka, but in general there were too few of them.
The highest school was the Zagreb Academy, originally a Jesuit institution.
Though it was granted privileges held by universities in 1669, higher Jesuit
authorities hindered the bestowal of academic titles and honours, probably in
an attempt to prevent competition to their other academies in the Monarchy.
The Academy was secularized during the reign of Maria Theresa, becoming
Regia scientiarium academia, offering courses in philosophy, law and theology.
The social structure of the Academy students during the «preporod» shows the
prevalence of middle-class over nobility. For example, in 1791-1830, 49% of 2191
philosophy students were of middle-class and 33% of peasant origin, but in the
period 1826-30, the percentage of the first category amounted to 62%. Despite
these facts one should not jump to conclusions of a rush oncoming of middleclass
society, since 63% of philosophy students chose to become priests.10 From
10 Jaroslav Šidak, “Regia Scientiarium Academia”, in Spomenica u povodu proslave 300. godišnjice
Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Vol. 1 (Zagreb, 1969), p. 66; Lelja Dobronić, Zagrebačka akademija/
Academia zagrabiensis: visokoškolski studiji u Zagrebu 1633.-1874. (Zagreb, 2004). It is
interesting that the social structure of Caranthanian students at the Vienna university in
1804-1849 shows that sons of peasants made up 29%. Alojz Cindrič, “Vpliv dunajske univerze
na oblikovanje slovenskega izobraženstva: statistična slika študentov s Kranjske na dunajski
univerzi med leti 1804 in 1917 - študijske smeri, krajevni in socialni izvor”, in Peter Vodopivec
(ed.), Slovenci v Evropi (O nekaterih vidikih slovenske povezanosti s sosedi in Evropo) (Ljubljana,
2002), pp. 17-34. Hereafter Alojz Cindrič, “Vpliv dunajske univerze”.
1830-1848, the Academy had 184 to 213 students yearly, mostly of philosophy
( 1 4 7 to 173), whereas the number of law students varied from 35 to 48.
Therefore the stage was set for a major education reform, which was articulated
by the Sabor committee in 1849, upon the ideas of Austrians Franz Exner and
Herman Bonitz. The reform suggested changes on all levels - primary, secondary,
and high. Its goal was to spur the establishment of more primary schools, with
Croatian as the teaching language (in accordance with the conclusion of the
Croatian Sabor of 1847), with educated teachers, and to enrich curriculum with
new subjects. Furthermore, new types of secondary schools were foreseen, such
as real and civic schools («realke» and «građanske škole»), as well as various
vocational schools (nautical, commercial, agronomic, etc.). The foundation of a
modern university in Zagreb was also proposed. Even though the 1849 reform
was not implemented due to the break-down of the 1848 movement in the whole
Monarchy, Croatian liberal intelligentsia had by 1848/49 developed clear notions
of educational reforms that should be undertaken, as well as the necessity of
giving them a national character. So, the course was set on modernization and
national integration.
In the 1850s, the neo-absolutistic regime laid the foundations of modern
primary school system. The regime seriously insisted on children attending schools,
but even then only a third of them did so.11 The secondary schools were reformed
into eight-year schools, the course on philosophy being taken from the Academy
to the Zagreb “gymnasium”. Since the course of theology was already moved from
the Academy during the reign of Joseph II, in the 1850s the Academy offered solely
the law course. In 1854 German was introduced as the teaching language. The neoabsolutistic
reforms were articulated in the Vienna centre (“modernization from
above”) and were coupled with a new wave of Germanization, which made the
regime unpopular. Only later, in the 1870s, did ban Ivan Mažuranić admit that
there was an important reform side to neo-absolutism.
The proper educational take-off in Croatia took place only in the 1860s and
1870s. It was visible in the founding of the Teachers’ Association (“Hrvatski
književno-pedagoški zbor”), periodicals, childrens books and journals in
Croatian12, development of pedagogical science13, founding of a modern
11 Mirjana Gross, Počeci moderne Hrvatske (Zagreb, 1985).
12 The first Croatian childrens book was Mali tobolac (1850) compiled by Ivan Filipovič, a liberal
teacher who also founded the first journal Bosiljak (1864). Until 1918 there were 16 journals for
children and youth. It is interesting that too few of them were published in Slavonia. Towards
the end of the century, specialized journals appeared, e. g. for young merchants and artisans.
Štefka Batinić, Zabava i pouka dobroj djeci i mladeži (Zagreb, 2004), p. 16.
First picture-books in Croatian were published in 1880s, but with illustrations of foreign
authors. Again, among illustrators there were Germans, Czechs, even Americans but no
Hungarians. Štefka Batinić-Berislav Majhut, Od slikovnjaka do Vragobe (Zagreb, 2001), p. 67.
13 In 1876 Franjo Markovič began with lectures on pedagogy at the Faculty of Philosophy. Đuro
Arnold and Stjepan Basariček further developed this field, the latter one being the first Croatian
theoretician.
University in Zagreb and a major elementary-school reform launched in 1874 by
the government of the ban Ivan Mažuranić.
Teachers’ Association founded in 1871 became the forum of liberal teachers,
who stubbornly lobbied for a substantial school reform. The reform could not
take place in the 1860s, since during the major part of that decade the elites of the
Monarchy were preoccupied with settling of the state structure. Even when this
had been decided upon in 1867, the immediate postdualistic regime in Croatia
controlled by the Hungarian government was not keen on modernization of
Croatia but its pacification. Only after a compromise had been reached between
the National Liberal Party (“Narodna liberalna stranka”) and the Hungarian
government in 1873, the new ban Mažuranić was able to articulate reforms
limited to Croatian autonomous affairs, one of them being education.
Mažuranić s reform of primary education was a great step towards secularization,
even though it was in this respect more moderate than its model - the Austrian
law of 1869 (Reichsschulgesetz). This moderateness is understandable given the
immense influence of the Catholic Church in Croatia. Another major difference
was that primary schooling in Croatia lasted not eight but five years. The 1874
reform also meant that teachers became civil servants, which was an improvement
in their material and social status. Yet, primary beneficiaries were peasant children
and girls, who now attended school in greater percentage than before. In one
respect the Mažuranić reform was even a small step ahead of its model - namely
in the compulsory status of gymnastics classes not just for boys but for girls as well.
Moreover, women teachers got the right to equal salary as their men colleagues!
Unfortunately, during ban Karoly Khuen Hédervâry (1883-1903) wages of women
teachers were again lower, and they were banned to a kind of celibacy since only
unmarried women could be teachers. In the Sabor, the Mažuranić reform was
strongly attacked by its Serbian members (even though the reform allowed the
Cyrillic script for Serbian pupils) who denied the Croatian Sabor the right to pass
bills that would encompass Serbian schools and pupils as well.14 The issue at stake
was Serbian autonomy in Croatia. This clearly shows the national role of education.
The effects of the Mažuranić reform were seen in the 1880s. In 1869, 85%
of population was illiterate, in 1880, 73% of men and 83% of women were
illiterate, but in 1884/5, 75% of eligible children attended school, compared to
55% in 1871/2. Of course, the percentages for towns were different, as 94% of
eligible children in Zagreb attended elementary school in 1884. The latter fact
was satisfactory regarding Croatian conditions, but in Austrian lands as early
as in 1860 almost all children attended school except in Carniola (71.9 %) and a
Styrian district Bruck (86.5%).15
14 Mirjana Gross, “Zakon o osnovnim školama 1874. i srpsko pravoslavno školstvo”, in Zbornik
radova o povijesti i kulturi srpskog naroda u SR Hrvatskoj, Vol. 1 (Zagreb, 1988), pp. 75-118.
15 Helmut Engelbrecht, Geschichte des österreichischen Bildungswesens. Erziehung und Unterricht
auf dem Boden Österreichs, Von 1848 bis zum Ende der Monarchie, Vol. 4 (Vienna, 1984), p. 117.
The educational reforms changed the everyday life of teachers and pupils
through new schoolbooks, methods, looser disciplinary measures and more
teaching means. It is interesting that in all the above-mentioned aspects, the
liberal reforms were very often conveyed through the Central European filter. In
the 1870s, schoolbooks were still translated from German, the most influential
pedagogical theoretician was J. Friedrich Herbart and empiricist Friedrich Dittes,
the director of the Viennese Pedagogium who exerted huge influence on liberal
teachers in Croatia. Dittes took part in the general assembly of the Teachers’
Association in 1871, he was personally acquainted with prominent teachers,
and he became persona non grata for the opponents of secularization (including
liberal priests, such as Franjo Rački and J.J. Strossmayer). Yet, Croatian followers
of Dittes did not implement his criticism towards national issue. At this point
I would like to stress that we often speak of the Western European models and
ideas without taking into consideration the modifications they went through in
practice. Our goals should be to identify models, explain their modifications and
their carriers and analyse their reception and results.
Not just ideas were imported from the Western and Central Europe, even
the teaching means and the school banks were of Austrian, German, Czech
and Slovene16 origin until late in the 19th century.17 Needless to say, a number of
teachers came from these lands to Croatia as well, exerting influence not only
on their pupils, but on colleagues as well.18 The Czech teachers were especially
influential and prominent Croatian teachers contributed to the Prague journal
Slavjanski pedagog. One should immediately notice the absence of Hungarian
influences at least in civil Croatia. The Croatian School Museum founded at
the beginning of the 20th century did not have a single teaching means from
Hungary!19 The reason was clearly of political and national origin.
Even the history textbooks were largely translated from German in the 1870s,
but novelty was that they were done by renowned historians, such as Vjekoslav
Klaić. Klaić did not mechanically translate, he added information on Croatian
history, but he also provided better supplementary material, such as illustrations,
chronologies or lists of kings.20 Klaić and other history teachers also began writing
16 Popular author of geographical atlantes was Blaž Kozenn.
17 Iskra Iveljić, “Modernisierung Kroatiens in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts. Europäische
Vorbilder und kroatische Besonderheiten”, in C. Zach-E Solomon et al. (eds.) Vorbild „Europa“
und die Modernisierung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (München, 2009).
18 Probably the most known Slovenian teacher was Janez Trdina, Czechs were Vjenceslav Marik
and his wife, Anton Truhelka, Stjepan Novotny - the founder of the first pedagogical journal
Napredak (“Progress”) in 1859, and Marija Jambrišak - one of the most prominent women
teachers. She studied at the Viennese Pedagogium upon personal invitation of F. Dittes who was
impressed by her liberal ideas exposed at the general assembly of Teachers’ Association in 1871.
19 Hrvatski školski muzej: Njegov postanak i uređenje (Zagreb, 1902); Elizabeta Serdar (ed.),
Hrvatski školski muzej 1901.-2001 (Zagreb, 2001).
20 Klaić did so in translating E. Hannak’s , Lehrbuch der Geschichte des Altertums fü r die unteren
Klassen der Mittelschulen (Vienna, 1870); V. Klaić, Poviest staroga vieka za niže razrede srednjih
učilišta ("Zagreb, 1877).
Croatian history schoolbooks,21 this being largely due to the founding of the
modern Croatian historiography by Ivan Kukuljević and Franjo Rački.22 Klaić,
who studied in Vienna, used methods and ideas of Western authors, which he
combined with that of Slavic ones in order to put Croatian history in the broader
European context. According to Klaić, Croats, as a branch of populous and
important Slavic peoples, deserved a prominent place among European nations.
Of course, Klaić was not the only one to promote such European discourse, it was
widely spread at least since 1848. Liberal reforms and national integration were
seen as a part of (Western) European civilization. The past was interpreted as the
time of serfdom, slavery, of medieval darkness in which only bats could prosper,
while the present was a brief transition to an era of liberty, progress and humanity.
Since 1848 the liberals were repeating on and on that Croatia had to make up for
its not keeping abreast with European progress. (This discourse is still present
nowadays). The conservatives of all colours, especially priests, were sceptical
of progress and tried to stress the importance of authentic and autochthonous
Croatian position and heritage. Yet, the dividing line between Croatian liberals
and conservatives was often blurred and vague. Liberal priests, such as Franjo
Rački and Josip Juraj Strossmayer (who fought consistently for the founding of
the University and Academy) sided with the conservatives in the battle against
secularization, which they saw as a result of intrigues and antichristian conspiracy
of Jews and masons.23 On the other hand, priests accepted the liberal Mažuranić
reform viafacti, which meant that there would be no «Kulturkampf» in Croatia.
The Zagreb archbishop finally called upon priests to do so.
Even among liberals there were big differences - the National Liberal Party was
keen on following the path of the Western European reforms, whereas «pravaši»
(followers of the Party of Right i.e. party of Croatian State Right) insisted on the
importance of establishing an independent Croatia, reforms being the secondary
question. The third stream was pro-Hungarian, and because of its political and
national orientation it was ostracized from the grand national narrative for a long
time. Yet, among the so called unionists (adherents of the unconditional union
with Hungary) there were also liberals, but they thought that major reforms
should be carried out in cooperation with Hungary.
The liberal and conservative fronts were also vague in the attitude towards
children. Since the abstract notion of children is socially constructed, childrens
21 Ivan Hoić, Franjo (František) Korinek, Ljudevit Tomšič, Stjepan Srkulj. See Charles Jelavich,
South Slav Nationalisms. Textbooks and Yugoslav Union before 1914 (Ohio: State Un. Press,
1990); Croatian edition: Južnoslavenski nacionalizmi^ Zagreb, 1992).
22 There is a certain dilemma among historians as to who is the founding father of modern history
writing. While stressing the important impetus provided by Kukuljević, one has to underline
that Rački was the first to apply the modern method of critical approach to historical sources.
During his stay in Rome he got acquainted with the methods applied in editing Monumenta
Germaniae historica. Mirjana Gross, Franjo Rački. Vijek i djelovanje, (Zagreb, 2004), p. 506.
23 Letter of F. Rački to J.J. Strossmayer 1 lth April and 28th August 1874. Ferdo Šišić (ed.),
Korespondencija Racki-Strossmayer, Vol. 1 (Zagreb, 1928).
characters indicate socially preferable and acceptable conduct.24 Croatian
childrens literature remained very tendentious and moralizing until the turn of
the century. This is not surprising since it was mostly written by teachers, who
promoted the conception of a universal didactical publication, aimed at various
age groups of children and youth as well as adults, since in the country the young
were more literate than their parents. It is important to stress that this conception
was shared by liberal and conservative teachers.25 Both of them were keen on
protecting innocent and helpless children, seen as physically and psychically frail
creatures, who therefore had to rely on their parents, teachers or other authorities
to remain on the right side and develop their proper identity. The image of children
in Croatian literature was accordingly stereotypic, turning childrens characters
into paradigms of proper and moral life. At the turn of the century, critical
voices were raised. One of them belonged to Jelica Belovic-Bernadzikowska who
promptly reacted to Heinrich Wolgasts Das Elend unserer Jugendliteratur (1896),
and pleaded against didactical tendentiousness.26 From the beginning of the 20th
century, childrens literature made steps in this direction, its authors were writers
(Ivana Brlić-Mažuranić, Jagoda Truhelka, Marija Horvat, Vladimir Nazor) eager
to produce an artistically relevant book and not to be crusaders of pedagogical
conservatism. In their works, children’s characters partake in articulation of their
identities, enjoy certain autonomy and have a central position in the narrative
discourse.27
At the turn of the century, Croatian education was more differentiated
particularly on the secondary level, with more “real” (“realke”) and vocational
schools, but also with two more “gymnasiums” (in Senj and Bjelovar). The
number of pupils in secondary schools was growing since the 1860s. In 1857,
there were 988 pupils in “gymnasiums” and 200 in “real” schools, in 1880, the
numbers were 2129 and 269, respectively. The confessional structure shows underrepresentation
of Orthodox pupils (in 1877, around 10%) overrepresentation of
Catholic, Greek-Orthodox and Jewish pupils. The letter amounted to 21% in real
schools in 1877!28 The social structure shows that in 1870s most pupils came from
ranks of merchants and artisans (40% in “gymnasiums”, 56% in “real” schools),
intellectual professions and peasantry, the latter being represented among the
pupils of “gymnasiums” with 20%.
24 Karin Lesnik-Oberstein, Children’s Literature. Criticism and the Fictional Child (Oxford, 1994),
pp. 9-10.
25 One can compare articles in Smilje the journal of liberal teachers of the Teachers’ Association
with Bršljan (1873), edited by the group of conservative teachers gathered around Školski
prijatelj.
26 Jelica Belovic-Bernadzikowska, “Naša omladinska literatura, Školski vjesnik, Vol. IV., No., 7-8,
1897, pp. 9, 17.
27 Dubravka Zima, “Djetinjstvo i stereotipi: Slika djeteta u hrvatskome dječjem romanu 20.
stoljeća”, in D. Oraić-Tolić et al. (eds.), Kulturni stereotipi (Zagreb, 2006), p. 255.
28 Agneza Szabo, “Društvena struktura polaznika srednjih škola u civilnoj Hrvatskoj i Slavoniji
1850-1881”, Historijski zbornik, Vol. 61, 1988, pp. 155-180.
In the 1890s, a new hybrid type of secondary school was introduced - the
“real gymnasium” (“realna gimnazija”), which combined the general curriculum
with practical goals of “real” schools. The case of a “real gymnasium” is an
interesting one. In Croatia they were often unjustly praised as Croatian specialty,
but on the contrary to Austrian lands, where this type of schools did not turn to
be successful, in Croatia it survived in the form of public schools.
The Zagreb University, founded in 1874, was entangled between the unfulfilled
ambition to be the academic centre of South Slavs and a more narrow one, that
of a national alma mater. Strossmayer and Rački envisioned the University as
an academic mediator between the Western and South-Eastern Europe. The
same mission in the field of science was assigned to the Yugoslav Academy of
Arts and Sciences. The Yugoslav mission of the Zagreb University turned out to
be an illusion, since the majority of students came from Croatia and Slavonia.
Until 1918, the university was not even able to completely fulfil its national goal.
Though its role in modernization and national integration was important, it was
limited through non-acknowledgment of its academic titles in the Austrian part
of the Monarchy, which meant that students from Dalmatia and Istria would not
attend it.29 The same argument probably impeded Slovenian students to study
law in Zagreb. The University offered studies in theology, law and philosophy
Despite the fact that the latter studies were being broadened with some courses
in natural sciences (which were rather attractive and 36% of students studied
them), the academic range was still rather traditional, without technical and
some natural sciences, as well as medicine. Therefore, a great number of students
had to study abroad. For example at the turn of the century, almost 100 students
from all Croatian lands (mostly Dalmatia) were matriculated yearly at the Vienna
University; in the winter semester 1909/10, out of 837 students with Serbian
or Croatian as mother tongue, 312 were citizens of Croatia and Slavonia in all
Austrian universities.30 The number of technical intelligentsia rose significantly
towards the turn of the century. In Austrian technical colleges in 1909/10, out of
altogether 238 students with Serbian or Croatian as mother tongue, 116 came
from Croatia and Slavonia31 and from 1815 to 1906, just in Vienna technical
college there were about 700 students from various Croatian lands, almost 40%
29 At the Faculty of Philosophy 1874-1914 6% of students came from Dalmatia and only 1% from
Istria. There were more students from Slovenia (25) than from Istria! Tihana Luetić, Studenti
Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu 1874.-1914., Masters thesis (Zagreb: Faculty of
Philosophy, 2005).
30 145 came from Bosnia and Herzegovina and 127 from Serbia. These statistics do not encompass
Dalmatia and Istria since they were part of Cisleithania. Gary Cohen, “The Politics to Advanced
Education in Late Imperial Austria”. As a working paper available at: URL: cas.unm.edu/
publications/papers.html.
31 31 were from Bosnia and Herzegovina and 10 from Serbia. Ebda.
of them from Dalmatia, but only 14% from Slavonia.32 The Prague University33
became a magnet as well, because of political reasons. Italian universities in
Padua34 and Bologna remained attractive to Istrian and Dalmatian students, and
the university in Budapest was despite political reasons (often just because of
them) still the alma mater of many students from Slavonia, but Croatia as well.
Even a concise comparison of peregrinatio academica among the students from
Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia shows that the University of Vienna was even more
important and attractive to students from Slovenia than Croatia, because they
lacked their own university, whereas Serbian students, who were in that respect
in the same position as Slovenes, tended to study more often on the German and
Russian universities or in Paris than their Croatian or Slovene counterparts.351
would very much agree with Lj. Trgovčevics argument that South Slavic students
from dependent countries tended to study within the state their country was a
part of.36 So, Slovene and Croatian students mostly studied within the Monarchy.
Of course, one must mention that since Serbia did not have a proper university,
32 Social structure is known just for half of them, but it amazingly puts sons of merchants in the
first place with 24%. Report by Maja Brkljačić, as a part of the project “Croatians in Vienna
1790-1918”, led by N. Budak and H. Heppner, unpublished manuscript.
33 Up to 1895 the number of students from Croatia in Prague did not exceed 3 per year, and they
mostly studied at the German university. After that time it began to rise, and the majority
attended the Czech university, but apart from 1908 and 1909, the years of student exodus from
Zagreb, it usually did not amount to more than 20 per year. From 1882-1918 the total number
was 444. The prevalence of law was evident (290 students), on the second place is philosophy
(91) and on the third medicine (63). Different is the structure of altogether 57 doctors until
1918, 35 were doctors of law, 21 of medicine and just 1 of philosophy. There were 9 women
doctors, 8 of medicine and 1 of philosophy. One should note the exodus of Slavic students from
Austrian and Hungarian universities after the fall of the Monarchy, many of them coming to
the Czech university in Prague (1918-1921 103 doctors, among them 95 of medicine).Therefore
also a rather big number of Orthodox doctors of medicine. Whereas the social structure of
doctors at both the German and Czech university until 1921 was similar (civil servants 25%,
agriculture 23%, trade, banking and traffic 17%, craft & industry 10%, liberal professions
10%) the regional one differed: at the Czech university 58% of students were from Croatia and
Slavonia, 34% from Dalmatia, 8% from Istria, at the German one 39% from Croatia-Slavonia,
48% from Dalmatia and 12% from Istria. Damir Agičić, Hrvatsko-češki odnosi na prijelazu iz
XIX. u XX. stoljeće (Zagreb, 2000), pp. 134-135; D. Agičić, “Hrvatski doktori u Pragu 1882.-
1921”, Časopis za suvremenu povijest, Vol. 27, No. 1, 1995, pp. 137-154.; D. Agičić, Hrvatski
studenti na češkom sveučilištu u Pragu 1882.-1918, Časopis za suvremenu povijest, Vol. 30,
1998, pp. 291-315.
34 Stijepo Obad, “Studenti Dalmati all’Università di Padova”, Atti, Centro di ricerche storiche -
Rovigno, Vol. 31, 2001, pp. 469-478.
35 Alojz Cindrič, “Vpliv dunajske univerze”; Irena Gantar-Godina, “Slovene Students in Central
and Eastern Europe up to 1918”, Dve domovini [Two Homelands], Vol. 7, 1996, pp. 249-260;
Ljubinka Trgovčević, “Serbian Intellectuals in Foreing Universities in the 19th Century”,
in Karady, Victor et al. (eds.), L’inseignements des Elites en Europe Centrale (19-20e siecles).
(Krakow, 1999), pp. 159-173; Ljubinka Trgovčević, “Obrazovanje i modernizacija. Osnove za
poređenja u okviru jugoistočne Europe”, in Fleck, Hans-Georg et al. (eds.), Dijalogpovjesničaraistoričara,
Vol. 2 (Zagreb, 2000), pp. 117-133. Herafter Ljubinka Trgovčević, “Obrazovanje i
modernizacija”.
36 Ljubinka Trgovčević, “Obrazovanje i modernizacija”, p. 127.
grants were awarded for various universities abroad. However, I would like
to point out that the pattern of Croatian students studying abroad is more
differentiated, with Vienna, Graz, Budapest, Prague, Innsbruck, Krakow, but also
Bologna, Padua, German universities or Paris as destinations.37 If we also take
into account that the Catholic clergy and artists were often educated outside the
Habsburg Monarchy, the picture is more diversified. It should also be stressed
that a broad spectre of Croatian elite was educated on various foreign institutions
- diplomats, officers, merchants, engineers, architects, agronomists, etc. Many
of them were in contact with contemporary ideas and tendencies during their
formative years, and were eager to apply them in their homeland. However, the
notion of the elite being intellectually profiled abroad and becoming a kind of
“Kulturträger” in their homeland might be somewhat misleading. Not few of
them strove to combine achievements of the Western and Central Europe with
specific traits of their country. Others were able to reach high levels in art or
science, which made them much more than pure epigones of foreign tendencies.
This brings me to another dilemma, namely that of centre - semi-periphery and
periphery. With no ambitions to start up a debate, I would just put forward my
humble opinion that, at least art and culture in the broadest sense of the word do
not easily submit to such hierarchization. Recently, much has been debated on
multiple encoding of identities.38
At the turn of the century, the number of students in Zagreb rose significantly.
From 1874/5 (290 students) to 1887/8 (438), there was a steady growth. A period
of stagnation followed, ending in 1896/7. From that year there was a rapid growth
of 100 students per year, with a climax in 1907/8 with 1464 students. This remained
the quantitative apex for the whole period until 1918. The year 1907/8 was marked
by the student exodus out of political reasons, and after that the numbers revolved
around 1000 students. The law study prevailed (in 1874-1879, 65% of students),
yet at the beginning of 20th century the percentage of philosophy students rose (in
1904-1909 to 30%) because of new courses. Most students (39% in 1884-1899) came
from what statistics call “intellectual professions” (including different categories,
37 Unfortunately, there are no thorough studies on Croatian students abroad except for Vienna,
Graz or Prague. See D. Agičić, op. cit.; Harald Heppner, “Die Rolle und Bedeutung der
Grazer Universität für die Studentschaft aus Südosteuropa 1867-1914”, in R. G. Plaschka-K.
Mack (eds.), Wegenetz europäischen Geistes, Vol. 1 (Vienna, 1983), pp. 286-293; H. Heppner,
“Studenti iz Istre na Sveučilištu u Grazu 1884-1914”, Radovi Zavoda za hrvatsku povijest, Vol.
23, 1990, pp. 139-148; Gustav Otruba, “Die Universitäten in der Hochschulorganisation der
Donaumonarchie”, in Student und Hochschule im 19. Jahrhundert. Studien und Materialien
('Göttingen, 1975); Gary Cohen, “Die Studenten der Wiener Universität von 1860 bis 1900”, in
Wegenetz, op. cit., Vol. 2, pp. 290-316.
38 Moritz Csaky, “Gedächtnis, Erinnerung und die Konstruktion von Identität”, in Catherine
Bosshart-Pfluger et al. (eds.), Nation und Nationalismus in Europa. Kulturelle Konstruktion von
Identitäten. Festschrift fü r Urs Altermatt, (Stuttgart-Vienna, 2002), pp. 25-49; Moritz Csaky-
Klaus Zeyringer (eds.), Ambivalenz des kulturellen Erbes. Vielfachkodierung des historischen
Gedächtnisses. Paradigma: Zentraleuropa (Innsbruck-Vienna-Munich 2000).
such as civil servants, lawyers, doctors, etc.), agriculture was represented with 28%,
craft and industry with 15% and trade and banking with 6%.39
Interesting is that the political situation is reflected on the regional and ethnic
origin of students. The policy of ban Khuen Hédervâry towards the Serbs in
Croatia clearly had consequences on the academic life, at least at the Faculty of
philosophy. Namely, until the 1880s the percentage of its Orthodox students was
5_10%, in 1885/6 21% and in 1900/1 it amounted to 26%! Furthermore, regarding
the regional background it should be pointed out that 17% students came from
the Syrmian county and 12% from Lika-Krbava, to compare with Zagreb, which
was represented with 16% and the Zagreb county with 14%.40
University soon became a political arena. Paradoxically the students at that
time were to a large extent followers of pravaštvo, thus being fierce opponents
of the National Party of the bishop Strossmayer. Towards the end of the 19th
century, students became even more politicized. On the occasion of the 10th
anniversary of the University in 1884, they drafted a declaration in which they
sharply criticized the pro-Hungarian regime. The rector refused to obey the
ban and undertake a second investigation, and was therefore suspended from
his duty. This unique offence of academic autonomy aroused interest outside
Croatia. But nothing could stop students. During the emperor’s visit in 1895 they
burned down the Hungarian flag. Since many students were thrown out of the
Zagreb University, they continued their studies in Vienna and Prague, where they
came under the influence of T.G. Masaryk41 and became known as “progressive
youth” (“napredna omladina”) because of their liberal-democratic ideas. At the
beginning of the 20th century, students were followers of various parties and
ideologies, from clerical to radical nationalistic youth.42 Even though university
teachers were civil servants, they often enticed the political atmosphere. Because
of their oppositional political activities, the dean of the Faculty of Philosophy,
Đuro Šurmin, was in 1908 retired by decree, and professor of history Gavro
Manojlović was suspended. This was followed by demonstrations, a temporary
suspension of lectures and a great exodus of students to Vienna, Graz and Prague,
but this time also to Belgrade. The students were welcomed by Istrian, Dalmatian
and Slovene members of the Reichsrat, at the very same time as the German
emperor visited Vienna, which gave the whole affair an international dimension.
39 Jaroslav Šidak, “Sveučilište do kraja prvog svjetskog rata”, in: Spomenica, op.cit.,pp. 116-117.
40 This percentage of Orthodox does not include Bulgarian students. Percentage from Tihana
Luetić, Studenti Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu 1874.-1914., Master’s thesis (Zagreb:
Faculty of Philosophy, 2005), p. 69, pp. 80-84. The interpretation is mine. At the whole university,
the number of Orthodox students was growing until 1899 when their percentage reached 19%
and remained steady. The percentage of Catholic students dropped from 86% in 1874/5-1879
/80 to 77% in 1894/5-1899/1900.
41 Arnold Suppan, “Bildungspolitische Emanzipation und gesellschaftliche Modernisierung. Die
südslavischen Studenten an der tschechischen Universität um die Jahrhundertwende und der
Einfluss Professor Masaryks”, in Wegenetz, op. cit., Vol. 2, 1987.
42 Mirjana Gross, “Studentski pokret 1875-1914”, in Spomenica, op. cit., pp. 451-483.
Moreover, the greater Austrian circle around the heir Francis Ferdinand used it
to criticize the Hungarian government.
Perhaps the best test paper of modernization is womens education. In the
last decade of the 19th century, it was much improved; in 1894-5 girls in Zagreb
attended primary school even in a slightly greater percentage than boys.43
Moreover, a public lyceum for girls was founded in Zagreb in 1892, and in 1895
women were allowed to become irregular students of philosophy. Very soon,
in 1901, they could obtain a regular status. In the Central European context,
women in Croatia did not fare badly, since women students were allowed to
study philosophy in Vienna in 1897, in Baden in 1899, in Hungary in 1895 and
in Prussia only in 1908.
Girls and women grabbed the chance, from 1892 to 1901, 852 of them
attended the Zagreb lyceum and in 1895-1914,158 of them studied at the Faculty
of Philosophy.44 The social and confessional structure of the pupils of lyceum is
interesting - a third of them were daughters of public and private employees,
and more than a fifth of merchants and artisans. As expected, Jewish girls were
overrepresented yet the percentage (16%) is surprisingly big, as well as the underrepresentation
(12%) of Orthodox pupils.45 The structure of philosophy students
was different, in 1874-1914, 12% were daughters of teachers and professors, 11%
of merchants and artisans, 10% of privateers and owners; 59% of women students
were Catholic, 35% Orthodox, 3% Protestants and 3% Jews.46 A higher percentage
of Orthodox students stems from the influx of Bulgarian students who often came
to Zagreb as the first academic step towards the Western and Central Europe.
By the beginning of the 20th century, the educational system produced first
women doctors of philosophy, the very first one being a historian,47 and allowed
the practice of women doctors who obtained their degree abroad in Vienna or
Zurich48. In 1918/19,-there were altogether 208 women students, 108 of whom
studied medicine.49 The issue of women education shows that underdevelopment
43 Dinko Župan, Pučko školstvo u vrijeme banovanja Ivana Mažuranića, Masters thesis, (Zagreb:
Faculty of Philosophy, 2002), p. 77. D. Župan, ““Uzor djevojke”: obrazovanje žena u Banskoj
Hrvatskoj tijekom druge polovice 19. stoljeća”, Časopis za suvremenu povijest, No. 2, 2001, pp.
435-452.
44 Ida Ograjšek Gorenjak, Otvaranje privremenog ženskog liceja i položaj građanskih žena u
Hrvatskoj na kraju 19. stoljeća (Zagreb: Masters thesis, Faculty of Philosophy, 2005); Tihana
Luetić, “Prve studentice Mudroslovnog fakulteta kr. Sveučilišta Franje Josipa I. u Zagrebu”,
Povijesni prilozi, Vol. 21, 2002, pp. 199-206.
45 In 1910 in Croatia and Slavonia 72% of inhabitants were Catholic, 25% Orthodox, 2% Protestant
and 1% were Jews.
46 Ida Ograjšek Gorenjak, Otvaranje, op. cit., p. 129.
47 It was Milica Bogdanovič, with the doctoral thesis Car Julije Apostat prema kršćanstvu, defended
in 1906. Luetić, Prve studentice, op. cit., p. 196.
48 The first doctor of medicine was Milica Šviglin Cavov (promoted in 1893), but she did not
practice medicine in Croatia. The first to do so was in 1906 Karola Maier Milobar.
49 Jaroslav Šidak, Sveučilište do kraja prvog svjetskog rata, in Spomenica, op. cit., p. 115;
Igor Karaman, “Socijalna i regionalna obilježja studenata na zagebačkim visokoškolskim
is often unjustly used as a stereotype explanation. In other words, in spite of
Croatia’s underdevelopment, women were offered education opportunities that
existed in more developed countries. This does not refer just to Croatia, since
women were allowed at universities in Greece in 1890, Turkey in 1894, and
Bulgaria in 1901 (but up to 1918 they made up 25% of all students in Sofia).
Moreover, the regulation regarding the status of women students was rather
vague in Serbia, not expressly forbidding them to become students, which led to
a number of women students in 1890s.50
At the turn of the century, Croatian initiatives became more numerous, and
foreign influences were not mediated via the Central Europe, but were sometimes
taken directly from the source. For example, Croatian teachers went to Sweden
to get acquainted with slöjd, and to attend gymnastic courses in Stockholm. All
in all, education was more precisely adapted to the needs of the modern middleclass
society and its economy, with a rather propulsive enrolment in technical
colleges.
I would like to end with a success story. By the beginning of the 20th century,
the educational system produced first women doctors of philosophy, following
the suit of more developed countries and thus showing that the European mission
could (at least partly) be fulfilled in an underdeveloped country. The liberalisation
of education can be illustrated by the example of a certain Danica Vlah, born in
Kastav near Rijeka. Her educational path shows that social emancipation was
available even to women of lower status. Danica was an orphan, who attended
women’s lyceum in Zagreb and obtained doctoral degree in Vienna with the
thesis on Pavao Ritter Vitezović. To be honest, she might have used some charms
of her sex to obtain the degree, since she barely passed all 5 strict exams and the
report of her supervisor Milan Rešetar was rather critical of her work. Perhaps
the committee at the Vienna University exercised political correctness without
knowing of it.51
To conclude with, at the turn of the century Croatia followed the pattern
manifest in the Habsburg Monarchy which might be called «Drang nach Bildung».
It was visible in the growth of the number of pupils and students, which lead even
to a certain discrepancy between state and society, since, at least Cisleithanian
governments sometimes unsuccessfully tried to slow down this trend. On the
eve of the World War I, Austria had the highest enrolment rate (relative to
the total number of inhabitants) of all major European countries, surpassing
ustanovama”, in Hrvatska na pragu modernizacije (1750-1918) (Zagreb, 2009), pp. 129-145.
50 Trgovčević, Obrazovanje, op.cit. pp.129-130.
51 Danica Vlah matriculated at the Vienna University in the winter term 1905/6, and she studied
there until the summer term of 1909 Slavic philology, ancient history and history of Eastern
Europe. Evidently, she was not a good student. She barely passed all of her five strict exams (the
so called rigorosa) and the report by professor Milan Rešetar on her doctoral thesis was not
flattering. Archives of the Vienna University, Rigorosenprotokolle, Ph 59.21, ad 2908.
in that respect France by 30% and England by 75%!52 The role of education in
modernization was immense. For a variety of social, national or confessional
groups of both sexes it became a means of emancipation, and for political parties
an essential agenda in the political arena. In general, education provided a much
more successful picture of modernization than economy or politics, yet in the
Monarchy it was also an instrument of preserving and promoting its cultural
polyphony and multilayered (re)structuring of identities.
CONCLUSION
The article deals with the modernization of school system in Croatia and the
importance of education in the social, political and cultural context. The very
first reforms were articulated during the enlightened absolutism, yet they were
not so deeply implemented in Croatia as in Austria. Despite significant efforts in
1830s, reforms of primary and secondary schools began in the 1850s. The proper
educational take-off in Croatia took place only in the 1860s and 1870s. It was
visible in the founding of the Teachers’ Association, periodicals, children’s books
and journals in Croatian, the development of pedagogical science, founding of
a modern University in Zagreb and major elementary-school reform launched
in 1874 by the government of the ban Ivan Mažuranić. The educational reforms
were very often conveyed through the Central European filter and they brought
about changes in everyday life of teachers and pupils through new schoolbooks,
methods, looser disciplinary measures and more teaching means.
The Zagreb University, founded in 1874, was entangled between the
unfulfilled ambition to be the academic centre of South Slavs and a more narrow
one, that of a national alma mater. The number of its students rose significantly at
the turn of the century, but still many students studied abroad. At the same time
they became even more politicized.
In the late 19th century, education was differentiated, Croatian initiatives
became more numerous, and foreign influences were not mediated via the
Central Europe, but were sometimes taken directly from the source.
52 Gary Cohen, “The Politics to Advanced Education”, op. cit.
Ljubinka Trgovčević
High School, University of Belgrade and
Modernization of Serbia (1863-1914)
Modern Serbia and Education
Like in the majority of modern European states founded during the 19th
century, particularly those created by a separation from multinational empires,
also in Serbia the entire century passed in constituting the state and building the
necessary state institutions. Serbia was created in a several decade long process,
starting from the uprising in 1804 and ending with obtaining the independence
in 1878. In this process, it changed its borders several times and in the course of
about 80 years it increased its territory 2.3 times, whereas the number of citizens
soared more than six times. The state was built by a separation of territories
from the Ottoman Empire, the least developed part of Europe of that time, while
its peripheral location therein only contributed to its difficult economic and
social position. On the other hand, geographically positioned at the edge of the
Christian and more developed Europe, it was also the final point reached by the
European modernization developments, ideas and processes.1
This destiny of a double periphery made the Serbian society one of the most
underdeveloped in the 19th century Europe, whereas the process of transition
to a modern state was largely determined (and burdened) by a historic legacy
of centuries of living in a foreign state and foreign culture. Instead of being a
driving force of development, all territorial expansions, apart from resulting in
an increase of population, in fact meant lagging behind and even declining in
the development achieved so far. Namely, due to the constellation of historical
and political circumstances, all the territories incorporated to the motherland
were even less developed; thus with adding of new regions and new population,
the development indicators suddenly declined instead of showing some sort of
progress. For example, in the districts incorporated to Serbia after 1878, there were
only 45 schools, whereas the entire county of Niš only had 75 literate inhabitants.
1 This research is a part of the project Gender equality and culture o f civil status: historical
and theoretical foundations in Serbia (No. 47021), financed by the Ministry of Science of the
Republic of Serbia.
What was missing could not be supplemented quickly; this is proved also by the
data that in 1890 14.17% of people were literate in the entire Serbia (including the
parts incorporated after 1878), with this percentage being still incomparably lower
in the new regions: in Toplica county 5.19%, Vranje county 6.18%, etc.; what is even
more impressive is that the number of children involved in education was ten times
higher in Belgrade than in the „new regions“ (in Belgrade 65.8%, in Toplica county
6.32%). The situation was even worse in Kosovo (incorporated to Serbia together
with Macedonia in 1913), with only 51 schools before the Balkan Wars2, compared
to 1,328 in the rest of Serbia. Therefore, traditional divisions to the developed North
and the underdeveloped South became obvious also in Serbia, with the Serbian
„South“ encompassing the parts of the Ottoman Empire which were less developed
and their incorporation into the new (nation) state was too short to enable balancing
of the existing discrepancies.
SERBIA IN THE 19th CENTURY
YEAR AREA GROWTH INHABITANTS GROWTH
1833 37,000 km 700,000
1878 48,303 km 1/3 1,665,000 2.37
1910 48,303 / 2,911,701 4.15
1913 87,800 km 2.37 cca 4,500,000 6.42
Apart from the imbalance in development, the discontinuity was obvious
as well. In the century when Serbia was emerging and could join the world of
modern states only through Europeanization, it experienced seven wars and
several popular rebellions, seven rulers who almost all came to the throne
through radical changes, persecutions, assassination and the changes of dynasties
and political elites, including changes of foreign political priorities.
The economic development of Serbia depended on the general progress. It was
disturbed not only by political circumstances, crises, wars and the late obtaining
of independence, but also by the structure of the society itself. In the early 19th
century, by liberation and distribution of land to peasants, Serbia in this segment
belonged to rather modern European countries, as it was building an egalitarian
society of free citizens; however, this advantage was later lost because a small plot
of land in fact became the brake to modernization. It suppressed the development
of technologically modern and cost-effective agriculture, it did not bring about
any significant accumulation of capital or increase in exports, it kept labour force
in villages, etc. Therefore, modern economic branches, particularly industry,
developed much slower, and at the moment of obtaining the independence in
2 S. Ćanović, Srpske škole na Kosovu u XIX veku (Priština, 1976), p. 265.
1878, Serbia’s level of development was that of pre-industrial societies; it had
several military-technical companies, one brickyard, two sawmills, two breweries
and several steam mills.3 After 1878, Serbia joined the European economic
developments with more strength, at first by building railways and developing
river traffic, which resulted in increased foreign trade, and later on by passing
the laws promoting development of industry; these started to show effects in
the early 20th century. Already in 1900, a quarter of population worked outside
agriculture, in crafts, traffic and public services, there were about 500 industrial
plants; however, the problems of insufficient financial capital, high birth rate and
small land plots remained, reflecting the rural structure of the society.
The social structure was another problem, particularly because of the
immigration of ’new’ population from the underdeveloped parts of the neighbouring
monarchies. This brought about a decline not only in the economic sense,
but also in the level of literacy, lifestyle, production structure, and the possibilities
for horizontal and vertical stratification of population. The new population had
an archaic social structure, including a patriarchal family which built a familytype
economy resistant to modernization. Consequently, the development
of Serbia was interrupted not only by political but also by demographic and
structural discontinuities. The weak social differentiation was reflected in the
majority being composed of free peasants and the minority of a thin layer of
state, bureaucratic-military elite and insufficiently strong middle class. It was still
a pre-modern society in which the majority of population lived in villages. While
the number of citizens of Serbia increased six times over a century, the urban
population only doubled. It accounted for 6.1% of population in 1834 and 14.1%
in 1900, which meant that only about 350,000 inhabitants lived in the cities4.
The educated middle class, including those in free occupations (medical doctors,
engineers, lawyers), together with professors and high civil servants, made up
nearly 12,000 of this number.5 The figure itself shows how small was the number
of potential bearers of social changes, including the essential changes, such as
democratization, development of economy, particularly industry, science and
culture, and therefore the inclusion into the group of modern states.
Exactly these components were decisive in the emergence of a modern Serbia.
Overcoming of underdevelopment was only possible with educated people,
3 Marie-Janine Calic, Socialgeschichte Serbiens, 1815-1941. Die aufhaltsame Fortschritt während
der Industrialisierung (München: R.Oldenburg Verlag, 1994), p.163
4 Holm Sundhaussen, Historische Statistik Serbiens 1834-1914. Mit europäischen Verlgleichsdaten
(München: R. Oldenburg, 1989), p. 99.
5 See Lj. Trgovčević, “Srpska inteligenicija u XIX veku - zapadni i istočni uticaji”, in Evropa i
Srbi (Beograd, 1996), pp. 261-273; Lj. Trgovčević, “La formazione dellelite nazionale in Serbia,
1830-1914”, in S. Burzanovic, M. Dogo, E L. Grassi, M. Ivanov, V. Kechriotis, B. Mitrovič, D.
Rodogno, L. Trgovcevic, Schegge d’impero, pezzi d’Europa. Balcani e Turchia fr a continuità e
mutamento, 1804-1923, a cura di Marco Dogo (Gorizia: Libreria Editrice Goriziana, 2006), pp.
101- 120.
i.e. urban population, as city was the space where modern economy and social
institutions were developing. At the beginning, Serbia had neither of these. At the
moment of its liberation, the country had no educational or cultural institutions,
while political institutions were only emerging. The start was from scratch and
there was a long way ahead to the creation of urban population (first by education
and employment), accompanied by institutions of civil society. They started to
emerge only after 1830 when the Ottoman authorities issued a “firman” allowing
Serbs to establish schools, hospitals and printing facilities, thus setting the bases
for independent cultural development.
The need for educated people called for the establishment of educational
institutions and by the end of the century, all educational levels were founded -
from preschool institutions, elementary and high schools, to University. Despite
this gradual development of education, Serbia remained among the countries
with the highest illiteracy in Europe until the beginning of the 20th century; in
1900, only 17% of citizens were literate. The Law on Education which stipulated
compulsory education for all children of both sexes was passed at the very
beginning of 1883; this was at the same time as similar laws were adopted in other
European countries, but the law was more modern than the society itself and
therefore could not be entirely implemented. Not only were there no economic
conditions, but there were even no awareness of each and every citizen about the
necessity of knowledge both for personal and collective prosperity. Moreover, at
the turn of the century, Serbia had the youngest population in Europe; in 1900,
as much as 54% of its population was younger than 19, whereas the percentage of
those obliged to go to school (aged between 5 and 14) was 26%. How much this
actually burdened the process of education and disabled all children to attend
school is also shown by the fact that in 1900, 6,871 small school buildings would
be required to include all the pupils, while there were only 1,101. Besides, there
was a demand for 12,057 teachers, which was six times more than the number of
teachers actually employed in Serbia at that time.6
From High School to University
A century long way to the establishment of a University corresponded to
the developmental one: obsolete societies neither had the need nor the strength
for their establishment. The modern university, established in the early 19th
century, was a new form of centuries old institutions understood as communities
of those participating in obtaining and expanding of knowledge, which at that
time faced a triple task: to educate, raise and to develop the science. This marked
6 Village schools prevailed, with 93 pupils in average. If city schools were to be built, in which at
the time were 700 pupils in average, 913 buildings would have been required. See Lj. Trgovčević,
“Obrazovanje kao činilac modernizacije Srbije u XIX veku (Analitička skica)”, in Srbija u
modernizacionim procesima XX. veka (Beograd, 1994), pp. 217-232.
the beginning of another revolution, which some would call a scientific’, others
an ‘intellectual’, the third a ‘technical-technological’ revolution, or simply the
revolution of knowledge.
The first school in the new Serbian state was the High School established
already during the First Serbian Uprising in autumn 1808. It was intended for
those who would „lead the country“ and therefore its curriculum contained a
little bit of everything, from elementary knowledge appropriate for elementary
school to the courses which formed an integral part of university education. As
the only enrolment requirement was that a candidate knew how to read, write
and calculate, the School could not reach the level corresponding to its name,
except as an idea, particularly because it functioned for only three years, with
interruptions.7 After the break-up of the uprising it was never renewed, nor did
the coming two decades see an establishment of similar schools; this was partly
due to the legal status of Serbia and partly due to the attitude towards education of
those who governed it. It was only after 1833 that the new state became aware that
development of the state is not possible without educated people. Thus, almost
simultaneously with the establishment of elementary school, attempts were made
to build a college which would provide the state with the urgently needed clerks
for establishment and functioning of public institutions.
The Lyceum established in 1838 in the city of Kragujevac (moved to
Belgrade in 1841) marked the beginning of higher education; it was a college with
two separate departments: law and philosophy. As it emerged from a part of the local
“gymnasium”, it did not differ from it at the very beginning, although it was assigned
a special task to educate all kinds of clerks. In the first two years, the courses were
general-educational, since 1840 the 1st year was introduced at the Department of
Law and since 1843 the 2nd year as well, whereby it increasingly gained the structure
appropriate to a specialized college. Since 1853 they were joined by the Natural-
Technical Department, as a core of the subsequent Technical Faculty. The work of
the Lyceum was legally regulated by the first Serbian law on schooling of 1844, which
stipulated that the first two years were studied at the Department of Philosophy and
the last two years at the Department of Law. The first professors were educated Serbs
from the Habsburg Monarchy; later on, the first Serbian state scholars who returned
from their studies at the leading European universities were immediately appointed
professors. They brought new experiences of modern world schools, new courses
were introduced and contemporary scientific knowledge and textbooks started to be
used, so that the school began to grow and gradually exceeded the form of a lyceum.
With the reforms of 1853 and a special law, the Lyceum started to change, and by
the creation of own teaching and scientific human resources and development of
elementary scientific research, it started to improve its quality. It naturally had to
surpass the general level, as differentiation of schooling began simultaneously,
7 In 2008, the University of Belgrade took the date of establishment of this uprising’s High School
as the year of its foundation, which this author disagrees with.
being one of the first conditions for professionalization of society. Around the end
of the 1840s, the School of Engineering was opened, then the Artillery and the
Crafts School in Kragujevac, to be followed by real professional career schools.
This showed that conditions were met for more extensive qualitative changes,
which were at first oriented toward clearer profiling of certain professions and
their gathering within departments. Gradually, various chairs were developed,
departments separated, new courses introduced and professors matured, so
that in 1863 the Lyceum became a High School with three separate faculties:
Philosophy, Technical and Law.
Already by its character, the High School got a university form, not only due
to the existence of separate faculties, but also because it was emphasized upon
its establishment that it was a scientific institution for higher and professional
education. This profoundly changed its character, as it did not only educate the
urgently needed clerks, but, in compliance with the European standards, introduced
science as a basis of its existence and as an integral part of the education process. This
was certainly thanks to its professors whose experiences from foreign universities
helped strengthen the school as a scientific institution; the state, from its part, was
meeting the demands to expand science by educating people for introduction of
new scientific disciplines and chairs. For example, in October 1884, the Academic
Council asked for education abroad for as many as 31 experts for various scientific
fields necessary for further development of certain faculties; it stated the need for
future lecturers for courses in history of philosophy, general philosophy, medieval
history, hydro engineering, civil engineering (for land roads and railroads), with
the requirement being corroborated by the attitude of “permanent lecturing of
science at the High School in order to avoid the High School to again fall into a sad
condition to which it had fallen before”.8 Almost every year the Academic Council
selected several best students and sent them to foreign universities in order to
prepare them to develop the scientific branches not existing in Belgrade and raise
the High School to the university rank. By the reforms of 1896/7, the Faculties
got professional departments and university organization. Thus, the Faculty of
Philosophy had the following departments: 1. Linguistic-Literature, 2. History-
Geography, 3. Mathematics-Physics, 4. Science and Chemistry. The Technical
Faculty was divided into three departments: 1. Civil Engineering, 2. Architecture,
3. Mechanical Engineering, while the Faculty of Law was divided into Judicial
and Political-Economic departments. Strengthening of the High School created
the possibility for educating the elite in the country as well, and it bore fruit.
During the four decades of existence, many separate sciences were developed
8 The Archive of Serbia, Ministry of Education, 1884, 185: the Rector’s letter to the Minister
of Education dated October 27/November 8, 1884. More in Lj. Trgovčević, Planirana elita. O
studentima iz Srbije na evropskim univerzitetima u 19. veku [The Planned Elite: Students from
Serbia at European Universities in the 19th Century] (Beograd, 2003). Hereafter Lj. Trgovčević,
Planirana elita.
therein, followed by establishment of chairs, seminars and departments with
accompanying necessary laboratories and libraries. At the beginning of the
century, for example, the Faculty of Philosophy encompassed the Institute of
Geography, Seminar of Mathematics, Seminar of French Language, Seminar
of Serbian Language, Laboratory for Chemistry, Botanic Garden, Zoological
Institute, Laboratory for Public Hygiene, Laboratory of Meteorology and
Astronomy (with 9 measuring posts in the countryside), etc.
At the same time, the question about its transformation to the university
was raised repeatedly, and even some of its benefactors contributed funds for the
establishment of "Serbian university in Belgrade”;9 however, wise people of that
time, of European knowledge and experience and appropriate responsibility
towards the country and its people, knew that a mere change of the name and a
new organization were not sufficient for a high school to become a university. The
university was not established before an optimum number of scientists gathered
in Belgrade, when laboratories and libraries were equipped at least modestly
and when experts were educated for all scientific fields of the curricula. In early
February 1905, all these conditions were met and the National Assembly adopted
the Law which came into force on 12 March. The three faculties continued to
exist, while the Faculties of Theology and Medicine were foreseen to be opened.
In accordance with high requirements of university education, the first full
professors were appointed from the rank of those having an enviable scientific
career, results and awards measured by European standards. The opening of the
University of Belgrade on 15 October 1905 concluded the century of Serbian
history marked by the establishment and development of the state and thus
completed the process of building national institutions characteristic for modern
societies. Thus Serbia became ready for modern times and challenges personified
in the advantage of those who know and who nurture knowledge. Like the
majority of modern universities, it was created by a state decree, however with
the role of the state being reduced to its financing and financial control, as only in
this manner the main requirement was met - the academic freedom.
Education and Professionalization
Young higher educational institutions of the Serbian state were at a rudimental
level in comparison to those in developed countries. A couple of hundreds of
students who every year enrolled in the High School were much less than the
percentage of those who at the same time studied in developed countries; in
9 Zadužbine i fondovi Beogradskog univerziteta. (Belgrade, 1940), p. 315. More in Lj. Trgovčević,
“Dobrotvori Beogradskom univerzitetu”, in Dobrotvori Beogradskom univerzitetu (Beograd:
Katalog izložbe, 2005), pp. 15-39.
Great Britain and Germany about 1.2% of the generation studied10 at the end of
the 19th century, while in Serbia this percentage was about 0.25%.11 Furthermore,
a student boom which occurred in developed Europe in the 1870s, with an
accelerated increase in the number of those enrolling in universities and higher
schools, was not notable in Serbia. Such a trend was only perceived in Serbia when
the High School was transformed to the University; this can be interpreted both
by the fact that studying was facilitated by the existence of a higher educational
institution in an immediate surroundings, and by the fact that modernization
and professionalization were accelerating.
The number of students at the High School and the University12
YEAR 1870/1 1874/5 1886/7 1889/90 1903 1905 1907 1913
TOTAL 229 185 231 484 465 778 1022 1500
When Serbia began to build its state, it was a country of peasants with
almost no literate people. As building of public institutions was a priority, the
majority of those educated both in the country and abroad got a job in public
service. The position of a clerk was the fastest way of social promotion and
transition from the lower, peasant, to higher social groups. Already after a few
semesters at the Lyceum or High School, many young Serbs became sufficiently
„competent“ to get employment in public administration. Public service
promised stable employment, social reputation and certain security, and since
the need for clerks was permanent, the largest number of those educated both in
the country and abroad searched for a job within public institutions. Law was a
more or less attractive profession everywhere, as children from old social layers
(bureaucracy) were interested in it, aiming at preserving influence and power, but
it also attracted those who still needed social promotion (peasantry, craftsmen).
Therefore, it is not unusual that the Faculty of Law was the most popular both
at the High School and later at the University. If we compare these trends with
the ones in developed countries, it is obvious that in Europe legal science was
the most popular profession in the early phase of establishment of a modern
state; however since the second half of the 19th century, more and more students
oriented towards different departments of faculties of philosophy, i.e. rather
10 K. H. Jarausch, “Higher Education and Social Change: Some Comparative Perspectives”, in
Konrad H. Jarausch (ed.), The Transformation o f Higher Learning 1860-1930: Expansion,
Diversification, Social Opening and Professionalization in England, Germany, Russia and the
United States (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1983), p. 16.
11 Data derived on the basic of statistics of 1900 by taking into account the age group from 20 to
24. If women are excluded from this group, whose number was neglectable in the world as well,
that percentage would increase to about 0.5%.
12 The archive of the High School and the University sustained significant damage in both World
Wars, so that the data for some school years are missing.
towards professions than general-type schools, as legal and socio-economic
sciences (Kameralien) were thought to be. For example, in the second half of the
1 9 * century, 20% of students in Germany studied law, while the percentage in
Serbia was between 57% and 72%. It is obvious that the number of future lawyers
in Serbia decreased as well, but at a much slower pace than in the countries where
modernization was completed.
S T U D EN T S AT HIGH S C H O O L AND U N IV ER S IT Y
At the same time, the number of those considering schooling to be the entry
ticket to public service showed that the society itself still did not have a demand
for experts of other profiles. Health, culture, economy were still in the emerging
phase, while the primitive accumulation of capital had not yet reached the level
which would include experts; primitive economy still relied upon craftsmen and
hastily trained cadres.
80%
D IS T R IB U T IO N O F S T U D E N T S AT HIGH S C H O O L
AN D U N IV E R S IT Y
The correlation between the development of school and the demands of a
society is visible on the example of the Technical Faculty After its establishment,
its curriculum contained as many as one third of general courses (12 professional
and 6 general), mostly from the field of civil engineering. Therefore, the Technical
Faculty was the only institution educating civil engineers and architects until the
end of the 19th century; it was necessary to build roads, bridges, railroads, i.e.
to „Europeanize“ the cities by building modern buildings that would replace
Ottoman- style boroughs. This is confirmed by the data that the maj ority of students
chose the Civil Engineering Department, which was the only one developed at
all (only 16% of students studied mechanical engineering). Only at the end of
the century, particularly by the reforms of 1896, the Faculty got a structure of
a modern university institution with 52 professional courses, and with several
separate institutes - Institute of Geodesy (1887), Institute of Applied Hydraulics
(1894), Institute of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics (1898), Material
Examination Laboratory, etc. - showing that also scientific fields modern in the
world, such as electrical engineering, were already studied at that time. A good
example is a gradual development of teaching of mechanical engineering; in 1873
there was only one general course in mechanical engineering intended primarily
for those who studied to build railroads; it was followed by the establishment
of a separate department for mechanical engineers in 1897. This shows that
not only the Faculty strengthened its human resources, but that demand for
the mentioned professions appeared, i.e. that Serbia was under the impetus of
industrialization. This is obvious also from the example of young Serbs who
went abroad to study technical sciences at the turn of the centuries. Thus, only
26% of all Serbs educated at the Technical Faculty (Technische Hochschule) in
Berlin were educated in the 19th century, whereas three quarters of students chose
this school in early 20th century.13 The enrolment rate at other foreign technical
universities was similar. This is further confirmed by the data that the number
of technical science graduates from the High School until 1904 was almost the
same to the number of those who enrolled in that Faculty (130:131) in the school
year 1905/06.14 This fast growth of interest in technical professions can only be
interpreted by the growing needs for professionals, which emerged from the
demands of young industry; this can be observed in the following example:
New factories and enterprises
Before 1858 1858-68 1869-78 1879-1898 1899-1908
6 5 8 61 92
13 Lj. Trgovčević, “Srpski inženjeri na studijama u inostranstvu do 1918’”, in Putevi srpskog
inženjerstva tokom XIX veka, Naučni skupovi LXXIII (Beograd: SANU, 1994), pp. 148-167.
14 “The list of graduates”, in M. Nikolova, Razvoj Tehničkog fakulteta Velike škole u Beogradu od
1863. do 1905, Flogiston, 2 (Beograd, 1996), pp. 59 - 84.
professional Emancipation of Women
The right to education and right to work were, besides political rights,
the foundations of emancipation of women in the 19th century. Like in other
countries, also in Serbia exercising of these rights was slow. In Serbia, education
0f girls was for the first time regulated by the law of 1844, however stipulating
separate schools for them; if there were none, girls could not go to school together
with boys after the age of ten. Because of the prohibition of coeducation, the first
female school was only established in 1845 and by 1858 18 female schools were
opened. A radical turn came in early 1883 when a compulsory 6-year education
for all children was introduced, but the economic conditions, the lack of schools
and teachers and patriarchal environment only slightly raised the number of girls
in school benches. In the early 20th century, inclusiveness of female children in
education was 17%, while the share of women among illiterate population was
still high: in 1900 there were 7.36% of literate women, i.e. double less than the
number of illiterate men.15
Higher education of girls started by the establishment of a Female High
School in Belgrade in 1863.16 Beside general education, its task was to prepare
teachers for work in female elementary schools.17 Female Teachers School and
Female Commercial School were also opened after 1900, while the first female
“gymnasium” was opened only in 1905. Since 1879, girls could attend male
“gymnasiums” and take the graduation examination privately, but only upon
an explicit approval which was difficult to obtain as the “gymnasium” directors
reluctantly admitted girls among their pupils.18
Female students were an exception at the faculties of the High School.
It was neither forbidden nor approved as at the time when regulations were
passed the possibility that girls would be interested in higher education was not
considered. This loophole was used by Draga Ljočić, who enrolled as a part-time
student in the Faculty of Philosophy in 1871; however after one semester she
left to Zurich where she obtained the title of medical doctor in 1879. She thus
became the first Serbian female doctor and among the first ones in Europe.19
For other interested girls, studies in Belgrade were mainly precluded by the
15 See Lj. Trgovčević, “Školovanje devojaka u Srbiji u 19. veku”, in Obrazovanje kod Srba kroz
vekove, (Beograd: Istorijski institut, 2003), pp. 81-88.
16 Similar schools were later opened in Kragujevac, Šabac, Valjevo, Kruševac.
17 L. Perovič, “Modernost i patrijarhalnost kroz prizmu državnih ženskih institucija: Viša ženska
škola (1863-1913)” in Srbija u modernizacionim procesima 19. i 20. veka, 2. Položaj žene kao
merilo modernizacije (Beograd, 1998), pp. 141-161
18 M. Nikolova, “Školovanje ženske mladeži u Srbiji do 1914”, Srbija u mo dernizacionim procesima
19. i 20. veka, 2, pp. 73-82; N. Trnavac, “Indiferentnost prema školovanju ženske dece u Srbiji
19. veka”, Srbija u modernizacionim procesima 19. i 20. veka, 2, pp. 55-72.
19 The first female medical doctor in Europe was N. Suslova in 1866, the first French in 1875, the
first Spaniard in 1882, Ester Bonomi became a doctor in Genova almost two decades after D.
Ljočić, while Bulgarian Ana Panova managed that eight years later (1887)...
mentioned regulation of compulsory secondary school final examination as an
eligibility requirement for enrolling in the university; so they also went to study
abroad.20 Some of more persistent girls yet managed to overcome the imposed
obstacles and in 1891 Leposava Bošković and Kruna Dragojlović graduated from
the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade. The number of women at studies was
gradually increasing, so that in 1900 the first female architect Jelisaveta Načić
graduated from the Technical Faculty followed by others. By the establishment of
the University of Belgrade in 1905, girls became legally entitled to the full studies;
already in the first school year they made up 12.6% of the enrolled students.
There was 74 of them at the Faculty of Philosophy making up one third of all
enrolled students, 11 at the Technical Faculty and only two at Faculty of Law.
The percentage of enrolled female students was higher than in majority of other
countries, except in Switzerland and Bulgaria, particularly if taking into account
that university education of girls had not yet been allowed at the entire territory
of the German Empire.21
An outstanding position in this generation of pioneers among universityeducated
women in Belgrade belongs to Jelisaveta Načić who in 1900 graduated
from architecture and became the first female architect in Serbia. This profession
was very rare among women worldwide. Girls first started to study this subject
in the USA, which recorded about ten female architects until 1890, whereas the
first European female architect was a Finish Signe Hornborg, who graduated in
1890. A year before, enrolment was allowed to girls in Brno, but without a right
to diploma, while the first French girl enrolled in this department at the Ecole
des Beaux-Arts in 1898 and graduated in 1902, the first Bulgarian obtained this
title by graduation in Berlin in 1917, the first Romanian in 1919, etc.22 Thus,
Jelisaveta Načić was one of the first European woman-architects, but also among
the first who won the right to the profession; at that time, higher education did
not imply an equal right to employment, particularly in public services, which
20 Until 1914, 32 Serbian girls studied in Zurich, five in Lausanne and about ten in Geneva.
According to the data collected so far, until 1914 ten girls from Serbia studied at the University
of Berlin, two in Munich (where Pravda Markovič got her PhD in Philosophy in July 1910), three
in Halle, two in Vienna, one in each of Jena, Giessen and Tübingen. According to incomplete
data, there were about twenty students from Serbia in France, same as in Russia. Particularly
interesting is that the first woman who graduated from the Technical Faculty in Darmstadt was
Jovanka Bončić, who enrolled architecture in autumn 1909 and in July 1913 became the first
woman to obtain the diploma of this school (Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, Archiv, 25-2a:
J. Boncic). Since 1882 Serbian state awarded scholarships for foreign universities to 46 girls, i.e.
5% of all its state scholarship beneficieres. See Lj. Trgovčević, "O studentkinjama iz Srbije na
stranim univerzitetima do 1914. godine”, in Srbija u modernizacionim procesima XX veka, knj.
II: Položaj žene kao merilo modernizacije (Beograd, 1998), 83-101; Lj. Trgovčević, Planirana
elita, pp.193-206.
21 See Lj. Trgovčević, »Blgarki i Srbkini v universitete v Šveicarija i Germanija do 1914.godina«,
in E.Tačeva, I. Nedin (eds.), Tja na Balkanite (Blagoevgrad, 2001), pp. 483-493.
22 K. Daskalova, R. Gavrilova (eds.), Granici na gradzanstvoto: Evropeyskite zeni mezdu tradiziyta
i modernnostta (Sofia, 2001), p. 286.
Y
were prevailingly intended for men. Upon graduation, Miss Načić managed to
t an employment and become the Architect of the Municipality of Belgrade in
1902. Thus she not only entered a „male preserve”, but also received a professional
recognition by designing some masterpieces of Serbian architecture, for example
the “Kralj Petar” School in Belgrade (1906) and the Aleksandar Nevski Church.
Soon after, Angelina Nešić graduated from architecture, Vidosava Milovanovič
and others followed. The law studies in Serbia, as elsewhere in Europe, were
connected to the prohibition for women to work in advocacy and the high
state service positions were conditioned by completed military service. At the
University of Belgrade, the first who won this ‘male’ profession was Smilja
Jovanovič, who graduated from the Faculty of Law in 1914.
Their professional emancipation unfolded at a slower pace than that of men.
Female teachers and professors were the first to obtain the right to employment
in public service, however they could not become appointed public servants; this
denied them the permanency of their employment and a right to pension, and
they had to observe the state distribution of places of service. They remained in
an unfavourable position regarding salaries, which were lower than those of men
of the same title; the position was even more difficult for female teachers, who
were committed to marry teachers as they could lose their job if choosing another
spouse. The first Serbian female doctors from foreign universities had to pass an
examination before the commission of the Serbian Ministry of Health, they were
allowed to private practice only in 1881 and to work in public hospitals in 1890.
Although in 1900 there was one fifth of women among public servants (2,124
employed female teachers, telegraph operators, midwifes, etc.),23 only teachers
had higher education obtained at the Female High School while less than one
hundred had university education.24
However, the examples of first female professionals in Serbia destroy a
stereotypic opinion that marriage and family disturbed their professional career
in the society of that time. The sample until 1914 (17 female doctors and 24
female architects and engineers) shows that 63% of these women were married
while 22% of them left the job after marriage.25 It is interesting that the majority
of these women kept their maiden name and added the husband’s family name
(e.g. Dr Draga Ljočić-Milošević, Mileva Andrijević-Stoiljković, Jovanka Bončić-
Katerinić, Dr Slavka Mihailović-Klisić, Dr Zorka Brkić-Popović, Jelisaveta Načić-
Lukai), but some of them, despite having successful marriages and children,
remained known per their maiden names for the whole life, for example Dr
23 D. Stojanovič, “Žene “u smislu razumevanja našeg naroda”. Slučaj žena stručnjaka u Srbiji 1903-
1912” in Srbija u modernizacionim procesima XX veka, No. 2, p. 241.
24 In percentage, it is not a small number in comparison to the number of citizens and literacy
of women in Serbia, if compared with the data that in 1914 in France there were only 400-
600 women with diploma (baccaleureat). See A. Goldmann, Le Donne entrato in scena. Dalle
suffragette alle femministe (Firenze, 1996), p. 18.
25 See Lj. Trgovčević, Planirana elita, p. 209.
Draga Ljočić and an architect Jelisaveta Načić.26 They are important also as role
models, as daughters of some of them also managed to graduate from faculties
before the World War One and started their professional careers (Dr Radmila
Miloševič, daughter of Dr D. Ljočić or Dr Jelica Nešković, daughter of Dr Marija
Prita-Vučetić,). This can also be interpreted by the emancipation of their partners
who were of liberal or socialist attitudes, but it also raises a question whether the
patriarchal model of Serbian society was as rigid as it is usually interpreted.
State, Education, Modernization
Throughout the 19th century, the Serbian state was making efforts to be
constituted as a modern state, to gain independence and freedom, complete
its territory, build public institutions and provide better economic and cultural
development for its citizens. As a result of a set of circumstances, something was
successful while something was not, i.e. it has not been developing at a desired
pace. Serbian political elites knew that the creation of own educated class was
a condition for the progress of the state; however it cannot be said that they
continually endured in that effort and followed the examples of some other
states. Although all educational institutions were built, it cannot be claimed that
education was the state’s priority. The rate of budgetary expenditure for education
was lower than in some other underdeveloped societies. This can be explained by
the political circumstances and economic development, but it remains striking
that the number of students in comparison to the number of citizens in Serbia
was lower than in the neighbouring Balkan states. On the other hand, Serbia had
an appropriate state program for education of its cadre abroad; but this number
gradually decreased in relation to overall population; for example, in 1884 one
such scholarship came to each 29,715 citizens of Serbia, in 1905 to 37,191 and
in 1910 to 83,191 citizens. This certainly resulted from the fact that the urgently
needed number of educated people had already been reached, as well as by that
the High School and the University could already form necessary professionals
(this is further shown by the decrease in the number of students going abroad
after opening of the University of Belgrade in 1905), but the main reason was that
economic development of the country did not follow one of the biggest natural
birth rates in Europe and Serbia’s leading position in terms of the number of
school-age children. The development of faculties improved the possibility for
quality education in the country, as the reforms starting in 1873 transformed
26 These results are interesting if compared with Anglo-Saxon examples we know. Bonnie Smith
shows in her analysis of professional female historians at universities that they generally were
not married nor had partners’ support and that family life disturbed their career. She records
that Lilian Knowles was the only female historian who had professional career and a child (B.
G. Smith, The Gender o f History: Men, Women, and historical Practice (Harvard, 2000), p. 190).
them from general-educational institutions, where almost a same number of
professional and general courses had been taught, to quality high schools.27
This was certainly thanks to the number and quality of professors. Almost all
teachers were educated at top class European universities. In the country of poor
scientific tradition, they could apply the most recent knowledge acquired during
studies, while the absence of competition and ‘authority’ granted freedom to their
work. Therefore they could introduce some of the most modern theories of that
time into the teaching process and to venture in opening new research fields.
Xhe increase in the number of professors28 is closely linked to the development
of sciences which were an integral part of teaching process, as other scientific
institutions beyond the High School and subsequent university almost did not
exist.29 Another obvious fact is a large fluctuation of professors who very often
replaced chairs with political positions. That trend, existing since the beginning
of higher education in Serbia, can be attributed to a higher reputation of political
functions compared to the faculty ones, but also by the needs of the state which
selected the best educated people from among the high school or university
teachers. There were almost no professors who did not spend at least some
time on the position of a minister, an envoy abroad, a president of a party or a
prime minister. On the contrary, it cannot be said that their political engagement
significantly contributed to the development of education. Except Stojan
Novakovič, who started a set of reforms in education, there are only a few of those
who focused on education during their political careers. The already mentioned
low rate of budgetary expenditure for education is the best example. On the other
hand, their impact in the field of modernization was significant. Professors wrote
almost all modern laws of the new state, organized public administration and
independent judiciary. Their colleagues from the Technical Faculty designed
the first modern buildings in Belgrade and in Serbia, worked on routing of
roads and building of railroads. Professors of the Faculty of Philosophy carried
out geological, geographic, ethnographic, philological, botanical, zoological,
archaeological and other research on Serbia and thus obtained a corpus of
knowledge about the space they belonged to; they introduced standards of food
and water control, carried out chemical experiments, contributed to metallurgy
and mining, etc.30
27 Out of 21 courses at the Faculty of Law in 1863, eleven were professional, at the Faculty of
Philosophy 10 professional and 7 general, and at the Technical Faculty 12 professional and 6
general (S. Bojovič, 200 godina Beogradskog univerziteta 1808-2008: Istorija institucije (Beograd,
2008), p. 54). Reforms of 1873 reduced the number of general courses at the faculties to 5.
28 In 1873 there were 19 professors, 1878-28, 1890-35, 1903- 67.
29 Apart from Serbian Learned Society, later Serbian Royal Academy, some scientific research was
carried out within the State Chemical Laboratory (since 1859).
30 Let us mention only the following: Vladimir Karič, Srbija: opis zemlje, naroda i države
(Belgrade, 1887); Jovan Žujovič, Geologija Srbije, I-II (Belgrade, 1893-1990); Josif Pančić, Flora
Kneževine Srbije (Belgrade, 1874); Jovan Cvijič, La péninsule balkanique. Géographie humaine
(Paris, 1918)...One of examples of professors’ contribution is Đorđe Stanojevič who built the
Another effect of education was the change of social structure. Middle class
and parts of different elite groups gradually emerged from a prevailingly peasant
society. The social promotion enabled inclusion into the elite, while many, in
order to join it, studied in parallel with work or enjoyed some of the scholarships
awarded by certain funds and student associations. However, about one fifth
of the High School students did not manage to graduate, sometimes due to a
frequent student disease of that time - tuberculosis. In the first decade of its
existence - until 1873, the High School had 380 graduates, while until 1888 it is
estimated that about 900 students got their diplomas.31 Already in the second half
of the century, academically educated citizens started to gain prevalence at free
labour market and replace their hastily trained predecessors.
As a result of the decades of development, Serbia managed to create thin
elite in early 20th century, which by its structure resembled the European one,
however in numbers it still lagged far behind.32 Although small, it was important
as it yielded all modernization improvements, from political to cultural. In the
political sphere, students created the core which accepted and developed liberal,
democratic and national ideas, particularly through organizations, such as
“United Serbian Youth” (modelled by La Giovine Italia). Although they mostly
did not follow their youth aspirations in later years, the vast number of politicians
transferred a part of their experience from studies to the public sphere. In the
national aspect, the presence of students from various areas inhabited by Serbs and
other Southern Slavs was important (Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia, Montenegro,
as well as Bulgaria, from where they came before the establishment of the state, as
well as due to political reasons, particularly in the time of closure of the University
of Sofia in 1907). The idea of the unification of Southern Slavs, strong in early 20th
century and demonstrated on the congresses of Yugoslav student youth and in
student associations, was developed and accepted among them.
The contribution of domestic education to the development of public, political
and general culture is undisputable. In the case of Serbia, the question remains
of how strong its contribution was to the development of economic or industrial
class, considering the overall growth of the country. The undisputable correlation
between the number of students and economic-cultural progress is more obvious
in the emergence of educated public administration than of modern professions
first hydroelectric power station in Uzice which gave alternating current 19 years after the one
built on the Niagara Falls.
31 Correct number cannot be determined due to the large damage of funds.
32 In 1900, Serbia had about 50,000 administration staff (out of which 12,947 clerks, customs
officials), 45,200 traders, 1,032 priests, monks and church officials, 1,937 military officers
and non-commissioned officers, 2,486 teachers, 588 High School professors, gymnasium and
college teachers, 292 medical doctors, 81 pharmacists, 295 lawyers, 100 engineers, 107 artists,
actors etc. (Popis stanovništva u Kraljevini Srbiji 31.decembra 1900.godine, Drugi deo. Sa tri
kartograga i tri dijagrama (Beograd, 1905), p. CCV).
of industrial society. On the other hand, a rational and secular knowledge offered
by the University of Belgrade broadened the fields of freedom much more than
the number of its students. By their manner of thinking, working, behaving,
they served as role models, which all contributed to the creation of new cultural
values different from the inherited ones. The multiple correlations between
higher education and social changes, although not always possible to be exactly
documented, remain unquestionable in the example of Serbia.

Roumiana Preshlenova
Emancipation through Education:
Some Bulgarian Experience since
the 19th Century
During the 19th century, popular in the Bulgarian historiography as national
Revival, a growing number of Bulgarians got acquainted with the achievements
and values of the contemporary European societies. More intensive trade
relations, contacts with the newly established diplomatic representations of
the Great Powers in the Ottoman Empire, European voyagers, Catholic and
Protestant missions in South-Eastern Europe, education at European universities
were the main channels through which the impact of the French revolution and
modern ideas in political, economic and cultural life penetrated the Balkans.1 The
urban space with specific communication facilities in the first place functioned
as the most influential site of transmission. The Western model, which won
recognition in a prolonged and complex process, not without contradictions,
embodied for the enlightened Bulgarian elite the prospects for the future
development and the negation of the rejected Ottoman domination. Its features
- intensive urbanization, parliamentary democracy, sustained technological
transformations, multiplication of communications, compulsory and common
accessible education - made a significant part of the projects for national
emancipation. In the rhetoric of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, adoption of
the Western model of social development was declared the way for the Bulgarians
to take their place among the civilized, prosperous or just enlightened nations
and to be part of the modern world.2
Emancipation in this case was understood as overcoming the complex
Ottoman heritage associated with Orientalism. A second line of development
confronted Greek religious and educational influence which dominated Bulgarian
intelligentsia till the mid of the 19th century. Thus, national education seemed to
be committed to change the cultural belonging of the Bulgarians and to perform
1 “Balkans” and “Balkan” are used as synonyms for South-Eastern Europe and South-Eastern
European without any derogative connotations inherent in some texts of Western authors. See
Maria Todorova, Imagining the Balkans (New York - Oxford, 1997).
2 See Veska Nikolova - Dimitur Sazdov (eds.), Programi, programni dokumenti i ustavi na
burzhoaznite partii v Bulgariya (Sofia, 1992).
the shift from the Balkan-Oriental model to the European one. It concentrated the
efforts and the will of the enlightened elites to change the status of the nation and
to approach the achievements of modernity in the states which shaped the image
of Europe.3 Several public celebrations related to education not only mobilized the
social energy for this but also promoted national self-esteem. The biggest among
them is the day of the Saints Cyril and Methodius, the creators of the Cyrillic
alphabet, celebrated since 1851/57 as the Day of Bulgarian Education and Culture
and of Slavic Literacy. A particular hymn of the Saints Cyril and Methodius was
created in 1892 by Stoian Mihailovski and the music to it by Panaiot Pipkov in
1900. The hymn is played in every Bulgarian school throughout the world on 24
May. Hundreds of schools, the National Library in Sofia and the University in
Veliko Turnovo added the names of the two saints to their names. The day of the
Seven Saints - Cyril, Methodius, Kliment, Sava, Gorazd, Naum, Angelarius - is
intended to outline the specific Bulgarian contribution to the preservation of the
Cyrillic alphabet and the old Slavic literature. Explicitly celebrated are: the Day
of the peoples’ spiritual leaders, the Day of St. Kliment Ohridski, patron of the
Sofia University which became the day of all Bulgarian university students at the
beginning of the 20th century.
This is just one of the many occurrences of a specific affinity for education
in Bulgaria formed through the last one and a half centuries. Reports of foreign
observers in the late 19th and the early 20th centuries indicate this peculiarity.
Felix Philipp Kanitz, Austro-Hungarian traveller, geographer, ethnographer and
journalist during the 1860s and 1870s, pointed out in his “Donau-Bulgarien und
der Balkan” that the Bulgarians have a strong natural inclination towards learning.
He supported this statement not only by his personal experience in different
towns and villages but also by impressive examples of donations made by wealthy
Bulgarians for promoting national education.4 Analogous observations were
also made by Count Zichy, an Austro-Hungarian ambassador to Constantinople
in 1874, although he put them into a diplomatic context: the aspirations of the
Bulgarians for progress and education are so evident, and anyone who would offer
them a possibility to satisfy this striving will have their affection and gratitude.
The Czech historian Konstantin Jireček, invited as an expert and later minister
in the Bulgarian Ministry of Education during the early 1880s, a man extremely
critical of the political elite, of urbanization and living conditions in Sofia at that
3 Angel Dimitrov, Uchilishteto, progresut i natsionalnata revoliutsiya: Bulgarskoto uchilishte prez
Vuzrazhdaneto (Sofia, 1987); Nikolai Genchev, Bulgarsko vuzrazhdane (Sofia, 1978); Nikolai
Genchev, Bulgarskata vuzrozhdenska inteligentsiya (Sofia, 1991); Raina Gavrilova, Vekut
na bulgarskoto duhovno vuzrazhdane (Sofia, 1992); Nikolai Aretov - Raia Zaimova (eds.),
Modernostta vchera i dnes (Sofia, 2003). For a more general view on this issue see in Serge
Latouche, Die Verwestlichung der Welt (Frankfurt am Main, 1994).
4 Felix Kanitz, “Donau-Bulgarien und der Balkan: historisch-geographisch-ethnographische
Reisestudien aus den Jahren 1860-1875”, Bd. 1-3, Leipzig 1875-1879, pp. VI, 87, 159, 208, 217,
234, etc.
time- admired the apparent endeavours of the Bulgarians to be enlightened and
to develop.5 Almost thirty years later, Harry de Windt, an English officer and
traveller, reflected in his book “Through Savage Europe“ the great aptitude for
learning, books, newspapers showed by the Bulgarians.6 Tbe explicitly positive
disposition towards promotion of education and culture as a peculiarity of the
Bulgarian nation is stressed also by several German and Austro-Hungarian
military observers during the Balkan Wars and World War I.7 These impressions
by foreign commentators in the long period from the 1860s to World War I
display a sustained trend with a relatively high social value.
After the re-establishment of the autonomous Kingdom of Bulgaria in 1878,
efforts of state, municipalities, economic and political elite to demonstratively
turn to the European patterns and standards affected first of all town planning,
construction and architecture. New cultural institutions occurred which were
not existing by that time - publishing houses, libraries, museums, institutions
of higher education, theatres. In the first decades after the liberation, European
experts were invited to carry out these changes. This had a long-term social
effect outlining the direction for the future advancement. As public discourse on
modernization or “Europeization” as opposed to the prior compulsory imposed
Ottoman pattern concerned the means and ways of realization but not its sense,
it could be regarded as a principal consensus.8
Beyond the nation-building role, education has another role - to disseminate
knowledge and skills and thus accelerate economic development. It promotes
economic progress in general and industrialization in particular as far as both are
intellectual activities based on acquisition of knowledge and technical methods.
In this context, education is regarded a significant factor of production next to
land, capital and work. This view of most of the leading activists of the Revival is
a further explanation for the special attention they paid to it. Comparable indices
of education in Bulgaria during the long 19th century - state funding per capita,
number of teachers per 1000 inhabitants, share of children in the age between 5
and 15 years regularly going to school - were approaching the respective average
values in Europe and were among the best in South-Eastern Europe.9 They reveal
5 Konstantin Jireček, Bulgarski dnevnik 1879-1884. Tom I. Plovdiv (Sofia, 1930).
6 Harry De Windt, Through savage Europe being the narrative o f a journey throughout the Balkan
states and European Russia (London, 1907), pp. 218, 234-235.
7 Mechthild Golczewski, Der Balkan in deutschen und österreichischen Reise- und Erlebnisberichten
1912-1918 ( Wiesbaden, 1981), pp. 33, 176.
8 Roumiana Preshlenova, “Challenges of Liberty. Shaping Identifications in Bulgarian Urban
Space after 1878. - “We” and “The Others”: Modern European Societies in Search of Identity”,
Studies in comparative history, Studia historica LIII, Acta Universitatis Carolinae. Philosophica et
Historica 1-2000, Praha, 2004, pp. 103-115.
9 Holm Sundhaussen, „Alphabetisierung und Wirtschaftswachstum in den Balkanländern
in historisch-komparativer Perspektive“, in Norbert Reiter - Holm Sundhaussen (eds.),
Allgemeinbildung als Modernisierungsfaktor. Zur Geschichte der Elementarbildung in
Südosteuropa von der Aufklärung bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg (Balkanologische Veröffentlichungen
23) (Berlin, 1994), pp. 21-36.
a strategic investment whose maximal accelerating effect was expected in years
to come.
According to official statistics, literacy in Bulgaria doubled from 27% to
52% from the late 19th century to the eve of World War I. This positive although
insufficient progress can be attributed to the priority given to education. The
existing network of primary schools was extended, and many buildings for
them were constructed voluntarily by the population. In addition, a number
of professional schools have been established immediately after 1879: several
pedagogical courses and colleges, the Military School in Sofia (1878), the
Handicraft School in Kniazhevo (1883), the first Academy of Trade in Svishtov
(1884-1885), agricultural schools with model farms in Obraztsov Chiflik near
Rousse and in Sadovo (1883). In the next years, the Art School in Sofia (1896), the
state school for deaf-and-mute students (1898), the Academy of Music in Sofia
(1904), the first school for blind students (1905) appeared. Between 1893 and
1905, 56 private girls’ schools were established as well. On the eve of the World
War I, there were already 4,033 schools in Bulgaria, and 37 of them were full
high schools. The Ministry of Education took up the administration of and the
control over all educational institutions in the country with the laws from 1891
and 1909. In the school year 1909/1910, only 22% of the obligated children did
not go regularly to primary and secondary schools, which were free of charge.10
Many foreigners, mainly Slavs from the Habsburg Monarchy, were invited to
teach and organize education in Bulgaria.11
The idea of the establishment of an own university or higher school was
welcomed by many prominent Bulgarians during the Revival. Among them
were Vasil Aprilov, Ivan Bogorov, Konstantin Fotinov, Gavril Krustevich, Ivan
Seliminski, graduates from prestigious European universities. The founders of
the Bulgarian Learned Society (1869) in Braila, the Bulgarian Community in
Constantinople and the Bulgarian Exarchate, established in the Ottoman capital
in 1870, shared the same vision. But there were not enough resources to achieve
this goal under the conditions of the alien rule. After the liberation, the first
Bulgarian prince Alexander von Battenberg and the Czech professor Konstantin
Jireček, minister of education in 1881-82 became the protagonists of a higher
school. Indeed, the first Bulgarian Higher School was founded in 1888, only a
decade after the reestablishment of the state and renamed university in 1904. The
biggest personal donation ever made in Bulgaria was explicitly aimed at this goal
- the establishment of a national higher school. Evlogii Georgiev, considered the
wealthiest Bulgarian in the 19th century and one of the most generous partisans
of national education and enlightenment, granted a site of 10,200 m2 in the centre
10 Nikola Vankov, Istoria na uchebnoto delo v Bulgariya (Sofia, 1930), pp. 86-109; Veliko Iordanov,
Materiali za izuchavane na uchebnoto delo v Bulgaria. Kn. II. Razvitie na nasheto uchebno delo
ot Osvobozhdenieto do voinite (1878-1913) ( Sofia, 1925).
11 Angel Penev - Petur Petrov, Chuzhdentsi - prosvetni deitsi v Bulgariya (Sofia, 1988).
of Sofia and 800,000 francs for the construction of the building for the Bulgarian
university in 1896. He also donated 6,000,000 francs for the establishment of a
technical university in his will.12
It is true that till 1918 the university remained incomplete in terms of the
classic pattern having only a Physical-Mathematical, Historical-Philological and
Juridical Faculty. The decision of 1897 to establish an agricultural department
at the university and that of 1917 to open a medical faculty did not change this
situation. Furthermore, there were fewer graduates from this university than the
Bulgarian students educated abroad in the same period. But the very existence of
the university at that time demonstrated a shift to other, non-Oriental models of
development. Consequently, the share of people with a university or higher school
degree increased especially among the political elite: in the Constituent Assembly
there were just 20% of people with such education in 1879, this percentage rising
to 31% in 1899, and to 43% in 1908.13 There were of course critical opinions
on the state of education and even on the very existence of the university in
Bulgaria. The same year when Harry de Windt praised the Bulgarians for their
studiousness, a debate developed on the occasion of the university crisis in Sofia
in 1907. The social legitimacy of the institution was contested in the press by
prominent intellectuals, such as Stoian Mihailovsky, Dr. Momchilov and Krustiu
Krustev because of the immaturity of the nation. The lack of adequate material
resources for the development of the Sofia University was also underlined. The
main motif for the establishment of the Sofia University was interpreted by its
critics like this: “People do not want to remain beneath Belgrade, Bucharest or
Athens, so the university opened for parade, for luxury”.14 In his response to such
criticism, the already mentioned Konstantin Jireček, at that time professor at the
Vienna University, pointed out: “If there are small universities in Athens, Corfu,
Zagreb, Belgrade, Bucharest, and Jassy, why not have one in Bulgaria as well?”15
A specific form of emancipation occurred also with regard to Russian
education, which was among the measures for creating a network of supporters
for Russian political ambitions among the Slavic population in South-Eastern
Europe. After the Crimean War, numerous scholarships were provided for young
Slavs at Russian schools and universities. On the other hand, Bulgarian students
sent to universities and higher schools in Central and Western Europe did not
12 Elena Statelova, Evlogii Georgiev i svobodna Bulgariya (Sofia, 1987); Elka Drosneva (ed.),
Daritelite Evlogii i Hristo Georgievi (Sofia, 1998).
13 Zina Markova, Elena Statelova, „Sotsiologichesko prouchvane na sustava na Uchreditelnoto
subranie“, in Georgi Vulkov (ed.), Turnovskite zakonodateli. Iubileen sbornik (Veliko Turnovo,
1980), pp. 26-27; Iordan K. Kolev, Bulgarskata inteligentsiya 1878 - 1912 g (Sofia, 1992), p. 74.
14 Pepka Boiadzhieva, Universitet i obshtestvo: dva sotsiologicheski sluchaya ( Sofia, 1998), pp. 284-
287.
15 Petur Miyatev (ed.), Iz arhivata na Konstantin Jireček. Prepiska s bulgari. Dokumenti za
obshtestveno-politicheskata i kulturnata istoriya na Bulgariya ot 1871 do 1914 godina (Sofia,
1953), pp. 294-295.
receive scholarships from the respective country, except for a very small number
of people. They were supported from native resources, such as wealthy parents,
relatives, compatriots, communities, or Bulgarian charity associations, such as
the “Blagodetelna Drouzhina” (Benevolent Society) in Bucharest or the Society
“Napreduk” (Progress) in Vienna. These offset Russian educational activities
to a significant degree. Bulgarian emigrant merchant colonies in Romania
and Vienna used to finance young gifted men during their studies abroad.
Significantly, they sent them predominantly to high schools and universities in
the Slavic areas of the Habsburg Monarchy - Zagreb, Prague, but also Vienna.
Before the establishment of a Bulgarian diplomatic office in Vienna in 1889, the
firm of Nikola and Sava Panitsa performed such functions for Bulgarian students
as well as for different missions defending the Bulgarian cause in the capitals
of the Great Powers. They or other compatriots in Vienna met the students,
accompanied them to the respective school or university, forwarded evidence
for their progress and behaviour, and transferred their scholarships. From 1872
to 1881, the “Benevolent Society” for example financed totally the education of
nineteen young Bulgarians either partly or by full scholarships. Nine of them
studied in Austria-Hungary, six in Russia, two in Bulgaria, one in Paris and one in
Munich. It is worth mentioning that the Society was known as one of the leading
Russophile organizations of the Bulgarian bourgeoisie.16 Support for Bulgarian
students predominantly in universities and higher schools in Central Europe
corresponded to the respect and admiration for modern European progress in
education, science and technology. This social mobilization to promote the status
of the Bulgarian population and to foster modernization is admittedly a part of
the complex nation-building process in South-Eastern Europe.
The balance of the two students’ streams - to Russia and to European
universities, was more favourable to the second one, according to recent studies.
Till 1878, 220 Bulgarians studied at Russian universities, most of them with a
scholarship from the Russian emperor or from Slavic charity committees. Twice
and a half more Bulgarian students acquired their higher education in other
countries - 150 in Constantinople (not only at Ottoman institutions, but also
at the famous American Robert College and Lycée Français in Galata), 160 in
the Habsburg Monarchy, 70 in Romania, 70 in France, 45 in Germany, 30 in
Greece, etc.17 This proportion repeats roughly in the educational profile of the
Bulgarian governmental elite in 1879-1915. Less than one third of the ministers
16 Bulgarski Istoricheski Arhiv - Natsionalna biblioteka „Sv. Sv. Kiril i Metodii“, f. IIB 9291,1. 134.
See also Nikolai Zhechev, Bucuresht - kulturno sredishte na bulgarite prez Vuzrazhdaneto (Sofia,
1991), pp. 234-237.
17 Nikolai Genchev, Bulgaro-ruski kulturni obshtuvaniya prez Vuzrazhdaneto (Sofia, 2002), pp.
113-202. Data about Austria, The Czech Lands, Hungary and Croatia are summed up as these
were parts of the Habsburg Monarchy.
in this period were educated in Russia and afterwards some of them also attended
diversities in Central and Western Europe.18
Enthusiasm for Russian educational institutions remained moderate also
after the liberation in the course of the Russo-Turkish war in 1877-78, which
strengthened some Russophile sentiments among the population. This trend
remained continuous, despite sometimes changing political priorities of the
Bulgarian governments. The share of state bursaries for students at Russian
universities was diminishing. It dropped dramatically especially after 1886 when
diplomatic relations between Sofia and St Petersburg were broken. During the
whole period 1879-1909, the total number of Bulgarian state grants for foreign
universities was around 600. Remarkably, 160 from them were intended for
France, 140 for Austria-Hungary, 115 for Germany and only 76 for Russia.19 It
would not be exaggerated to interpret the destination of state scholarships also as
a tool for the country’s emancipation from Russian hegemonic pretensions.
The overall number of Bulgarians studying abroad was much greater than
the one of state grants. Only in the academic year 1897/98, 1000 young people
studied abroad according to the Ministry of Education. The data on particular
universities also confirm this assumption: in 1913/1914, 330 Bulgarians were
studying only at the New Brussels University, and further 80 in Vienna, where
nearly 1000 Bulgarians have been ascertained up to World War I. In Zurich,
some 220 Bulgarians were registered at the university by that time. The European
universities played a crucial role for the Bulgarian development, which is evident
also from the fact that the total number of their graduates (totally 1500 by 1909)
exceeded many times the number of graduates at the Sofia University. Up to that
time, only the number of probated diplomas from foreign universities was 1600.
Most of them were obtained in Central and Western Europe: in France (318), in
Switzerland (305), in Austria-Hungary (272), in Germany (225). The number of
diplomas obtained in a small Belgium (162) is comparable to the number of those
obtained in Russia (185).20
18 Dobrinka Parousheva, Pravitelstveniyat elit na Rumania i Bulgariya vtorata polovina na XIX i
nachaloto na XX vek ( Sofia, 2008), p. 220.
19 Figures are rounded. Roumiana Preshlenova, Poputishtata na evropeizma. Vissheto obrazovanie
v Avstro-Ungaria i bulgarite (1879-1918) (Sofia, 2008), p. 273. Herafter Preshlenova, Po
putishtata. More details on state support in the initial years after the liberation see in Ivan
Tanchev, Bulgarskata durzhava i uchenieto na bulgari v chuzhbina 1879-1892 (Sofia, 1994), pp.
93-97.
20 Preshlenova, Po putishtata, pp. 56, 60-61; Alexandre Rostov, Bulgariya i Belgia. Ikonomicheski,
politicheski i kulturni vruzki (1879-1914) (Sofia, 2005), pp. 69-70; Werner Zimmermann,
„Serbische und bulgarische Studenten an der Universität Zürich bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg“, in
Richard Georg Plaschka - Karlheinz Mack (eds.), Wegenetz europäischen Geistes II. Universitäten
und Studenten. Die Bedeutung studentischer Migrationen in Mittel- und Südosteuropa vom Ende
des 18. Jahrhunderts bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg (Wien, 1987), pp. 250-251. Hereafter Plaschka -
Mack (eds.), Wegenetz.
A high number of Bulgarians who studied in Central and Western Europe
after 1878 is a phenomenon worth further detailed research. It is part of the
increasing stream of young people attending universities as well as of a growing
mobility and communication, which had clear analogies at least in Serbia and
Romania.21 It could hardly be explained by Bulgaria’s greater underdevelopment
than that of other South-Eastern European countries. Its interpretation is
inevitably embedded in, although not limited to the manifested efforts and
measures of the elites to catch up with European developments. In the Bulgarian
case, the correlation between the diminishing state bursaries for studying abroad
and the growing number of Bulgarian students at universities and higher schools
in Austria-Hungary since the late 19th century22 implies at least an autonomous
development of the students’ current. Whether state support was the prevailing
source of study financing even in the years after the liberation is a question which
demands further particular and wide-ranging research. Indicative in this respect
are also data from the educational ministry on Bulgarian students abroad in 1881-
1882. Almost two thirds of them were supported by their families and only 14%
were holders of state grants. Not less striking is the fact that the share of students
at the Sofia University in 1896-1914 financed by sources outside their families
rarely exceeded 1%.23 In addition, private donations for educational purposes
and for regular scholarships24 continued tradition from the previous period,
despite the expectations of a decisive role of the “own” state. In this context, social
mobilization seems to have had a much greater role in fostering education than
it is usually accepted and the concept of a state-nourished intelligentsia needs a
certain re-evaluation.
A striking parallel to the 19th century Bulgarian phenomenon of studying
abroad can be found in a recent development. According to Eurostat, the number
of Bulgarian students enrolled in foreign European tertiary education increased
more than four times during the last decade - from 4,900 in 1998 to 22,600
in 2007 when the accession to the EU took place. Reportedly, further 20,000
Bulgarians comprise the third largest foreign students’ group in the USA, after the
Chinese and Russian ones. That means that about 15% of all Bulgarian students
study at European or American universities. Whether this means striving for
a faster integration into supranational developments, a new rationality or just
21 Plaschka -Mack (eds.), Wegenetz; Harald Heppner, “Führungsschichten und Staatswerdung
am Balkan im 19. Jahrhundert”, Schriftenreihe des Instituts fü r Geschichte. 2. Graz 1988, pp.
115-130; TbyÖMHKa TproBMeBMh, IlnaHUpaHa enuma. O cmydenmuMa U3 Cpöuje na eeponcKUM
yHueep3umemuMa y 19. BeKy (Beorpaß, 2003); Elena Siupiur, „Intelectuali, elite, clase politice
moderne in Sud-Estul European“, SecolulXIX, 2004; Wolfgang Höpken, „Die „fehlende Klasse“?
Bürgertum in Südosteuropa im 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhundert“, in Ulf Brunnbauer, Wolfgang
Höpken, (eds.), Transformationsprobleme Bulgariens im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Historische
und ethnologische Perspektiven ( München, 2007), pp. 33-69.
22 Preshlenova, Po putishtata, pp. 273-276.
23 Ibid., pp. 192-193, 200.
24 Veliko Iordanov, Daritelipo narodnata ni prosveta. Biografichni belezhki. Kn. I (Sofia, 1911).
dissatisfaction with the national educational system and social environment is a
matter of individual choice. Anyway, it reflects a new strong ambition to change
the status quo.
Attractiveness of education of course has another perspective which was not
always relevant to national sentiments. Studying at a university or a higher school
was motivated by the unprecedented vertical social mobility also in egalitarian
states like Bulgaria. In the late 19th century Bulgaria, where qualified experts in
almost all professions were lacking, university diploma was a kind of permit
for high social positions, especially in administration. “Learn for not have to
work” is a saying that reflects the very positive attitude to intellectual, inclusively
administrative professions as a way to avoid hard physical work. It is more or
less a universal disposition. Even nowadays it exists among Bulgarian students
(and not only among them). The official data at the beginning of the 21st century
reveal a relatively high share of students in social sciences and humanities in
Bulgaria - almost a half of all. Many of them enter a university or higher school
without a clear orientation, they just choose an exam they consider easiest to
pass. Therefore, there is still a deficiency of students in maths, natural sciences,
computing, where just 5% of the students were enrolled in 2006.
In the process of nation building, the function of education as a means of
accelerating economic development had a secondary importance. In this aspect,
it has been regarded as a long-term investment in the future. The Bulgarian
economy was based overwhelmingly on small-scale peasant agriculture like
all other Balkan economies before the World War I. It was only beginning
the process of industrialization, which was the hallmark of modern growth.
Structural shifts of labour and financial resources into advanced technologies,
which turn such growth into sustained development, were just starting to occur.
A recent survey of Bulgarian statistical data reveals stagnation in per capita GNP
from 1879 to the 1930s. Evidence is available of a new phase of intensification
in agriculture from the 1920s onwards.25 In this state of affairs, education could
not do miracles. Compared to most of the states in Western and Central Europe
at that time, Balkan economic achievements were very modest. In this sense,
the process of their disputable modernization, often called Europeanisation or
Westernisation, unavoidably acquires labels, such as partial and superficial. The
very fact of a simultaneous transition from pre-industrial to industrial and from
Oriental to European patterns made it much more complicated. The fact remains
that the Bulgarian elite demonstrated its aim to follow the advanced European
countries or rather to adopt some of their economic and cultural achievements
and to adapt them to the specific, very unfavourable conditions as a basis for
transformations toward the standards of contemporary industrial societies. The
25 Martin Ivanov, Adam Tooze, “Convergence or Decline on Europe’s Southeastern Periphery?
Agriculture, Population, and GNP in Bulgaria, 1892-1945”, The Journal o f Economic History,
67, 3, 2007, pp. 672-703.
long 19th century momentum nurtured the prospect of modern development in
the framework of the nation-state and gave that prospect an irrevocable place
in the national consciousness.26 What was expected from education - to prove a
new cultural belonging and to publicly propagate it - has been achieved.
26 John R Lampe, “Imperial Borderlands or Capitalist Periphery? Redefining Balkan Backwardness,
1520-1914”, in Daniel Chirot (ed.), The Origins o f Backwardness in Eastern Europe. Economics
and Politics from the Middle Ages Until the Early Twentieth Century (Berkeley - Los Angeles:
Oxford, 1989), p. 202.
Peter Vodopivec
Educated Elites in Slovene Regions before
VVWI - between National Aspirations and
Social and Political Conservativism
In the 19th century, the Austrian provinces populated by Slovene-speaking
population experienced a relatively slow social and economic development, but
at the same time a significant cultural change characterized by rapidly increasing
literacy. While according to the estimates of the Slovene historians more than
92% of the population was still illiterate at the end of the 18th century, the rate
of literacy increased to 80% and in some areas even to over 85% over the next
100 years, i.e. by the end of the 19th century. Before the WWI, Slovenes were
thus ranked just behind Germans, Czechs and Italians in terms of literacy rate
within the Habsburg Monarchy.1 The rapid growth of literacy in the second half
of the 19th century was a result of modernization of the primary school education
since the 1869 school reform and the increasing number of primary schools
using Slovene language as the language of instruction. By expanding literacy and
education, also the culture of reading spread. This is also seen from the increasing
number of copies of the publications by a catholic Družba sv. Mohorja publishing
house, which printed books in Slovene for less educated and peasantry readers.
Even back in 1875, some of its books were already printed in 25.000 copies, in
1890 in around 50.000 copies, and just before the end of world war the print-run
rose to as many as 90.000 copies.
The number of high school graduates, however, grew much slower. In the fifty
years from the introduction of high-school graduation exam (“matura” exam)
in the Austrian half of the Monarchy in the 1850s, there were 4513 graduates in
the high schools on the territory of todays Slovenia (all of them were boys); in
the period 1901-1910, there were another 2404 high-school graduates (7 of them
were girls), and in the period 1911-1920, this number rose to 3613 (of whom,
1 Ferdo Gestrin - Vasilij Melik, Slovenska zgodovina od konca osemnajstega stoletja do 1918
(Slovene History from the End o f 18 th Century to 1918) (Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije,
1966), p. 261.
84 girls).2 Around 1900, Slovenes lagged behind Czechs, Poles and Croats in the
Monarchy in terms of the number of high-school graduates. In the opinion of
Slovene historians, this was an inevitable consequence of the poor status of Slovene
language in high schools, particularly in “gymnasiums”. Only a few of them were
bilingual (only in the lower classes), while the instruction in the majority of them
and in all higher classes was in German or Italian (in the Littoral area). The first
entirely Slovene “gymnasium” was a private Episcopal “gymnasium” founded in
Šentvid near Ljubljana in 1905, and the only Slovene state “gymnasium” in the
Habsburg Monarchy was founded in Gorizia in 1913. Lessons in Slovene also
took place in some technical and vocational schools; the first female vocational
and secondary schools were founded towards the end of the 19th century.
Although demands for a Slovene university had been an element of the
Slovene political program since 1848, the Austrian authorities paid it no heed
until the end of the Monarchy in 1918. The movement to establish a Slovene
university - either in Ljubljana or Trieste, where also the Italians were demanding
their own university - gained new momentum at the start of the 20th century, but
again to no avail. Slovene students therefore mainly studied at the universities in
Vienna and Graz and since the end of the 19th century also in Prague and Krakow.
By far fewer students, however, went to the University of Zagreb, since its degrees
were treated as foreign in Cisleithania, due to the differences in the education and
legislation systems of the two halves of the Monarchy. At the beginning of the 20th
century, some liberal-thinking students also grasped the idea that the Slovene
educated classes could go west, to Paris if possible, and experience new ideas
there, if they wanted to expand their horizons and escape the forma mentis of
the German and Austrian universities. But in reality only few individuals turned
towards the non-German Europe and the Western European university centres
before the WWI. Until the end of the Monarchy, the great majority of Slovene
students studied at the Austrian universities and higher education colleges;
their number rose from around 350 in 1880 to more than 1000 per year in 1914.
According to the data based on the Austrian statistics published by Vasilij Melik
in 1986, the following number of Slovene students was enrolled at Austrian
Universities, high- and higher-education colleges in the period 1876-1913:3
2 Janez Kmet, “Nekaj podatkov o razvoju naše gimnazije” (Some Data on the Development o f
our "Gymnasium”), Prikazi in študije, III, No. 9, 1957, p. 24; Mateja Ribarič, “Od mature do
mature”, Od mature do mature, Zgodovinski razvoj mature na Slovenskem 1849/50 - 1994-95
(From Graduation to Graduation, Historical Development o f Graduation on Slovene Territory
1849/50 - 1994-95), Razstavni katalog 62, Ljubljana: Slovenski šolski muzej 1998, p. 19.
3 Vasilij Melik - Peter Vodopivec, "Slovenski izobraženci in avstrijske visoke šole” (Slovene
Educated Men and Austrian Colleges 1848 - 1918), Zgodovinski časopis, 40, 1986, No. 3, p. 272.
The year 1876 denotes the study year 1875/76, the year 1886 - study year 1885/86, and the
same all through to 1913, which denotes the study year 1912/13. In the last study year, another
30 Slovene students of the Export Academy in Vienna and the Higher College of Commerce
Revoltella in Trieste should be added to the total of 926 Slovene students, as well as 11 students
of the Art Academies and 5 students of the Academy of Music and Fine Arts in Vienna. Thus,
Slovene students at Austrian universities (Vienna, Graz, Prague, Krakow)
Year Iheol. Law. Med. Phil. Tech. Bodenkultur Mining Veterinary
Med.
Together
1876 139 80 9 89 72 0 3 392
1886 180 128 28 12 20 1 3 352
1896 262 147 73 49 34 5 3 568
1900 244 246 58 69 29 5 1 652
1910 176 388 74 71 102 27 9 24 871
1913 221 309 90 93 120 42 8 43 926
Two thirds of all Slovene university students studied in Vienna. Until around
1900, the majority of students of Slovene origin studied theology, if we refer to the
statistical data which include also the regional Episcopal colleges. After that, the
number of the law students prevailed. There were also more and more students of
philosophy, medicine and technical sciences (the number of the latter grew since
1860, at first slowly and since 1900 faster - so that after 1910 their number even
exceeded the number of medicine and philosophy students). The first Slovene
women to attend the University in Vienna enrolled medicine and philosophy at
the outset of the 20th century. In the period 1897-1918, there were 43 women - all
from the Carniola province, who studied medicine and philosophy at the Vienna
University.4 Before the WWI, only the most optimistical Slovene political leaders
were of the opinion that Slovene educated elites already had the professional
structure needed for the most vital interests of national existence as well as the
experts for the majority of areas that could influence further Slovene national
development and formation.
Obviously, such assessments were rather exaggerated: according to the
above-mentioned data, in 1914 there were around 5000 persons living and
working on the territory of todays Slovenia (of whom perhaps 10 or slightly more
women) with high school graduation (“matura exam”) in the period from early
1980s to the WWI, i.e. a mere 0.3 % or 0.4 % of total population.5 There were
even much fewer university, high or higher education graduates. Although no
the total number of Slovene students at the Austrian universities, high and higher-education colleges
was 972. See also: Alojz Cindrič, Študenti s Kranjske na dunajski univerzi 1848 - 1918 (Studentsfrom
Carniola at the Vienna University1848 - 1918), (Univerza v Ljubljani, 2009), pp. 28- 29.
4 Cindrič, Študenti s Kranjske na dunajski univerzi, pp. 565-568.
5 According to the estimates in the Slovene historiography, around 1,411,700 people lived on
the territory of today’s Slovenia in 1914. See: Slovenska novejša zgodovina 1848-1992 (Slovene
Contemporary History) (ed. by Jasna Fischer et al., Ljubljana: Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino
(Institute fo r Contemporary History) and Mladinska knjiga, 2005), p. 1 9 .1 would like to thank
my colleague Branko Šuštar for drawing my attention to the low percentage of high-school
graduates among the Slovene population.
detailed data is available on the university graduates in terms of professions, the
share of university students and graduates of Slovene origin was certainly much
lower than that of Austrian Germans, Poles and Czechs. This was, according to
prevailing opinion in the historiography, a consequence of the development level
and social structure of the Slovene population.6 Most students of Slovene origin
at the Austrian universities came from peasantry or lower to middle class urban
population, whereas there were very few students coming from more wealthy
urban population or Wirtschaftsbürgertum in the period 1848-1918.7
The layer of Slovene middle class elites which became the most important
actors of Slovene political and cultural movement in the Habsburg Monarchy in
the second half of the 19th century was thus very thin. However, they were largely
formed thanks to education. In a little more than seven decades from about 1840
to the WWI, which is over three and a half generations, a sizable enough layer of
educated people was formed, and it became an indispensable dynamic factor of
the Slovene national mobilization and politics. Socially, it mainly originated from
the peasantry and partly from the lower class urban social groups (civil servants,
tradesmen and craftsmen). Its leaders and spokesman were lay intellectuals and
the catholic clergy; wealthy entrepreneurs, tradesmen, land owners and officials
only slowly joined them since the 1880s and 1890s. Since 1848 and in particular
since the beginning of the constitutional era in 1861, nationality was the central
issue of their politics. The guiding national-political principle referred to by the
liberal and conservative Slovene leaders was a demand for the federalization
of the Monarchy and the unification of the territory populated by the Slovenespeaking
population in an autonomous unit within the Habsburg State. In
practical political life, however, they strove for the equality of Slovene language
in schools and offices and for establishing of Slovene cultural and educational
institutions. At the end of the 19th century, when the tense national relations in
the Monarchy required the Slovene political elites to modernize and broaden
their national political ideas and horizons, they added the Yugoslav dimension
to their traditional demands; the conservatives were looking for an alliance with
Croatian parties and the liberals and social democrats also with Serbian political
groups, as well as Serbs and even Bulgarians outside the Monarchy.
Both Slovene middle class parties that were eventually formed in the 1890s - the
catholic and the liberal - were thus primarily based on national-political ideology.
6 Melik - Vodopivec, “Slovenski izobraženci in avstrijske visoke šole”., p. 273.
7 Cindrič, Študenti s Kranjske na dunajski univerzi, p. 368. In his comprehensive work based on
the documents from the Vienna university archive, the author in general asserts that students
of urban origin strongly prevailed (more than 60 %) among the students from Carniola (i.e.
Slovenes and Germans) at the Vienna Alma Mater Rudolphini in the years 1848-1918, whereas
only a solid fifth (21.9 %) of the students were of the peasantry origin. He, however, points out
that students from urban areas mostly came from lower middle classes and Bildungsbürgertum,
whereas there were only a very few students (a mere 1.8%) who came from Wirtschaftsbürgertum.
rj^e differences among them were mainly dogmatic and political, depending on
the views of potentials and prospects of the Slovene national movement as well as
the role of the church and clergy in it, but they did not express conflicting social
interests. It is true that catholic leaders appealed in the first place to the peasants
and adjusted their political language to their demands. The liberal spokesmen
and leaders, however, referred to the rising middle class and tried to reflect its
aspirations and ambitions. They were more or less all educated men (mainly
lawyers, some of them graduates of philosophy and others doctors), graduated at
the same or similar universities and in a majority poorly (or not at all) involved
in economic or business activities. Their ideas about social and economic as
well as political change and modernization were thus - despite the political and
ideological differences - much more similar than they were ready to admit or
even than it might seem at the first sight.8
The central figure of the Slovene politics and movement in the 1860s and
1870s was a veterinary surgeon Janez Bleiweis. He was a true conservative, but
also an adherent of reforms and a realistic, practical man, brought up in the
enlightenment and rationalist spirit, who persistently maintained that national
prosperity and national autonomy could not be achieved without a firm social and
economic basis. He was, however, at the same time persuaded that the territory
with the Slovene speaking population should only slowly change its social and
economic structure and in this sense only gradually industrialize because of the
prevailing and modernized agriculture. He based this standpoint on the one side
on the physiocratic image of a peasant (farmer) as the most important of the
“productive states” and an indispensable element of social stability, and on the
other side on quite a realistic fact that Slovenes, lacking capital and extended trade
and industrial network, had little potential for their own industrial development.
Thus, opening to foreign capital and faster economic and social change would
accelerate Germanization and become a dangerous threat to the process of
Slovene national emancipation.
In Bleiweis’ opinion, economic and social processes should run simultaneously
with the process of nation building and nationalization of the Slovene speaking
population, maintaining the balance between different social and different
ethnic groups, while the government and the State were supposed to keep
watch over them and provide protection for the more vulnerable (in economic,
social or national sense). Although since the 1860s he and his adherents agreed
that the economy should get rid of the “old, traditional” chains and that liberal
competition was an important incentive to economic development, they rejected
the Austrian governments flirtation with liberal economic policy and accused
Peter Vodopivec, “Slovene Intellectuals’ Response to Political and Social Modernisation in the
Nineteenth and at the Beginning of the Twentieth Centuries”, Journal o f the Society fo r Slovene
Studies, 23, 2001, No. 1-2, (published in October 2003), pp. 6-7.
the governments in Vienna of detrimentally supporting “large factory owners,
large merchants and large capital.”9
Bleiweis’ liberal opponents loudly criticized his political and cultural
conservatism, but at the same time shared his mistrust of a more radical social
and economic change. They also maintained that “simple national-economic
conditions” in the provinces populated by Slovene speaking population should be
changed as soon as possible. In their opinion, this could be done in the first place
by raising “national culture” and by providing “material assistance to the nation”.
Nevertheless, their social vision and ideas were no more modern than those of
Bleiweis and his adherents, since they did not seek the future of Slovene society
in a capitalist middle class transformation, but in the preservation of tradition,
peasantry, and a slow-down of the impending social and economic changes.
A writer, linguist and journalist Fran Levstik was a notorious free thinker and
democrat owing to his national radicalism, his critical attitude towards the clergy,
and his opposition to the opportunistic authoritarianism of the conservatives.
However, he saw the Slovene future “in the brotherhood of Slavic nations” purified
of any foreign element, in which there would be no room for an “example of a
more developed and technologically more progressive (German) environment”; it
would be based on the rural tradition and “a sort of primordial Slavic community”
rooted in the language and the literature.10 A poet and writer Josip Stritar was also
a determined opponent of Bleiweis and Slovene conservatives, but in his social
views, he was also their adherent. His unfinished story The Ninth Country, which
was the first Slovene social utopia, features (partly ironically and partly seriously)
an ideal Slovene society as a Slavic-Slovene rural collectivist democracy governed
by solidarity and founded on the common ethnic origin and national harmony.
Stritar s Slovene Ninth Country is thus an island surrounded only by sea and with
no neighbours. It is an orderly landscape where farmers work during the day
and sit to converse and read journals and books at night. They speak and write
literary Slovene, adopt important decisions by a majority of adult (male) votes,
and tolerantly and self critically solve mutual disagreements.11
An intermingling of liberal-progressive and conservative beliefs can also
be found in the views of most other Slovene liberal politicians and educated
men.12 Since the 1860s - following the Czech model - they strived for systematic
9 Peter Vodopivec, “Socialni in gospodarski nazori Bleiweisovega kroga” (Social and Economic
Views of the Bleiweis Circle), O gospodarskih in socialnih nazorih na Slovenskem v 19. stoletju
(On Economic and Social Views on Slovene Territory in the 19th Century) ( Ljubljana: Inštitut za
novejšo zgodovino, 2006), pp. 131-150.
10 Dimitrij Rupel, Svobodne besede (Free Words), Koper: Lipa, 1976, p. 219,
11 Josip Stritar, “Deveta dežela” (The Ninth Country), Zbrano delo 4, (ed. France Koblar, Ljubljana:
Državna založba Slovenije, 1954), pp. 305-38.
12 The question of how liberal Slovene liberals really were is of course a problem in itself. I use the
designation as generally used in the Slovene historiography, although one may ask how justified
it really was. The replacement of »liberals« with »freethinkers« or »progressives« seems even
less persuasive.
establishing of local savings banks and Schulze-Delitsch type cooperatives,
v/hose main purpose was to help small producers (craftsmen, tradesmen and
bigger farmers) to get out of debts and to promote the “productivity of Slovene
regions through all types of national efforts”, as they put it. But they persistently
rejected liberal capitalism and modern industrialization. In the 1870s and partly
also in the 1880s, some of them even argued that the Slavs and Slovenes, if they
wished to avoid the decay of their economies and social tensions caused by liberal
capitalism and individualism, should take a different route to development than
the Western Europe. In this respect, they idealized the Russian and South Slav
agricultural collectivism and Russian craft cooperatives. They claimed that social
tensions which followed the introduction of capitalist production in the rapidly
developing Austrian provinces and the European West could be alleviated by
stimulating an awareness of common interests, by forming family and craft
cooperatives and even by “social ownership of people’s labour, producing in the
same areas of the economy”, as Josip Sernec, a lawyer by profession and one of
the founders of the liberal savings banks, put it in 1874.13 Josip Vošnjak, another
prominent liberal leader and a practicing doctor by profession, was a little more
realistic, clearly rejecting the ideas that Russian and South Slav cooperatives could
serve as a model for solving the problems of the indebted Slovene farmers. He
proposed the indivisibility of the farmers’ lands within the scope of a permanent
farmer’s home, which was supposed to ensure survival of the farming families.
But in the mid-1880s, Vošnjak was also of the opinion that the so called progress
and the 19th century technical inventions had not increased general prosperity
and “happiness”, which was mostly due to liberal capitalism, which enabled the
“unlimited accumulation of wealth” by individuals and caused the poverty in
which “the present human race is writhing and moaning”.14
As elsewhere in Cisleithania, the economic collapse of 1873 led to several
years of stagnation also in the provinces populated by the Slovene speaking
population. It was, however, not followed by a long-term depression or a more
radical economic halt, which would influence to a greater extent the economic
trends or deeply interfere with the existing socio-economic structure. In this
sense, the crisis of 1873 had more tangible political, ideological and psychological
than economic and social consequences also in Slovene regions, like elsewhere
in the Monarchy. It strengthened the anti-liberal disposition on all sides, but
simultaneously it reinforced the conviction that social and economic changes
were inevitable and that the economy had to follow more decisively the path
of modernization. While Bleiweis’ views that physiocratically modernized
agriculture and the peasantry should remain the economic and social basis of the
13 Josip Sernec, Der Matreialismus und das Slaventhum, Marburg 1874, pp. 24-25, 32-42.
14 Dr. Josip Vošnjak, “Ob agrarnem vprašanju” (Besides the Agrarian Issue), Letopis Matice
Slovenske za leto 1984 ( Yearbook o f Matica Slovenska fo r 1984), (Ljubljana: Matica Slovenska,
1885), pp. 72-81.
Slovene development still had numerous adherents in the Slovene political and
educated elites even in the 1880s and 1890s, voices raised after the crisis arguing
that capitalism and “large factories” were inevitably also the Slovene future, unless
the Slovenes wanted to lag even more behind the faster developing Austrian and
Western European regions.
The ideas of what should be done in practice were, however, unclear
and uncertain. The widespread net of Catholic Raiffeisen type cooperatives,
established at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, was of
major significance, as they helped prevent the break-up of agriculture and the
peasantry burdened with debts. At the same time, the mobilized personal savings
for investment in agriculture and business provided useful economic education
and trained the farmers and small producers in organizational and managerial
skills. But its main goal was still modernization in the frames of the existing
social and economic structure and not its gradual change. The first successful
Slovene commercial bank investing to a greater extent into business and industry
was founded only in 1900 on the initiative of the liberal leader Ivan Hribar.
As it was established with the backing from the Czech Živnostenska banka, its
leading banking staff was Czech. Also Slovene students studying in Prague were
under the strong influence of the Czech and Massaryks ideas. At the beginning
of the 20th century, they claimed that the main task of the nationally conscious
educated classes was to broaden the cultural horizons and social conditions of
the population. Some of them founded a Business Party in 1906, which however
folded two years later as it failed to find an adequate political and social support.
Several generations of Slovene students of law, philosophy, medicine, natural
and technical sciences who studied at the Austrian universities in the second half
of the 19th century and before the WWI, mentioned in their correspondences,
memoirs and autobiographies various professors who had permanently
influenced their professional orientations and work. Although there has so far
been no systematic overview or any detailed historiography assessment of these
influences, some conclusions can be made on the basis of the existing data.
Apparently, under the influence of the experience gained during their studies at
Austrian university centres and their contacts with the prominent representatives
of the Austrian scientific and cultural milieu, young Slovene educated elites formed
not only their own political and literary ideologies, but also Slovene scientific
literature and terminology. In the area of civics and national economy, they were
mainly influenced by Lorenz Stein, Albert Schäffle and the representatives of
the Vienna school of history. The social reformists - from a more liberal Josip
Vošnjak to a Christian socialist Janez Evangelist Krek - were under the influence
of Karl von Vogelsang. The foundations of Slovene natural sciences were laid by
a generation of Slovene students who studied at the Alma mater Rudoplhina. Art
historians were particularly affected by Max Dvorak, whereas Slovene architects
Jože Plečnik, Maks Fabiani and Ivan Jager were all students of Otto Wagner.
And finally, at the beginning of the 20th century, a circle of young educated men
prospered in Slovene politics, who embraced the ideas of Massaryk and his circle
during their studies in Prague and who tried to implement these ideas also in the
Slovene political life.
In the second half of the 19th century, Slovene educated elites thus succeeded
in establishing the most important cultural institutions, newspapers, scientific
and cultural journals, societies and a widely used literary language with its own
technical and scientific terminology. Slovene cultural development advanced
substantially and the cultural activities and institutions became the central
dynamic factor of the nation building process. Thanks to the spread of literacy
and education, also reading become a popular pastime, which by increasing
number of people turning to Slovene newspapers and books accelerated the
process of nationalization and national integration. By the end of the 19th century,
Modernism had - despite the opposition of the conservatives - made its way into
Slovene art, architecture and also literature, which continued to be the dominant
form of artistic expression. In the scientific work, there were more opportunities
in history, linguistics, law and social sciences than in natural sciences, medicine
and technical studies, mostly because of the lack of adequate institutions and
university. Nevertheless, the cultural changes experienced by the Slovene speaking
population in the second half of the 19th century and before the WWI were much
more fundamental and far-reaching than the social and economic ones. National
aspirations of the educated elites and their pragmatic focusing on the nationality,
which had doubtlessly a positive, stimulating impact on cultural development,
became a troubling obstacle to a faster social and economic change. Although the
falling number of people recorded as Slovene speaking in Styria and Carinthia by
the Austrian statistics was understood as a dangerous threat, it was at the same
time used by political and educated elites as an argument against faster social and
economic change and liberal ideas of the German and Italian speaking middle
classes.
Before the WWI, the Slovene educated elites were thus much more successful
in their national emancipation endeavours than in creating a more favourable
and adequate environment for a faster social and economic change and
modernization. They were in this sense - according to the Austrian and German
social historians - not much different from the educated elites elsewhere in the
Central Europe and the German Empire. “The educated middle classes focusing
on a career in public service were in the Central Europe a unique functional
elite (Funktionselite),” maintained a German social historian Hans Ulrich Wehler,
“different from the union of the nobility, the city and Oxbridge in Great Britain
and different from the union of the great bourgeoisie, nobility and the graduates
of Grand Ecoles in France”.15 Without doubt, schools, educational institutions
15 Hans Ulrich Wehler, Wie bürgerlich war das Deutsche Kaiserrreich?, Aus der Geschichte lernen?
(München: C.H, Beck, 1988), p. 184.
and universities had a central role in the process of the formation of the Slovene
educated middle classes (Bildungsbürgerthum) and consequently the process
of the Slovene nation building in the second half of the 19th century What was
still missing was stronger middle class economic elite which would be able more
resolutely to part with tradition and pave the way for modernity In the Slovene
case, the latter could only take place after the radical change of the political,
national, cultural and economic environment after 1918 and the formation of the
Yugoslav state.






















Ä & . '







Žarko Lazarevič
Education and Economic Development in
Slovenia
(Some Observations up to WWII)
In economics it holds that the correlation between education and economic
modernisation cannot be denied. Here we have to emphasise that the modern
economics does not refer to education as often as it does to human capital. The
concept of human capital itself includes useful knowledge and skills acquired by
individuals during the process of (vocational and general) education, training
or work. Such definition also equalises both kinds of education we obtain in our
lives: formal and informal.1
Paul Samuelson and William Nordhaus argue that four requirements
must necessarily be met in order to ensure faster economic development and
modernisation of society. Society must have at its disposal suitable human and
natural resources as well as the accumulation of capital and technology.2 In this
concept we should also mention the thesis of Douglas C. North, who pointed
out: “Economic change is a result of changes, one, in the quantity and quality of
human beings; two, in the stock of human knowledge, particularly as it applies
to the human command over nature; and three, in the institutional matrix that
defines the incentive structure of society. A complete theory of economic change
would therefore integrate these three strands”.3
The category of human resources - meaning, the population with all its
capabilities, brought together within the concept of human capital - is the most
interesting category for our discussion. In order to introduce and manage the
economic processes, a certain level of knowledge and experience is essential.
Already at the first educational level - at the level of basic literacy - it has to be
1 David Mitch, “Education and Economic Growth in Historical Perspective”, in Robert Whaples
(ed.), EH.Net Encyclopedia, July 27, 2005. URL http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/mitch.
education.
2 Paul Samuelson - William Nordhaus, Ekonomija (Ljubljana, 2002), p. 233.
3 More detailed in Douglas C. North, Understanding the Process o f Economic Change (Princeton
University Press, 2005).
underlined that it lowers the costs of information dissemination.4 Well-educated
population is more productive, uses capital more efficiently, finds it easier to
adapt to new technologies and is capable of promptly upgrading the existing
knowledge.5
By no means should we overlook the very important contribution of
education to social development. It may be indirect, but it is that much more
effective. Increasing the education level of the population or society as a whole
creates an atmosphere favourably inclined to development, in all fields, not only
economy. Simultaneously, as the education (knowledge6) level increases, the
possibility of innovations at the level of business strategies and practices as well
as economic development technology also increases.7 Thus education is only one
of the factors of economic development, and its influence on this development
also has to be evaluated in such a context. We should not neglect to emphasise
additional aspects of contents and meaning, expanding the moments of the
social acceptability of progress. With this we mean the cultural background8 of
socio-economic changes, underlined by the institutional theory,9 which are an
integral part of various developmental paradigms.
After the introductory part defining the correlation between education
and economic development at the schematic level we will focus on the Slovene
circumstances. We will try to define the place of the Slovene economic
development until the World War II from the viewpoint of the education. We
wish to bring the attention to the points which in view of their long-term effects
seem to be the turning points towards focusing on different values. Obviously we
should emphasise that it is not our purpose to present the development stages
and dynamics of Slovene educational institutions, education and educational
policy. With this restriction in mind, we will first make four assertions that in our
opinion describe the Slovene situation from the middle of the 19th to the middle
of the 20th century. These statements are the following:
4 Marjan Senjur, Razvojna ekonomika - teorije in politike gospodarskega razvoja [Development
Economics - theories an politics of economic development] (Ljubljana, 2002), p. 289. Hereafter
Senjur, Razvojna ekonomika.
5 Antonio Ciccone - Elias Papaioannou, “Human Capital, the structure of production and
Growth”, Working Paper Series No. 623/ May 2006, European central bank, 2006, pp. 3 1 -3 2 .
6 Aleksandar Kešeljević, “Vloga in pomen znanja v teoriji rasti” [The role of konowledge in
Growth Theory], NG, Vol. 3-4, 2006, pp. 115 - 124.
7 Senjur, Razvojna ekonomika, pp. 289 -291.
8 Lorena Korošec, “Kultura in ekonomska rast” [Culture and Economic Growth], Ekonomski
pregled, 52 (11 - 12), 2001, pp. 1378 - 1399.
9 Douglas North, Institucije, institucionalne spremembe in gospodarska uspešnost [Institutions,
Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Political Economy of Institutions and
Decisions] (Ljubljana, 1998).
1. the Slovene level of education was modest,
2. the educational structure was unbalanced in terms of professions, and
humanist intelligentsia prevailed,
3. the Slovene space was governed by anti-progress ideology: the social
atmosphere not in favour of economic development persisted,
4. the affirmation of certain aspects of technology and economic efficiency in
the social perception was delayed.
All the interconnected statements defined the basic parameters of the Slovene
economic and social development. However, they differed among themselves in
terms of the time of their effect. The first two points manifested themselves as a
long-term constant. The third point partially lost its momentum in the interwar
period, when the fourth one started taking effect.
To illustrate the situation, let us begin with some information from 1948.10
The educational structure in Slovenia of that time was the following:
No education 3.0 %
Elementary school 85.3 %
Lower secondary school 7.8 %
Upper secondary school 3.1 %
University education 0.8 %
The average inhabitant of Slovenia only attended school for a bit over four
years. This confirms our initial statement about the modest education level in
Slovenia in the long-term perspective until the World War II. It is more than
obvious that the focus of education was on the elementary school level - on
the level of basic literacy. This supports the second initial statement: that the
education level structure on higher levels - that is, the secondary school (lower
and upper levels) and university education - was deficient and unbalanced in
terms of professions.
i c "k -k
One of the basic roles of education in the society is to create an atmosphere
favourably inclined towards economic progress. In such an environment
innovations in the social as well as economic processes are also made possible
or encouraged. In the historical context, we can draw a line between two very
important periods in the time since the end of the World War I. Circumstances
more favourably disposed to economic and social modernisation, also at the
10 Ekonomsko društvene osnove sistema školstva u FNRJ [Economic and Social Foundations of
School System in Yugoslavia] (Beograd, 1953).
level of the public discourse, started to be established. The time between the two
world wars represented a conclusion of the preceding period on various levels -
the period from the middle of the 19th century until the beginning of the World
War I. However, also within these points in time, two shorter periods should be
distinguished. The division line between them is the beginning of the 1880s. As
far as economic progress is concerned, a developmental standstill in the Slovene
space was characteristic for the first period, lasting until the beginning of the
1880s. Due to the transformational depression during the transition from the
feudal to capitalist economic system, the Slovene territory remained on the edge
of modernisation processes. It made use of but a few innovations of modern
capitalist economy. Thus the basic relative economic relations with the northern
and western neighbouring territories were established. This lag in the economic
modernisation processes notably characterised the Slovene space, not only in the
field of the economic progress achievements, but also or especially in the field of
social ideology.
No theoretical and practical ideas and initiatives with regard to a different
economic and social structure were to be seen. Anti-capitalism and protectionism
became the predominant ideologies - as an answer to not keeping up with the
modernisation processes. At first both of these phenomena were a consequence
of the delay, while later they also became its cause, since a social atmosphere
disinclined to faster economic modernisation had been formed. The collective
had precedence over individualism, and certainty was more important than risk:
perhaps in this sense we could even say that rentiership had a higher value than
entrepreneurship.11
This pattern was most distinctively established after the ideological division
in the last decades of the 19th century. Prior to that, an affirmative social discourse
can be detected with regard to modernisation, albeit with some apprehension.12
After the ideological division, the prevailing social discourse changed, especially
after the unilateral political homogenisation. The perception of farmers as bearers
of national awareness and devotedness to the church/Catholicism brought about a
specific moment in national discourse based on religion. For a part of the Slovene
elite, the affiliation to the Slovene nation was synonymous with practicing the
Catholic religion. This did not contribute to a positive development programme,
but to the one of a defence, as the modernisation also brought secularisation. The
fundamental emphasis within the defence discourse was put on the preservation
and consolidation of the existing situation. However, the development was not
11 Žarko Lazarevič, Plasti prostora in časa [Layers of Space and Time - Chapters from Economic
history of Slovenia in the first Half of 20th Century] (Ljubljana, 2009), pp. 23-24. Hereafter
Lazarevič, Plasti prostora.
12 Peter Vodopivec, O gospodarskih in socialnih nazorih na Slovenskem v 19. stoletju [On Economic
and Social Principles of the 19th Century Slovenia] (Ljubljana, 2006), pp. 130-150. Hereafter
Vodopivec, O gospodarskih in socialnih nazorih.
objected to in its entirety. The economic progress was present but it had to be
very slow, undertaken with extreme caution, and was by no means allowed to
disrupt the traditional social model.13 As a logical consequence, such a starting
point meant that, in addition to the ideological and political homogenisation,
homogenisation of the people living in poverty also came about. This fact was
not changed even by the extensive cooperative organisation which played an
extremely important part by increasing the farmers’ purchasing power with their
income unaltered. In the long run, however, it was unable to ensure economic
modernisation. Nevertheless, cooperative societies were an effective tool used
to achieve political and ideological limitation within ones own nation, as they
enabled control over market presence, control over the economic potential of
membership, as well as the production and distribution of information via the
cooperative and other types of print.14 It was at this point that supporters of
differing political beliefs found themselves sharing the same viewpoint.15
In this context, it would be impossible not to consider the activities the purpose
of which was to reject anything that disrupted the homogenisation of people
and enhanced the property or intellectual differentiation. The modernisationrelated
phenomena were disruptive to the existing order of limitation within
the country’s own national borders. If ones differences were displayed, a step
that followed would generally involve public discrediting. Disqualification was
based on two moments in public discourse, namely on moralising and disputing
genuine nationality. Modern art, for example, was discredited as amoral and
anti-national.16 The property-related and entrepreneurial differentiation was
characterised as capitalist activities that were equal to rapaciousness and
selfishness.17 As such, they were expected to be in opposition to the imagined
Slovene character. The circle was thus completed.
The possible reasons for such a social atmosphere lie in the unbalanced
social and educational structure. Thus, the entrepreneurial bourgeoisie as the
propagator of progress in the economic and social field was non-existent. On
the other hand the one-sided nature of the Slovene elites, which influenced the
construction of social reality, was more than obvious. The representatives of
13 Jasna Fisher et al. (eds.), Slovenska novejša zgodovina 1 [Contemporary Slovenian History]
(Ljubljana, 2005), pp. 24-120.
14 Lazarevič, Plasti prostora, pp. 307-360.
15 Jurij Perovšek, Na poti v modem [On the Way to Modernism] (Ljubljana, 2005), pp. 15-80.
Hereafter Perovšek, Na poti v modem.
16 Egon Pelikan, “Ideološka izhodišča cenzure v konceptih slovenskega političnega katolicizma
ob koncu 19. in v prvi polovici 20. stoletja” [Ideological Starting Points of Censorship within
the Concepts of the Slovenian Political Catholicism at the End of the 19th and the First Half
of the 20th Centur], in Mateja Režek (ed.), Cenzurirano.Zgodovina cenzure na Slovenskem od
19.stoletja do danes [Censored. The History of Censorship in Slovenia from the 19th Century to
the Present Day] (Ljubljana, 2010), pp. 45-54.
17 Various articles in the Narodni gospodar newspaper, a gazette of the Cooperative Union
published in Ljubljana at the break of the 20th century.
humanist disciplines (priests, teachers) and social science disciplines (lawyers)
were prevalent within this sparse group. Their way of thinking was torn between
the traditional and modern. It is not very risky to conclude that this mentality,
with its focus still more on the traditional social and economic structure, was less
favourably inclined towards modern economic and social developments.18
The aspect of ethnicity, which strongly characterised the Slovene space of the
second half of the 19th century, also has to be taken into account in the assessment
of the construction of the economic anti-modernisation atmosphere. Namely,
it often seemed that economic modernisation went hand in hand with ethnic
assimilation. In the eyes of the humanist elites, influencing the public discourse
and identifying themselves in Slovenism, the opposition between the principle of
national (ethnic) adherence and the principle of economic modernisation started
to be established. Therefore the Slovene society was blocked, unable to open itself
up to the modern world completely, as Dušan Pirjevec put it.19 Instead of focusing
on economic efficiency, it emphasised the symbolic modernisation20 in the form
of national cultural institutions and organisations. In this context, cooperatives
were encouraged instead of individual entrepreneurship. Cooperatives also
functioned as a tool for establishing control and closing the borders of the Slovene
ethnic community in the economic field.
The social atmosphere, disinclined to progress, was a consequence of the
circumstances in which there was a lack of high-quality resources: human and
natural as well as capital and technology. With regard to these developmental
factors, the Slovene territory depended on the import of knowledge, capital
and technology. Only since the 1880s did a more intensive process of economic
development take place. A significant presence of technical personnel from other
Austrian, especially Czech lands, taking care of the smooth technological process
of production, was evident in more important Slovene companies. The Slovene
environment, as a rule, supplied an abundance of literate workforce. This fact can
be underlined as one of the more important characteristics of that time.
* * *
The period between the two world wars, after Slovenes had entered the Yugoslav
state, brought many changes, as we have already indicated. We should focus on
three of them which had significant consequences for the Slovene economy and
society at that timé. That includes the newly acquired self-confidence, somewhat
swifter industrialisation in the 1920s, as well as the establishment of the University
in Ljubljana and the organised technical study programme.
18 Vodopivec, O gospodarskih in socialnih nazorih [On Economic and Social Principles], pp. 151
- 221.
19 Dušan Pirjevec, Vprašanje naroda [The Question of the Nation] (1964), pp. 90-91.
20 The expression was used by John Kenneth Galbraith, Economic development (1965), p. 4.
The time between the two world wars was a period when the Slovene society
stood before the challenges of transitioning to the new and different paradigm of
development, social relations and the concept of economic and social progress,
'jhe national discourse lost some of its current edge and was gradually muted
down by the development discourse, as the social problems were a burning topic
in Slovenia too, and, at their core, actually represented a problem of development.
According to all calculations, half of the rural population was “superfluous” in
terms of their productivity.21 This is where the “in-between” position of Slovenia in
terms of belonging to Eastern or Western Europe was most evident. The Slovenia
ofthat time had problems both in relation to workers as well as rural problems.
The working class population rose to such an extent that their social position
was in urgent need of a system organisation. The rural problem was impossible
to solve by means of an agrarian reform, as there was not plenty of land to be
distributed amongst farmers. The rural issue could only be solved by means of
a new development model, as other aspects of economic modernisation were
impossible without modernising agriculture (increase of productivity).22 This
is precisely where the change of the development model occurred, whereby the
significance of raising education levels and the scope of knowledge on society and
technology became relevant. At the turn of the century, the prevailing part of the
Slovene elite directed most of their energy into the preservation of farming culture
rather than to the entrepreneurial transformation of other sectors. Furthermore,
the other pole of the Slovene elite was unable to bypass the structural social and
economic matters, according to which the argument in favour of protecting the
rural population prevailed over the entrepreneurial emphases.23
The development model in the new environment thus had to answer the
fundamental question of how to ensure the transition of the rural population into
the industrial sector, and how to save nearly half of the rural population from
poverty and despair. This was namely the only way to solve the social problem. To
enable this, there were three basic problems that had to be resolved; namely, (i) the
problem of the scope of investments (capital issue!) enabling economic growth and
the generation of new jobs, (ii) the problem of promotion of the entrepreneurial
spirit and stripping entrepreneurship of its negative connotations, and (iii) the
problem of raising the general level and balancing the education structure.
The existence of the Yugoslav state meant that the circumstances changed in
many ways, especially at the level of economic and social environment. A very
important change also took place at the level of defining and comprehending the
nation and the national question. Within the Yugoslav state, of which Slovenes
21 Slovenec, 13th June 1924.
22 Mojca Novak, »Periferna agrarna transformacija:slovenski primer« [Peripheral Agrarian
Transformation: The Slovenian Example], in Neven Borak - Žarko Lazarevič (eds.), Prevrati
in slovensko gospodarstvo v XX. stoletju [Overthrows and the Slovenian Economy] (Ljubljana,
1996), pp. 23-36.
23 Perovšek, Napoti v modem, pp. 63-83.
The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization Processes
formed a constituent part, the perception of the national question
the state context altered, the danger of assimilation/Germanisation in the major
part of the Slovene territory passed, which resulted in a more relaxed social
atmosphere. The processes of »Slovenisation« of the economy, administration
politics and culture raised the social self-awareness. In the new situation, the
feelings of social, cultural and economic subordination gradually disappeared
The consequences of the new self-conscience were multifaceted.
The process of increasing self-awareness was also accompanied by other
processes, including or especially in the economic field. In the new environment
Slovenia, despite its relatively modest developmental achievements, became
economically the most advanced part of the state. Slovenes were a constituent part
of a state that had a very important function. The state behaved paternalistically in
order to compensate for the underdeveloped social and institutional environment
and to promote swifter economic development. The state acted as a guarantor
of the accelerated accumulation of capital, which was not in opposition to the
Slovene wishes. In such a protectionist environment, after the relative level of
prices changed in favour of the industrial sector, and in light of such a large
market, industrialisation in Slovenia intensified. The encouragement provided
by the Yugoslav market made up for what was otherwise a deficient institutional
framework and spurred development. Industrial capabilities doubled in a
relatively short time, and the scales of the national product or income generated
already tipped in favour of non-agrarian activities.
It was important that economic development originated from the characteristics
of the Slovene space: deficient educational level of the population, modest
accumulation of capital and low technological level. Within the industrial
sector, the branches developing most rapidly were those that did not demand
a high technological level, but required a lot of workforce, which Slovenia
had in abundance. Here we also have to underline the high literacy rate of the
population. Furthermore, a relatively notable presence of foreign technical
experts in the Slovene economy, overseeing the more demanding production and
management processes, was also characteristic of this time. The characteristics
of the educational structure remained the same. The Slovene population may
have been 90 % literate; however, the extent of secondary school or university
education was still modest and of limited scope.
However, changes also took place in this regard. The time between the two
world wars brought about important changes in education, contributing to a
gradual alteration/expansion of the educational level and structure. In the 1920s,
the number of pupils enrolled in secondary schools doubled, and the number of
students enrolled in the university increased as well due to availability.
This information does not only reflect the achievements of the general social
development, but also the progress of the system of social values, school policy and
accessibility of higher level education. The 1932 manual about the correct selection
changed, a.
0f study courses attests to the wider backgrounds and social circumstances of
the perception of individual professions at the academic level.24 The messages
conveyed to the readers were ambivalent. Already in the introduction, the author
stressed his opinion about the necessity of higher education: »...education is
a treasure, it is useful everywhere, without it one is worth less and less these
days-« He took part in controversial debates about the impression of the
»hyper-production of intelligentsia« present in the public, claiming that it had
n0 real basis. But despite his sober outlook on the world of education, the author
nevertheless dissuaded women from taking part in higher education, claiming
that the abstract and theoretical emphases of the university-level studies were
incompatible with the female way of thinking (emotional, vivacious, personal,
concrete). He may not have assigned certain values to individual professions;
however, certain implications of his emphases were quite meaningful. The space
intended for individual professions was allocated in favour of the humanist and
social science disciplines. In the wide range of vocations within the technical
professions, the author evidently emphasises the difficult and demanding nature
of these studies as well as the more limited possibilities for employment in
comparison with humanist and social science professions.25
* * *
The founding of the University with significantly more accessible courses
introduced a new dimension in the Slovene space. As the technical studies
and other social science disciplines outside of legal sciences strengthened, the
composition of the educational level started changing. The educational structure
became more balanced in terms of professions. Thus in the academic year
1931/32,30 % of all students of the Ljubljana university were enrolled in technical
programmes. The percentage of students at the Faculty of Arts and Faculty of Law
was roughly the same.26 The percentage of the technical intelligentsia among the
intellectuals became much more prominent, even though from the viewpoint of
economic development and requirements for controlling the economic processes
at the level of technology and managerial work, the lack of the technical staff was
still noticeable.
In the interwar period, the Slovene technical intelligentsia also affirmed itself.
Not only did the graduates of technical and social science studies gradually enter
the Slovene economy and take over the leading posts - their public role was also
important. They entered the public space, introducing new emphases and new
knowledge, unusual for the Slovene space. This breakthrough of the technical
intelligentsia was made possible by both aforementioned elements: the University
24 Lovro Sušnik, Akademski poklici [Academic Professions] (Ljubljana, 1932).
25 Ibid., p. 75.
26 Ibid., pp. 67-68.
and better accessibility of education as well as industrialisation. Industrialisation
played an especially important role - when it turned into an ongoing process
it needed a constant influx of properly educated and trained technicians and
engineers, especially to achieve the transition to new technologies or introduce
more demanding technologies in the Slovene space.
The vocabulary, intellectual framework and grasp of new professionals jn
the technical fields were different from the previous context - the established
model in terms of contents, development priorities and hierarchy of social values
which the humanist intelligentsia - traditionally the most numerous group 0f
intellectuals among Slovenes - identified with. The questions of culture and
nation were no longer in the centre of their interests. The new professionals went
beyond this and focused on technological issues, the question of applying the
technologies to the production processes, the ways and manners of managing the
technological and business processes, and the relationship between technology
and society or their co-dependence. The conceptualisation and topics of their
public appearances contributed significantly to the establishment of the new social
atmosphere in the Slovene public, which started recognising and accepting with
greater understanding the dynamics and multi-layered processes of economic
and social modernisation.
The persistence of the technical intelligentsia in the fields of society and
economy management technology with the purpose of achieving greater economy
within the developmental dynamics introduced the need for new considerations
of the developmental strategies and practices in the Slovene space. One of these
intellectuals communicated the fundamental developmental dilemma in Slovenia
to the Slovene public without any embellishment: »In Slovenia agricultural
production will have to be increased; or the percentage of the agricultural
population will have to be reduced by a half«.27 This may have been expressed in a
technical manner, but it was efficient and lucid, underlining an aspect completely
overlooked until that time. Others tried to make sense of the Slovene economic
position in the Yugoslav state. They made the society think about the dilemma
of how to restructure the Slovene industry (economy) to ensure higher and more
demanding levels of production, which required more knowledge, more complex
technologies and capital. The completed analyses led them to conclude that the
previous developmental model, involving the expected industrialisation of other
Yugoslav regions, did not promise a permanent success.28
These may have been small steps; however, they were very important in
the Slovene environment. The principle of the comprehensive co-dependence
27 Slovenec, 13 June 1924.
28 Črtomir Nagode, “Naravne osnove smotrne upravne ureditve naše države” [Natural Foundations
of an Efficient Administrative Arrangement of Our Country], Misel in delo, No. 11 -12/1939, pp.
362-363; Stanislav Roglič, “Jesenice in Zenica” [Jesenice and Zenica], Tehnika in gospodarstvo,
No. 11-12/1935-36, p. 227.
0f society, economy and technology was introduced into the construction of
social reality. The introduction of these concepts into the public space was also
ensured with specialised magazines like Tehnika in gospodarstvo (Technology
and Economy), Misel in delo (Thought and Work) and Trgovski tovariš
(Commercial Companion), which brought together the humanist, technical
and social sciences intelligentsia. The expansion of the scope of the debate in
the direction of a multi-disciplinary approach to the comprehensive analysis of
complex developmental relations between the society, technology and economy
was an important intellectual achievement for the Slovene space. In the 1930s, a
special scientific institution was also established: the Socio-Economic Institute,
working on the studies of various aspects of social and economic progress.
Xhe establishment of this Institute was important, since for the first time in
Slovene history the critical assessment and consideration of possible strategies
and practices of socio-economic development was finally institutionalised -
admittedly on the level of a society, but nevertheless.
The extensive presence of the technical intellect in the Slovene public and
society is a part of the wider social process. It is a process of softening up the
traditional economic model or the modernisation of the social and economic
structure which progressed with greater intensity in the period between the two
world wars. There is, therefore, a consensus in the Slovene historiography, the
one indicating that the time between the two world wars, along with the more
relaxed period taking place at the beginning of the 1920s, stands for a heyday of
various forms of culture-related work in the field of artistic creation in fine arts,
music and dance, literature, playwriting, theatre and architecture. The Slovene
artistic creativity followed the modern artistic and cultural currents and enabled
the transposition of current artistic poetic and aesthetic features into the Slovene
space. By upgrading and modification, it also created outstanding national
achievements. Great strides were also made in the field of re-creation, either in
the form of professional or amateur culture. Furthermore, a great diversification
of cultural institutions was taking place. At the level of scientific and intellectual
work, an extremely important role was played by the University of Ljubljana,
which enabled the communication of the Slovene space with the international
environment, as well as the transfer and adoption of a plethora of knowledge that
was new to Slovenia.29
The intellectual activity, either artistic or scientific, opened in the public a
question of the role of creativity and inventiveness, as well as its influence on
social development. At the same time, it reflected on this issue from a critical
distance. It enforced the social distinction made on the basis of artistic power or
intellectual potential. By setting originality and critical stance as the principles
of existence, it urged its audience to display its own individuality in all areas of
29 “Kultura 1918-1941«, Jasna Fischer et al. (eds.), Slovenska novejša zgodovina 1 [Culture 1918-
1941, Contemporary Slovenian History] (Ljubljana, 2005), pp. 415-440.
life. The engagement of the Slovene technical intellect in the period between the
two world wars must also be regarded within this broader process of invigorated
intellectual pursuits.
Ernst Bruckmüller
Der Zugang zu den Hochschulstudien im
■ ■
alten Österreich
Eine der zentralen Fragen an die Geschichte lautet, wie es denn zu einer
bestimmten Zeit mit der Erreichbarkeit bestimmter Bildungsgüter und Bildungsgrade
beschaffen gewesen sein, oder, anders ausgedrückt, wem es denn überhaupt
möglich war, eine Sekundarstufenbildung bzw. eine Hochschulausbildung zu
erreichen.1
Zu dieser Frage haben im Hinblick auf die Habsburgermonarchie Gary
Cohen und Helmut Engelbrecht ausführliche Studien vorgelegt.2 Danach war im
19. Jahrhundert die Zahl der Studierenden an Universitäten und Hochschulen
nur langsam angestiegen. Es war dies eine logische Folge der von Maria Theresia,
Joseph II. und Franz II. (I.) betriebenen Bildungspolitik, die zwar eine breite
Grundausstattung der Bevölkerung mit bestimmten grundlegenden Techniken
(Lesen, Schreiben, Grundrechnungsarten), aber nur wenige Möglichkeiten zur
Erlangung einer „lateinischen“ Bildung vorsah, und für die Hochschulbildung
ausschließlich praktischen Zwecken diente, nämlich der Heranziehung von
Priestern, Ärzten und Beamten, jedoch keiner Verbindung von Forschung und
Lehre, wie sie Wilhelm von Humboldt in Berlin mit großem Erfolg eingeführt
hatte. Es gab also bis 1848 nur sehr wenige weiterführende Bildungsanstalten, die
Zahl der Gymnasien war kleiner als bis 1773.3 Die Hochschulprofessoren waren
in ihrer Lehre extrem eingeschränkt, sie waren auf ein Lehrbuch festgelegt (das
konnte, nach Genehmigung, auch ein eigenes sein), und durften kein Jota von den
dort dargebotenen Inhalten abweichen. Die Gymnasien waren immer noch nach
Klassen organisiert, mit Klassenlehrern, die Einführung des Fachlehrerprinzips
wurde zwar von Fachleuten mehrfach gefordert, aber nicht umgesetzt.4 Immer1
Eine Erstfassung dieses Beitrages erschien in der Festschrift für Arnold Suppan, hg. v. Marija
Wakkonig, Wolfgang Müller und Michael Vortmann (Wien 2010), 263-278.
2 Gary Cohen, Education and Middle-Class Society in Imperial Austria 1848 - 1918, West
Lafayette, Indiana 1996; Helmut Engelbrecht, Geschichte des österreichischen Bildungswesens.
Erziehung und Unterricht auf dem Boden Österreichs. Bd.4: Von 1848 bis zum Ende der
Monarchie, Wien 1986.
3 Cohen, Education, 15: in Böhmen gab es 1773 44 Gymnasien, 1847 nur 21, in Mähren 1773 15,
1847 nur acht.
4 Hubert Weitensfelder, Studium und Staat. Heinrich Graf Rottenhan und Johann Melchior von
hin wuchs im Vormärz die Zahl der Realschulen, die als Bildungsinstitute für
das kommerzielle Bürgertum gedacht waren. 1806 und 1815 wurden in Prag
und Wien polytechnische Institute, die Vorgängereinrichtungen der späteren
technischen Hochschulen, eingerichtet. Das entsprach auch den Neigungen des
Kaisers: Franz II. (I.) war extrem misstrauisch gegenüber allen freien geistigen
Entwicklungen, wie sie das Humboldtsche Universitäts-Modell vorsah, aber
technischen Fortschritt und technische bzw. naturwissenschaftliche Bildung
schätzte er durchaus.5 Dass es aber Aufgabe des Staates sei, Gelehrte systematisch
heranzubilden, war ein diesem Kaiser eher fremder Gedanke.
Universitäts- und Mittelschulorganisation nach 1848
Entscheidende Veränderungen brachte erst das Revolutionsjahr 1848.
Schon im März 1848 wurde ein Unterrichtsminister bestellt, ein eigenes Unterrichtsministerium
geschaffen und die Freiheit der Lehre versprochen. Der erste
Unterrichtsminister, Franz Freiherr von Sommaruga plante eine Umgestaltung des
Mittelschul- und Universitätssystems nach dem als vorbildlich geltenden Muster
von Berlin. Als erste Maßnahme wurde der philosophische Einführungsunterricht
von den Artistenfakultäten in die Gymnasien verlegt und deren Besjuch damit
von sechs auf acht Jahre verlängert. Die neue Maturitätsprüfung („Matura“)
wurde zur Eintrittsprüfung in die Universitäten, bald aber auch zur Voraussetzung
für die Erlangung gewisser Beamtenpositionen.6 Schon unter den Vorzeichen
der Konterrevolution wurde im September 1849 der von Franz Exner und
Hermann Bonitz erarbeitete „Organisationsentwurf“ für das Gymnasium vom
Unterrichtsminister (seit Juli 1849) Graf Leo Thun-Hohenstein dem jungen Kaiser
Franz Joseph vorgelegt und von diesem genehmigt.7 Thun setzte sogleich wichtige
Schritte in Richtung einer Universitätsreform, in der Lehr- und Lernfreiheit
eine zentrale Rolle spielen sollten.8 In Zukunft sollten sich die österreichischen
Universitäten zu Stätten von Lehre und Forschung entwickeln. Zahlreiche
Professoren wurden aus dem Ausland berufen, zum Entsetzen guter Katholiken
nicht wenige Protestanten.9
Birkenstock als Repräsentanten der österreichischen Bildungspolitik um 1800, Wien 1996, 139 f. -
Ein Fachlehrersystem für Gymnasien existierte von 1807 bis 1818, vgl. Weitensfelder, Studium, 151.
5 Das zeigt sich auch in seiner Sammlungstätigkeit. So hat dieser Kaiser Teile der Sammlung
von James Cook, für Wien ersteigern lassen, auch in seiner Porträtsammlung spielen
Naturwissenschaftler eine große Rolle, vgl. Alexander Sperl, Das Bild des Gelehrten. Europäische
Ideen- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte im Spiegel des Gelehrtenporträts, in : Hans Petschar (Hg.,),
Die Porträtsammlung Kaiser Franz I. Zur Geschichte einer historischen Bildersammlung der
Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek, Wien - Köln - Weimar 2011,185 - 228.
6 Cohen, Education, 28.
7 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd. 4,147; Hans Lentze, Die Universitätsreform des Ministers Graf Leo-
Thun-Hohenstein (Österr. Akad. d. Wiss., phil.-hist. Kl. Sitzungsberichte 239/2) Wien 1962, 31.
8 Lentze, Thun, 37 - 39.
9 Lentze, Thun, 41.
Die neuen Gymnasien (und Realschulen), aber auch die Universitäten sollten
nicht von allzu vielen jungen Leuten besucht werden. Es gab zwar Stipendien für
ebenso mittellose wie hervorragende Studenten, aber im Allgemeinen wünschte
der Staat nicht, dass die Mitglieder der ärmeren Klassen studierten. Eine gewisse
Erschwerung des Hochschulzuganges sollte die Einführung der Kollegiengelder
(1850) bringen.10 Für zukünftige Verwaltungsbeamte, Richter und Staatsanwälte
wurden in der Folge neben den für das Doktorat entscheidenden Rigorosen
(Rigorosenordnungen 1872) Staatsprüfungen vorgeschrieben. Für zukünftige
Lehrer („Professoren“) an Gymnasien und Realschulen („Mittelschulen“) wurden
staatliche Lehramtsprüfungskommissionen eingerichtet.11 Die quantitative
Entwicklung sah zunächst ein Sinken der Hörerzahlen an Universitäten und
Polytechnika unmittelbar nach 1849 - eine Folge der Verlängerung der Mittelschulen
um zwei Jahre. Die Universität Wien hatte in den 1850er Jahren etwa 2.500
Stundenten. Erst um 1860 begann ein steiler Anstieg - 1865 zählte man erstmals
um 3.000, 1870/71 mehr als 4.000 Studenten.12 Die Zahlen an den Universitäten in
Graz und Innsbruck lagen weit darunter. In den 1850er Jahren wuchs auch die Zahl
der mittleren Schulen kaum, während die Zahl der Grundschulen (Volksschulen)
mit dem Bevölkerungswachstum mithalten konnte.13
Die weitere Entwicklung hat Gary Cohen sehr genau dokumentiert. In der
Phase der Hochkonjunktur der späten 1860er und frühen 1870er Jahre stieg die
Zahl der Realschüler und Realgymnasiasten stark an, die „akademische“ Bildung
auf der Sekundarstufe erreichte breitere Bevölkerungsschichten als je zuvor.14
Nach Regionen differenziert hatten Niederösterreich (inclusive Wien), Böhmen,
Mähren und Schlesien bei Neugründungen von Gymnasien, Realschulen und
Realgymnasien die Nase vorn. Gemeinsam mit Galizien hatten Alpenländer wie
Salzburg oder Vorarlberg 1880 die geringste Dichte an Mittelschulen. Berücksichtigt
man allerdings den Anteil der Mittelschüler an den Elf- bis Achtzehnjährigen eines
Landes, dann lag Salzburg mit 24,1 hinter Niederösterreich (30,8), Mähren (28,8),
Schlesien (24,7) und Böhmen (24,6) an fünfter Stelle, noch vor Tirol (21,1) und
Bukowina (17,6), und weit vor Krain und Oberösterreich (je 15,1), Kärnten (13,9),
Steiermark (12,2), Galizien und Vorarlberg (10,7 und 10,4).15
Zur langsam wachsenden Zahl an Gymnasien, Realschulen und Realgymnasien
kam als neuer Typus einer Mittelschule die Lehrerbildungsanstalt
hinzu, die die Pflichtschullehrerausbildung nach dem Reichsvolksschulgesetz
1869 zu gewährleisten hatte. Auch sie schloss mit einer Matura.16
10 Cohen, Education, 31; Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd. 4, 225 (Engelbrecht interpretiert das
Kollegiengeld aber primär als Mittel, um die Konkurrenz unter den Professoren anzuspornen -
der bessere oder zumindest beliebtere Lehrer sollte ein höheres Einkommen lukrieren können!).
11 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd.4, 229 f.
12 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd.4, Grafik S. 514.
13 Cohen, Education, 63 - 65.
14 Cohen, Education, 68.
15 Cohen, Education, 69, Table 2/5.
16 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd.4, 63 f.
— " 1
The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization Processes
Seit den 1880er Jahren stiegen die Zahlen der Gymnasiasten, Realschüler und
Realgymnasiasten ebenso an wie die der Universitäts- und Hochschulstudenten
(insbesondere an Technischen Hochschulen). Dabei zeigten sich gewisse
Entwicklungsmuster: Nach dem schon beschriebenen Tiefpunkt um 1850 stieg die
Zahl der Mittel- und Hochschüler langsam an, während der Depression 1861/65
fiel die Zahl der Inskribenten an den polytechnischen Schulen, dafür stieg die an
Universitäten. Um 1870, auf dem Höhepunkt der Hochkonjunktur, stieg wiederum
die Zahl der Technikstudenten, während die Zahl der Universitätshörer sank.
Während der langen Depression der 1880er Jahre sank die Zahl der Realschüler
ebenso wie die der Technikstudenten, während die Zahl der Gymnasiasten und
Universitätshörer zunahm. Die akademische Jugend strebte in den Staatsdienst,
als Beamte, Ärzte oder Mittelschullehrer. Nach 1890 wuchsen die Studentenzahlen
an den Technischen Hochschulen wieder stärker an.17
Nun setzten auch erste Initiativen zur Ermöglichung höherer Bildung für das
weibliche Geschlecht ein. 1873 wurde in Graz eine sechsklassige Anstalt errichtet,
die als „Lyzeum“ bezeichnet wurde. Hier wurden statt Latein und Griechisch
Englisch und Französisch unterrichtet. 1877 folgte diesem Muster eine schon 1871
in Wien eröffnete, zunächst vierklassige „höhere Bildungsschule für Mädchen“.
Einem ersten Gymnasium für Mädchen, einer Vereinsgründung (1892), die nur
„gymnasiale Mädchenschule“ heißen durfte, blieb die eigene Matura verwehrt
- sie musste an Schulen für die männliche Jugend abgelegt werden.18 1900
erhielten die Mädchenlyzeen eine neue ministerielle Ordnung, doch erwiesen
sie sich zunehmen als „Bildungssackgasse“.19 Um Lyzeallehrerinnen zu werden,
mussten Frauen auch Universitätsstudien absolvieren können - seit 1897 war das
an der Wiener philosophischen Fakultät möglich, ab 1900 konnten Frauen auch
Medizin studieren.20
Bis zur Jahrhundertwende bildete sich ein gewisses Muster der nationalen und
religiösen Zugehörigkeit der Studierenden heraus. In dieser Zeit erreichten die
Tschechen eine Inskribentenzahl, die ihrem Anteil an der Bevölkerung entsprach,
bei den Technikern übertrafen sie sogar den Anteil der Deutschen.21 Nun stieg
auch der Anteil der Polen stark an, wobei unter den 1909/10 inskribierten etwa
6.700 Polen mehr als 1.100 Juden und eine unbekannte Zahl von Ukrainern
sich befanden.22 Dieser Prozess begann ausgerechnet in der Zeit der Regierung
Taaffe, die keineswegs an einer Ausweitung der Mittel- und Hochschulbildung
interessiert war. Gary Cohen berichtet ausführlich über Initiativen des
Landesschulinspektors von Niederösterreich, Heinrich Schramm und des
17 Cohen, Education, 76.
18 Engelbrecht, Geschichte Bd. 4, 282 f.
19 Engelbrecht, Geschichte Bd. 4, 287.
20 Engelbrecht, Geschichte,Bd. 4, 290 f.
21 Cohen, Education, 150 f.
22 Cohen, Education, 151.
prominenten Ministerialbeamten Armand von Dumreicher23, die darauf drängten,
die Jugend von Gymnasialstudien abzuhalten und dafür den gewerblichen
Unterricht zu forcieren. Freilich teilte der Statthalter von Mähren, Karl Baron
Korb von Weidenheim, dem Ministerium mit, es sei angesichts der ungünstigen
ökonomischen Zukunftsaussichten für Handwerker. Gewerbetreibende und
Bauern nicht unverständlich, wenn die Jugend akademische Bildung so
außerordentlich erstrebenswert finde. Er forderte die Schließung überflüssiger
Mittelschulen und mehr Publizität für das gewerbliche Schulwesen.24 Tatsächlich
versuchte der langjährige Unterrichtsminister Paul Gautsch von Frankenthurn25,
Minister von 1879 bis 1893 und von 1895 bis 1896, durch Schließung einiger
Sekundarschulen (Realschulen in Steyr und Cattaro/Kotor, Gymnasien in Bozen,
Rovereto, Krainburg/Kranj und Cattaro, Untergymnasium in Sereth) den Drang
zur Matura und damit zu den Hochschulstudien einzubremsen. Freilich erregten
diese Pläne und Anordnungen lebhaften Widerstand, nicht nur, aber besonders
bei den Tschechen, die sich um gewisse Hoffnungen für ihre Unterstützung der
Regierung betrogen sahen.26 Aber Gautsch fuhr fort, gegen die seiner Meinung
nach zu hohen Zahlen von Mittelschülern und Studenten zu argumentieren:
Nur zwei Prozent der männlichen Bevölkerung sei in höheren Bildungsberufen
beschäftigt, aber mehr als vier Prozent der männlichen Jugend besuchten
Mittelschulen. Es seien aber die Positionen in der öffentlichen Verwaltung
besetzt. Und Hoffnungen auf immer mehr Lehrerstellen an Mittelschulen dürfe
man sich auch nicht machen. Der Minister verwies sowohl auf den enormen
Zuwachs an Mittelschülern und Studenten wie auch auf die hohe Zahl der
Studienabbrecher.27 Als Gautsch Mitte der 1890er Jahre nochmals versuchte,
den jetzt stark wachsenden Andrang zu den Mittelschulen (und damit auch
zu den Universitäten) zu begrenzen, erlitt er dabei Schiffbruch. Wie Helmut
Engelbrecht28 betonte, sank jetzt generell die Durchsetzungsfähigkeit der
zentralstaatlichen Politik gegenüber regionalen, nationalen und parteipolitischen
Interessen: Cohens überaus interessanter Vergleich zwischen den Universitätsund
Technikinskribenten 1879/80 und 1909/10 bestätigt, dass immer mehr
junge Leute an die Hochschulen drängten: Auf tausend junge Leute im Alter von
19 - 22 Jahren entfielen 1879/80 zwischen 7,18 (Tirol) und 3,15 (Küstenland)
Studierende, 1909/10 waren es in der Bukowina 19,44, in Galizien 15,65, in
Mähren 13,78, in Niederösterreich 13,12, in Böhmen 12,42, sogar im Küstenland
waren es 7,68 und in Dalmatien 8,32.29
23 Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon 1, Wien 1957, 203 f.
24 Cohen, Education, 101 - 103.
25 Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon 1, Wien 1957,413 f.
26 Cohen, Education, 105.
27 Cohen, Education, 104. f
28 Engelbrecht, Bd. 4, 30 f.
29 Cohen, Education, 78 f . , Tab. 2/6.
In den letzten 20 Friedensjahren der Habsburgermonarchie wuchs die
Zahl der Mittelschüler ebenso wie die der Technik- und Universitätsstudenten
unerwartet stark an.30 Gleichzeitig blieb die Zahl der Universitäten und Hochschulen
praktisch gleich. Seit 1882 gab es in der österreichischen Reichshälfte
der Habsburgermonarchie acht Universitäten (Prag - eine deutsche und eine
tschechische, Krakau, Wien, Graz, Lemberg/L’viv, Innsbruck, Czernowitz/
Černivci). Dazu kamen sieben technische Hochschulen (Prag - eine deutsche
und eine tschechische , Brünn/Brno - eine deutsche und eine tschechische,
Wien, Graz und Lemberg/ L’viv). Hochschulrang hatte auch die 1872 in Wien
gegründete Hochschule für Bodenkultur, ebenso die Akademie der bildenden
Künste (1872).31 Eine erste Handelshochschule blieb Episode (1873 - 1877), dafür
erhielt das Tierarzneinstitut in Wien nach 1900 Hochschulrang, 1894 auch die
Bergakademie zu Leoben (ihr entsprach eine in Pribram in Böhmen).32Alle diese
Anstalten standen aber nach ihren Hörerzahlen weit hinter den Technischen
Hochschulen ebenso wie hinter den Universitäten. Dasselbe gilt auch für die
hier nicht weiter diskutierten theologischen Hauslehranstalten an den meisten
Bischofssitzen (und in einigen Klöstern), ebenso wie einige andere hochschulartige
Einrichtungen wie die Exportakademie (heute: Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien).
Massenuniversität um 1910?
Die rasche Zunahme der Studentenzahlen führte zu Erscheinungen, die von
Zeitgenossen in dramatischen Tönen beklagt wurden:
„Es klagen die Studierenden über mangelhafte Erfüllung des Lehrberufes von
Seiten der hohen Schulen. Sie finden nicht die Lehre so, wie sie sie brauchten, sei
es zur beruflichen Vorbereitung fü r die Praxis des Lebens, sei es aber auch fü r die
Erwerbung wissenschaftlichen Anfangskapitales. Eine übergroße Hörerzahl steht
einer relativ geringen Zahl von Dozierenden gegenüber. Was Wunder, dass auch die
Lehrtätigkeit, wie fast alles in unserer Zeit, mechanistische Formen angenommen
hat. Der einzelne Hörer findet nicht das, was ersucht und was er zu finden berechtigt
ist: intimeren Arbeitskontakt zwischen dem weisenden Meister und den suchenden
Folgern. D e n n z w i s c h e n i h n e n s t e h t d i eM a s s e (im Orig, gesperrt).
Und es klagen auch die Hochschullehrer. Den fü r sie hat die Störung des
Lehrbetriebes durch die Masse weit schwerer wiegende Folgen. Bedrängt doch die
immer größere Arbeitskräfte bindende Lehrverpflichtung mehr und mehr die andere
Richtung ihrer Lebensarbeit, die schöpferische Forschertätigkeit. Wie viel wertvolle
Forscherkraft wird .vergeudet in dem fa st tragisch zu nennenden Gewissenskonflikt,
in dem der Hochschullehrer unserer Großstadtuniversitäten heuzutage befangen ist:
zwischen dem zur Forscherarbeit aufrufendem Genius und dem zur Lehrtätigkeit
mahnenden Pflicht- und Verantwortlichkeitsgefühl!“33
30 Cohen, Education, 76 f.
31 Engelbrecht, Bd, 4, 255 - 259.
32 Engelbrecht, Bd. 4, 260 - 265.
33 Hugo Frh. v. Haan, Statistische Streiflichter zur österreichischen Hochschulfrequenz, in: Stat. Ms.
NF 22 (43), 1917,155 - 208.
Abgesehen vom „weisenden Meister“ und den „suchenden Folgern“ könnte der
Text aus dem zweiten Jahrzehnt des 21. Jahrhunderts stammen. Übervolle Hörsäle,
Verschulung der Studienpläne, zu wenige und überlastete Hochschullehrer, die
keine Zeit mehr für eigenen Forschung finden - das alles entnehmen wir der
täglichen Klage, die unerhört aus den Gebäuden unserer Universitäten dringen,
poch die in unserem Zitat formulierten Klagen stammen nicht aus dem Jahr
2010, sondern aus dem Jahr 1917. Die Zahlenbasis, von der sie ausgehen, ist die
Hochschulstatistik für das Studienjahr 1910/11. Wir wollen im Folgenden diesen
ausführlichen statistischen Text zum Ausgangspunkt für die Diskussion der Frage
nach den Zugangsmöglichkeiten zu universitärer Bildung nehmen.
Im Wintersemester 1910/11 studierten an den 20 österreichischen Hochschulen
(incl. den drei selbständigen theologischen Fakultäten in Salzburg, Olmütz
und Wien, hier evangelisch, aber ohne Kunsthochschulen, Exportakademie und
Konsularakademie) 42.116 Personen (davon 2477 Frauen), ordentliche und
außerordentliche Hörer zusammen.34 Zur gleichen Zeit wiesen die 50 (reichs-)
deutschen Hochschulen 85.638 Studierende (davon 6575 Frauen) auf. 35 Bei
28,6 Millionen Einwohnern (Österreich - »Zisleithanien«) kamen auf 10.000
Österreicher 14,74 Hochschulfrequentanten, auf 10.000 Reichsdeutsche (bei
65 Millionen Einwohnern) nur 13,19. Bloß auf Männer und ordentliche Hörer
bezogen verschärft sich der Unterschied sogar auf 20,71 (D) zu 25,52 (Ö). In
Österreich drängten also, nur bezogen auf die männlichen Studenten, um fast ein
Viertel mehr Hörer auf die Hochschulen als in Deutschland.36
Vertiefen wir diesen Vergleich mit dem Deutschen Reich ein wenig.
Tabelle 1: Ordentliche immatrikulierte Studenten (männlich) in Deutschland
und Ös terreich37
Studienzweige
Österreich Deutsches Reich
Absolut In % Auf 10.000
männl. Ew.
Absolut In % Auf 10.000
männl. Ew.
Theologie 1.691 4,7 1,21 4.312 6,6 1,35
Jus 11.941 33,3 8,51 12.360 18,6 3,86
Medizin 5.461 12,7 3,25 12.298 18,5 3,84
Philosophie 5.102 14,2 3,64 21.380 32,2 6,67
Universität 23.295 64,9 16,59 50.350 75,9 15,71
Technik 10.255 28,6 7,31 10.962 16,5 3,42
Bodenkultur 960 2,7 0,68 3.289 5,0 1,03
34 Haan, Streiflichter, 159.
35 Haan, Streiflichter, 159.
36 Haan, Streiflichter, 160.
37 Haan, Streiflichter, 161.
Studienzweige
Österreich Deutsches Reich
Absolut In % Auf 10.000
männl. Ew.
Absolut In % Aufloooo"
männl. Ew.
Tierarznei 771 1,6 0,55 1.138 1,7 0,43
Montanistik 580 2,2 0,41 623 0,9 0,19
Summe 35.861 100,0 25,52 66.362 100,0 20,17
Besonders attraktiv waren in Österreich die Studienzweige' der Juristen
und der Techniker. So gab es in Österreich 11.941 ordentlich immatrikulierte
Juristen, in Deutschland 12.360, bei den Technikern waren es 10.255 und 10.962.
An den acht österreichischen Rechtsfakultäten studierten praktisch ebenso viele
Studenten wie an den 21 (reichs-)deutschen, ebenso viele Techniker an den
sieben österreichischen technischen Hochschulen wie an den elf deutschen.
Bei einer mehr als doppelt so hohen Einwohnerzahl waren die Zahlen der
studierenden Juristen und Techniker praktisch gleich!38 In Österreich studierte
genau ein Drittel aller Studierenden Jus, in Deutschland nur 18,6%. Ein Viertel
aller Studenten in Österreich waren Techniker, in Deutschland nur 18,4%.39
Es war also die Prädominanz der Juristen in Österreich, wo ein Drittel aller
Studenten Jus studierten, klar ausgeprägt. Fast noch überraschender - auch die
Zahl der Techniker war in absoluten Zahlen etwa gleich hoch wie in Deutschland.
Zusammen studierten fast 62% aller Studenten in Österreich Jus und Technik.
In Deutschland waren nur 18,6 % der Studierenden Juristen, ziemlich genau so
viel wie Mediziner. Gemeinsam mit den Technikern machten die Juristen 35%
aller Studierenden aus. - Hingegen spielten Mediziner und Agrarstudenten in
Deutschland eine erheblich größere Rolle als in Österreich. Aber bezogen auf
die Einwohnerzahl waren beide Gruppen auch in Österreich nicht besonders
unterrepräsentiert: Immerhin entfielen in Österreich 3,25 angehende Mediziner
auf 10.000 männliche Einwohner, in Deutschland 3,84. Bei den Agrariern waren
diese Verhältniszahlen 0,68 und 1,03.
Die Tendenz zur Massenuniversität schien in Österreich also bereits
deutlich ausgebildet: Auf eine juristische Fakultät kamen in Österreich 1492,6 in
Deutschland nur 589 ordentliche Studierende, auf eine technische Hochschule
in Österreich 1463,5, in Deutschland 996,5 ordentliche Studierende.40 Auf die
20 medizinischen Fakultäten Deutschlands entfielen je 615, auf eine der sieben
österreichischen jedoch 652 ordentliche Studierende; auf die einzige Hochschule
für Bodenkultur in Wien entfielen alle 1051 Frequentanten der Bodenkultur, auf
die acht agrikolen Lehranstalten in Deutschland jedoch nur jeweils 456. Bei den
Theologen verhielt es sich ähnlich: Mehr Studierende in Deutschland, aber auch
38 Haan, Streiflichter, 162.
39 Haan, Streiflichter 162 f.
40 Haan, Streiflichter, 163.
mehr Fakultäten. Zu den elf österreichischen theologischen Fakultäten (mit 1691
Hörern) muss freilich die große Zahl (45) hochschulähnlicher „theologischer
Lehranstalten“ (bischöfliche Seminare und Hausstudien einzelner Orden) mit
ipsgesamt 1734 Hörern hinzugezählt werden. Aber auch in Deutschland war zu
jen 22 Fakultäten (mit etwa 4300 Hörern) eine hier nicht genannte Zahl von
»Lyzeen« sowohl katholischer wie protestantischer Orientierung zu rechnen.
Ein wirklich markanter Unterschied zwischen den beiden Staaten existierte
jedoch: in Deutschland bildeten die Studierenden an philosophischen Fakultäten
(die damals noch alle geistes- und naturwissenschaftlichen Fächer umfassten)
mit genau einem Drittel der ordentlich Immatrikulierten (oder 21.380) den
größten Studenten-Block, während diese Studien in Österreich nur von etwas
mehr als 5.000 Studierenden oder gerader 14,2 % der Studenten in Anspruch
genommen wurden. Auch bezogen auf die männliche Bevölkerung (6,67
Philosophen auf 10.000 männliche Deutsche) ist die Vorliebe für die Philosophie
ausgeprägt - in Österreich standen dem nur 3,64 Philosophen auf 10.000
männliche Österreicher gegenüber. In beiden Staaten dürfte freilich die ziemlich
große Zahl von außerordentlichen Hörern (in Österreich 4.000, darunter viele
Frauen, in Deutschland nicht publiziert) diese Zahlen etwas relativieren. Aber
der Vorrang der Philosophen in Deutschland bleibt ganz unbestritten, auch die
völlig entgegengesetzte Tendenz in Österreich. In Bezug auf diese Fakultäten war
die Belastung mit Studierenden in Österreich auch geringer als in Deutschland:
Pro Fakultät entfielen auf die 22 deutschen Fakultäten 791 ordentliche Hörer, auf
die acht österreichischen jeweils nur 638.41
Erweitert man den Vergleich der österreichischen Verhältnissen auf die
wichtigsten europäischen Staaten, so behauptete Österreich nicht nur gegenüber
Deutschland, sondern auch gegenüber dem übrigen Europa in Bezug auf die
Zahl der Hochschüler den Spitzenrang, bezogen auf die Einwohnerzahl:
Tabelle 2: Auf 10.000 Einwohner entfielen im Wintersemester 1910/11 in
Österreich 14,74 Hochschüler
Deutschland 13,19
Frankreich 11,30
Belgien 10,90
Schweiz 10,90
Niederlande 9,60
England 8,20
Italien 7,90
Ungarn 6,90
Russland 4,20
41 Haan, Streiflichter, 164.
Die österreichischen Hochschulen gehörten auch zu den größten Europas
Sieht man von Paris ab, wo etwa 16.000 Studenten immatrikuliert waren, gajt
die Berliner Humboldt- Universität mit etwa 9.700 Hörern als größte in Europa
schon gefolgt von der Wiener Universität mit fast 7.900 Hörern. Danach kamen
München (6.905), Budapest (6.683), Neapel (5.336), Leipzig (4.900) und - schon
- Lemberg (4.500). Im österreichischen Binnenvergleich folgte auf Lemberg die
tschechische Universität Prag (3.430) vor Graz (1.675), der deutschen Prager
Universität (1.557), Innsbruck (1.024) und Czernowitz (971).
Ursachen
Woher kamen diese für die Zeit um 1910 doch überraschend großen Studentenzahlen?
Unser Autor untersuchte drei Vergleichsgrößen, um diese Frage beantworten
zu können:
Die Konfession
Als verantwortlich für diese »Überfrequenz« - wie man das damals benannte
- wurde in erster Linie der enorme Zustrom jüdischer Studenten vor allem zu
den juridischen und medizinischen Studien gesehen. Von 100 Hochschülern
waren etwa 75% katholisch, 2,9% griechisch-orthodox, 4,3% evangelisch, 16,2
% israelitisch (Bevölkerung: 90,8 % katholisch, 2.3 % griechisch-orthodox,
2 % evangelisch, 4,6% israelitisch).42 Die religiösen Minderheiten waren also
durchwegs überdurchschnittlich unter Studenten vertreten, recht deutlich
die Evangelischen, aber absolut hervorstechend die israelitischen. Einen
Erklärungsgrund suchte der zeitgenössische Statistiker „(...) in dem vorwiegend
städtischen oder, besser gesagt, nicht agrarischen Charakter der jüdischen
Bevölkerung (...).“ Aber er spricht auch von einem „elementaren Auftrieb“,
„(...) der das Judentum nach Jahrhunderte langer Niederhaltung in inferioren
Lebensstellungen nunmehr unaufhaltsam zu kultureller Macht empordrängt.“43
Stefan Zweig hat in seinem schönen Erinnerungsbuch die starke Bildungstendenz
im Judentum seiner Kindheit und Jugend hervorgehoben.44 Ob freilich
42 Haan, Streiflichter, 174. Die Quellengrundlage für diese Aussagen bildeten die von den
Studierenden auszufüllenden “Nationale”.
43 Haan, Streiflichter 175.
44 Stefan Zweig, Die Welt von Gestern. Erinnerungen eines Europäers, Erstauflage Stockholm
1944, hier zitiert nach einer Taschenbuchausgabe, Frankfurt/Main 1970 (die dem Autor bei
der Suche nach dem Zitat am 10. 5. 2010 endgültig zerfiel): “ Der eigentliche Wille des Juden,
sein immanentes Ideal ist der Aufstieg ins Geistige, in eine höhere kulturelle Schicht. (...) auch
der ärmste Hausierer, der seine Packen durch Wind und Wetter schleppt, wird versuchen,
wenigstens einen Sohn unter den schwersten Opfern studieren zu lassen, und es wird als
Ehrentitel für die ganze Familie betrachtet, jemanden in ihrer Mitte zu haben, der sichtbar im
Geistigen gilt, einen Professor, einen Gelehrten, einen Musiker (...).”
stets nur der reine Bildungsdrang zum Hochschulstudium führte oder auch
gewisse materielle Erwägungen, wird sich nicht generell entscheiden lassen.
Gegenüber einem weit verbreiteten Vorurteil, wonach sich jüdische Studierende
nUr für Jus oder Medizin interessiert hätten, ist festzuhalten, dass sie auch in
den technischen Studienrichtungen und sogar in der Tierheilkunde den zweiten
platz nach den Katholiken einnahmen, wie dies die folgende Tabelle zeigt.45 Aber
vielleicht waren die Juden nur die Vorreiter einer Bildungsexplosion, der mit
einer gewissen Verzögerung auch die Ändern folgen würden? Wie Gary Cohen
gezeigt hat, lag der Höhepunkt an jüdischen Inskribenten in den 1880er Jahren.
Im Wintersemester 1884/85 waren 61% aller Wiener Medizinstudenten jüdischer
Konfession, von der Gesamtzahl der an der Wiener Universität Studierenden
waren es 36%. Später sanken diese Verhältniszahlen, gleichzeitig sank die Zahl
der Medizinstudenten dramatisch, bis 1899/1900 auf etwa die Hälfte der 1880er
Jahre, der jüdische Anteil dieser kleineren Zahl war auf 39% gesunken. 1909/10
machten sie von einer wieder etwas gestiegenen Gesamtzahl nur 35% aus.46
Tabelle 3: Konfessionelle Struktur verschiedener Hochschulstudienzweige:
KonfeTheoJus
MediPhiloUniverTechnik
Boku TierMonta-
Summe
ssionen logie zin sophie sität arznei nistik
Kath. 1.530 9.373 3.221 6.726 20.850 8.476 888 662 482 31.358
Orthodox 193 202 254 269 918 226 18 17 27 1.206
Evang. 61 375 199 453 1.088 576 47 27 50 1.788
Israelit - 2.670 1.252 1.270 5.192 1.468 31 61 12 6.764
Sonst - 168 82 80 330 170 67 5 26 598
Sum. 1.784 12.788 5.008 8.798 28.378 10.916 1.051 772 597 41.714
In Prozenten
Kath. 85,76 73,30 64,30 76,45 73,48 77,64 84,49 85,75 80,74 75,17
Orthodox 10,82 1,58 5,07 3,06 3,23 2,07 1,71 2,20 4,52 2,89
Evang. 3,42 2,93 3,97 5,15 3,83 5,27 4,47 3,50 8,38 4,29
Israelit - 20,88 25,03 14,43 18,30 13,45 2,95 7,90 2,01 16,22
Sonst - 1,31 1,63 0,91 1,16 1,57 6,38 0,65 4,35 1,43
Sum. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Der relativ große Anteil an orthodoxen Medizinstudenten wird übrig auf
das Fehlen einer medizinischen Fakultät in Agram/Zagreb zurückgeführt,
was sich auch an der großen Zahl von “Ausländern” unter den Hochschülern
mit kroatisch-serbischer Muttersprache äußere (900 Ausländer, 345 Inländer),
45 Haan, Streiflichter, 177.
46 Cohen, Education, 167, Tab. 4/6.
The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization Processes
wobei diese Ausländer zumeist als “ungarländische” spezifiziert werden.47 De
Autor jener Studie verweist auf zwei weitere Faktoren, die übrigens beide für đie
Hochschulfrequenz durch die israelitische Bevölkerung kaum verantwortlich
gelten konnten, nämlich Unterrichtssprache und Kronlandszugehörigkeit der
Universitäten.
Die Kronlandszugehörigkeit48
Die geringste Hochschulfrequenz hatte Dalmatien, in aufsteigender Reihe
gefolgt von Oberösterreich, Kärnten, Krain, dem Küstenland und Salzburg - alles
Länder ohne eigene Hochschulen. Dann kamen mit Tirol und Steiermark schon
zwei Länder mit Hochschulen, aber trotzdem geringer Frequenz. Die nächst
höhere Position nahm Schlesien ein, dann Galizien (mit zwei Universitäten),
sodann Böhmen (zwei Universitäten, zwei technische Hochschulen), Mähren
(zwei technische Hochschulen) und die Bukowina (Universität), die letztere nur
mehr übertroffen von Niederösterreich (mit Wien). Ob also im jeweiligen Land
ein Hochschulstandort existierte, war von großer, freilich keineswegs Ausschlag
gebender Bedeutung!49
Tabelle 4: Inländische Hochschüler nach Kronlandszugehörigkeit
Kronländer Inland. Stud, nach Bev. (österr. Staatsbürger) Auf 10.000 Ew.
Zugehörigkeit zu Kronld. nach Kronland entfallen
absolut in % absolut in % Studenten
Galizien 9.771 26,5 7,980.477 28,5 12,24
Böhmen 9.631 26,1 6,712.944 24,0 14,35
Niederösterr. 5.693 15,4 3,264.110 11,7 17,44
Mähren 4.211 11,5 2,604.857 9,3 16,17
Steiermark 1.429 3,9 1,394.699 5,0 10,21
Tirol u. Vlbg. 1.039 2,8 1,049.169 3,8 9,90
Oberösterr. 675 1,8 843.146 3,0 8,01
Küstenld. 792 2,1 827.269 3,0 9,57
Bukowina 1.285 3,5 794.929 2,8 16,16
Schlesien 853 2,3 741.456 2,6 11,50
Dalmatien 497 1,3 634.855 2,3 7,83
Krain 490 1,3 520.327 1,9 9,44
Kärnten 338 0,9 387.072 1,4 8,73
47 Haan, Streiflichter, 178.
48 Haan, Streiflichter, 180 -
49 Vgl. ferner Cohen, Education, 78 f, der die Kronlandherkunft der Studierenden 18798/80 und
1909/10 vergleicht. Durch seine Methode der Errechnung des Anteils der Studierenden an den
Jahrgängen der 19 - bis 22 -Jährigen verändern sich die Relationen doch etwas.
Grönländer Inländ. Stud. nach Bev. (österr. Staatsbürger) Auf 10.000 Ew.
Zugehörigkeit zu Kronld. nach Kronland entfallen
absolut in % absolut in % Studenten
"^Salzburg 207 0,6 208.562 0,7 9,92
Summe 36.911 100,0 27,973.872 100,0
(Die Zahl der inländischen Hochschüler differiert etwas von anderen Zahlen,
wahrscheinlich, weil die Hörer der selbst, theol. Lehranstalten nicht nach Kronländern
aufgeschlüsselt sind)
Nur vier Kronländer wiesen Hochschülerkontingente auf, die über dem
Staatsdurchschnitt lagen: Niederösterreich (mit Wien), Mähren und die Bukowina
(um ein Viertel über dem Durchschnitt) sowie Böhmen (um ein Zwölftel). Alle
anderen Länder lagen darunter. Warum ein Land wie die Steiermark mit immerhin
drei Hochschulen (Universität und Technik in Graz, Bergakademie in Leoben)
eine so relativ geringe Hochschulfrequenz aufweist, ist nicht ganz klar. Der Autor
vermutet, ähnlich wie in Tirol, dass die ausschließliche deutsche Unterrichtssprache
die in beiden Ländern starken nichtdeutschen Sprachgruppen (Italienisch bzw.
Slowenisch) vom Besuch der landeseigenen hohen Schulen abgehalten habe.50
Außerordentlich erscheint nur die überaus hohe Studentenzahl der Bukowina, die
ja einen stark agrarischen Charakter aufwies. Hier habe, so der Autor unserer Studie,
die Gründung der Universität in Czernowitz 1875 zu jener ganz ungewöhnlich
hohen Frequenzziffer geführt, die sich auch in der Erhöhung der Zahl orthodoxer
und rumänischer Studenten ausgewirkt habe.51 Eine den Sudetenländern eigene
Besonderheit zeigt sich im »unnatürlichen Prävalieren des Technikstudiums«,
das mit den vier technischen Hochschulen (bei nur zwei Universitäten) in diesem
Raum begründet wird: In diesen Ländern überwogen daher nicht - wie sonst - die
Juristen, die in Böhmen nur knapp 26%, in Mähren 22% und in Schlesien 21%
der Studierenden ausmachten, sondern die Techniker mit 36% (Böhmen), 38%
(Mähren) und 29% (Schlesien).52
Hochschulneugründungen, so die Schlussfolgerung unseres Autors, fassen nicht
nur vorhandene Frequenzziffern zusammen, sondern verstärken sie fühlbar. Wird
also irgendwo eine neue Hochschule gegründet, dann heißt das nicht nur, dass die
landeseigenen Studenten nicht mehr anderswohin zum Studium wandern müssen,
sondern vor allem, dass mehr Menschen als früher studieren werden. Das würde
also bedeuten, dass neue Universitäten für die Ruthenen, Italiener und Slowenen
den vorhandenen Druck etwa auf die Wiener Universität kaum verringern, dafür
aber neue Schichten für das Studium interessieren würden (die »frequenzzeugende
und befruchtende Wirkung der konnationalen Hochschuleinrichtungen«).53
50 Haan, Streiflichter, 182.
51 Haan, Streiflichter, 183 f.
52 Haan, Streiflichter, 186.
53 Haan, Streiflichter, 190, FN 1.
Die Nationalität
Nationale Hochschulen, wie sie für Deutsche, Tschechen und Polen existierten
verstärkten aus nahe liegenden Gründen die Hochschulfrequenz in der jeweiligen
nationalen Gruppe - genau diese drei Gruppen hatten auch überdurchschnittliche
Hochschulfrequenz aufzuweisen. Die höchste Hochschulfrequenz zeigten jedoch
nicht die »Deutschen«, sondern die »Polen«; die »Tschechen« studierten hingegen
überdurchschnittlich Technik (zwei tschechische technische Hochschulen!).
Tabelle 2: Anteil der Sprachgruppen an den Hochschülern:54
Sprache Muttersprache der
inländischen Hochschüler
Umgangssprache der österr.
Staatsbürger
Auf 10.000
Staatsbürger
absolut In % Absolut In % entfallen
inländische
Hochschüler
Deutsch 16.534 44,5 9,950.000 35,6 16,6
Tschechisch 8.588 23,11 6,436.000 23,0 13,35
Polnisch 8.392 22,6 4,968.000 18 16,9
Ruthenisch 1.470 4,0 3,519.000 12,6 4,2
Slowenisch 690 1,9 1,253.000 4,5 5,5
Serbo-kroat. 345 0,9 783.000 2,8 4,4
Italienisch 844 2,3 768.000 2,8 11,0
Rumänisch 300 0,8 275.000 1.0 11,0
Magyarisch 2 - 11.000 - 1,8
Summe 37.165 100.00 27,963,872 100,00 13,28
Abgeseheni von der hier nicht lösbaren Frage, ob und inwieweit die
„Muttersprache“ inländischer Hochschüler mit der in den Volkszählungen
erhobenen „Umgangssprache“ tatsächlich so vergleichbar ist wie dies unser Autor
praktischer Weise annimmt55, und ob damit auch tatsächlich die »Nationalität«,
also das nationale Bewusstsein eingefangen wurde, ist der Vergleich höchst
interessant: Nicht die Deutschen führen relativ (wie man annehmen würde),
in der Hochschulstatistik, sondern die Polen, freilich nur knapp vor den
Deutschen, und beide vor den Tschechen. Alle drei Sprachgruppen liegen über
dem Staatsdurchschnitt. Noch relativ nahe am Staatsdurchschnitt liegen - mit
11 Hochschülern aüf zehntausend Sprecher - die Sprachgruppen italienisch und
rumänisch. Das verwundert bei den Italienern nicht besonders, handelt es sich
hier doch um eine vielfach in urbanen Verhältnissen lebende Gruppe. Aber die
Rumänen ? Die gab es im alten Österreich bekanntlich nur in der Bukowina.
Die Bukowina erhielt 1875 eine eigene Universität, zwar mit deutscher
54 Haan, Streiflichter, 191.
55 Wobei er die Gleichsetzung auch eingehend begründet, vgl. Haan, Streiflichter, 192.
Unterrichtssprache, aber wer im Gymnasium Deutsch gelernt hatte, konnte als
Rumäne sozusagen „zu Hause“ studieren.
Wie nicht anders zu erwarten, hatten die Deutschen die meisten Studienmöglichkeiten:
Fünf Universitäten und vier technische Hochschulen, dazu die
Hochschule für Bodenkultur, die Tierärztliche Hochschule sowie die Bergakademie
Leoben. Trotzdem hatten die Polen eine noch höhere Hochschulfrequenz. Dafür
wird die gute Ausstattung Galiziens mit Hochschulen (mit polnischer Unterrichtssprache)
verantwortlich gemacht: zwei Universitäten (Krakau und Lemberg), eine
Technische Hochschule, eine Tierarzneischule und ein landwirtschaftliches Studium
an der Universität Krakau. Aber dominant blieb doch das Universitätsstudium,
und da wieder Jus und Philosophie. In diesen Fächern sowie in Theologie und
Medizin übertrafen die Polen die Tschechen ganz deutlich.
Für die Verteilung der tschechischen Studenten war wiederum die
eigentümliche Verteilung der tschechischen Hochschulen verantwortlich: Nur
eine Universität stand zwei tschechischen Techniken gegenüber. Daher auch
die enorm hohe Zahl von Technikstudenten unter den Tschechen. Dagegen
studierten relativ weniger Tschechen als Deutsche oder Polen Jus, Theologie,
Philosophie oder Medizin.
Die genannten drei Nationalitäten machten etwa 76% der gesamten
Bevölkerung Österreichs aus, die Hochschüler dieser drei Sprachgruppen jedoch
etwas mehr als 90%. Die Nationen ohne »eigene« Hochschulen stellten fast 24%
der Bevölkerung, aber nicht einmal 10% der Studierenden.56
Kolleggeldbefreiungen
Als eine der Ursachen für die großen Hörerzahlen vermutete der Statistiker
übrigens, dass das Kollegiengeld in Deutschland doppelt so hoch war wie
in Österreich (hier K 2,10) und nicht erlassen, sondern nur gestundet wurde,
während es in Österreich »in largester Weise« zur Hälfte oder zur Gänze
erlassen wurde (1910/11 genoss ein Drittel der österreichischen Studierenden
Kollegiengeldbefreiung, ein Zehntel war total befreit).57
Die Kollegiengelder waren 1850 eingeführt worden, bis dahin gab es ein
allgemeines Unterrichtsgeld von fl 30,-.58 Jeder Vortragende erhielt von jedem
Studierenden soviel Gulden pro Semester, als die Vorlesung Wochenstunden
zählte (2 Stunden = 2 fl). Allerdings musste jeder ordentliche Professor in
jedem dritten Semester eine unentgeltliche ein- oder zweistündige Vorlesung
(collegium publicum) abhalten. »Bei einer stark besuchten Universität wie der
Wiener erreichten die Kollegiengelder für einzelne Professoren 8.000 bis 9.000
fl im Jahr.«59
56 Haan, Streiflichter, 201.
57 Haan, Streiflichter, 166.
58 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd.4, 225.
59 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd. 4, 72.
Zu weitgehende Schlüsse dürfe man aus den Zahlen der Kollegiengeldbefreiungen
nicht ziehen, meinte der Statistiker Stefan Graf Badeni, weil zur
Bedürftigkeit auch noch besonders gute Studienleistungen kamen, die ebenfalls
eine Grundbedingung für die Kolleggeldbefreiung waren. Im Staatsdurchschnitt
waren in den 1890er Jahren etwa 20% halb oder ganz vom Kollegiengeld befreit
dabei lag die Zahl der Vollbefreiten immer deutlich über der Zahl der Halbbefreiten
Tabelle 5: Verhältnis der vom Kollegiengeld Befreiten zu der Hörerzahl,
Winter- und Somm erseme s ter l 8 9 8 /9 9
Universität,
WS1898/99
Hörer Ganz
befreit
In % Halb
befreit
In % Begünstigt
In %
Wien 6.697 529 7,9 133 1,9 662 9,8
Graz 1.644 123 7,5 141 8,5 264 16,0
Innsbruck 1.087 134 12,3 44 4,0 178 16,3
Prag deutsch 1.326 157 11,8 109 8,2 266 20,0
Prag tschech. 3.066 699 22,8 314 10,2 1.013 33,0
Lemberg 1.901 423 22,2 248 13,1 671 35,3
Krakau 1.323 214 16,3 174 13,1 388 29,4
Czerno-witz 377 41 10,8 19 5,0 60 15,8
Summe 17.421 2.320 13,3 1.182 6,8 3.502 20,1
In Wien zahlten - auch über mehrere Jahre gerechnet - immer 88 - 89% der
Studierenden das ganze Kollegiengeld, in Graz 84 bis 87, in Innsbruck 81 bis
83%. An der deutschen Universität Prag betrug dieser Prozentsatz zwischen
etwa 79 und 83%, an der tschechischen hingegen zwischen etwas unter 68 und
70%. Noch tiefer lagen die Prozentsätze der Vollzahler in Lemberg (56 - 64%),
in Krakau (65 bis 69%), in Czernowitz hingegen zahlten wiederum zwischen
80 und 84% das volle Kollegiengeld. Etwas verallgemeinernd kann man sagen,
dass die Universitäten mit tschechischer und polnischer Unterrichtssprache
“billiger” waren als jene mit deutscher. Nach Fakultäten waren die Theologen
die günstigsten, in Lemberg und Krakau bildete bei ihnen die totale Befreiung
die Regel, an den übrigen Fakultäten wurden 80 - 90 % der Hörer befreit. Bei
den technischen Hochschulen war der Prozentsatz der Befreiungen insgesamt
höher als an den Universitäten: 1893/94 zahlten von den etwa 2.500 Hörern an
Technischen Hochschulen 64% das volle Kolleggeld, ganz befreit waren fast 27%,
halb etwas mehr als 9, zusammen also 36%.60
Ob also tatsächlich die Kolleggeldbefreiungen einen wesentlichen Anteil an
der »Überfrequenz« der österreichischen Hochschulen hatten, wird nicht ganz
zu klären sein.
60 St. Graf Badeni, Statistik der Collegiengelder an den österreichischen Universitäten, in: Stat.
Ms. NF V (26), 1900, 343 - 370.
Ausweitung der sozialen Rekrutierungsfelder
Dieses Thema wurde von unserm trefflichen Haan gar nicht angeschnitten.
Es bestand sowieso weithin Übereinstimmung in der Meinung, dass der Schuster
bei seinem Leisten bleiben, und dass höhere Bildung für Angehörige der unteren
Volksschichten nur im Falle außerordentlicher Begabungen ermöglicht werden
solle. Gary Cohen hat die soziale Zusammensetzung der Studenten an den beiden
Prager Universitäten sowie an der Universität Wien analysiert.61 Er unterschied
dabei fünf große soziale Kategorien:
- die besitzenden Klassen, also die im Deutschen traditionell „Besitzbürgertum“
Benannten, einschließlich des Großgrundbesitzes,
_ die „educated professions“, also das „Bildungsbürgertum“ (höhere Offiziere
und Beamte, Advokaten, Notare, Professoren an Universitäten und Mittelschulen,
Naturwissenschaftler, Ingenieure, Architekten),
- die „alte“ Mittelklasse, bestehend aus Bauern, Herrschaftsverwaltern, selbständigen
Handwerkern und Kaufleuten,
- die „neue“ Mittelklasse aus Pflichtschul-Lehrern, mittleren und unteren
öffentlichen und Privat-Beamten, Buchhaltern, Angestellten,
- Schließlich „Arbeiter“ - Fabriksarbeiter, unselbständige Handwerker,
Handelsdiener, unqualifizierte Arbeiter und Taglöhner.
Die Wiener Zahlen für die Zeit von 1861 bis 1910 zeigen (mit Prozentsätzen
um etwa 30%) Studenten aus dem Besitzbürgertum bzw. dem „alten“ Mittelstand
an der Spitze, wobei der alte Mittelstand ab 1880 langsam zurückging (von fast
33% auf knapp 27% bis 1910). Das Besitzbürgertum lag mit etwa 14 bis fast 19%
(1880) an dritter bzw. (ab 1900) an vierter Stelle (17,7%) , zuletzt schon knapp
verdrängt vom neuen Mittelstand, dessen Anteil von 11,6 % 1860 auf 18,4%
1900 angestiegen war (1910: 18,3%). Der Anteil der Arbeiterklasse sank von 9%
(1860) auf weniger als 5% (1880) und lag 1910 bei 4,4%. An den Technischen
Hochschulen lagen die Studenten aus den alten Mittelschichten weit voran,
wobei die neuen Mittelschichten stark aufholten. Besitz- und Bildungsbürgertum
studierten signifikant weniger an Technischen Hochschulen. Der Arbeiteranteil
war höher als an den Universitäten, sank aber tendenziell ebenfalls.
Cohen vergleicht die Zahlen für Wien und Prag auch mit Globalzahlen für
Preußen. An preußischen Universitäten führten 1911/12 Studenten aus dem
Milieu des neuen Mittelstandes (32,6%) vor dem alten Mittelstand (29,1 %). An
dritter Stelle lagen Studenten aus dem Bildungsbürgertum (21,1%), an vierter
Stelle aus den besitzenden Klassen. Aus der Arbeiterschaft kam fast niemand.
Im Vergleich dazu hatten an den drei Universitäten in Wien und Prag 1909/10
den höchsten Anteil an Studenten aus dem alten Mittelstand (31,1%), gefolgt
von solchen aus dem Bildungsbürgertum. Die neuen Mittelklassen rangieren
im Vergleich mit Preußen deutlich abgeschlagen an dritter Stelle (nur 20%), das
61 Cohen, Education, 179 -211.
Besitzbürgertum war noch schwächer als in Preußen vertreten (14%). Wien allein
sah allerdings anders aus, hier führten mit fast einem Drittel der Immatrikulierten
Ankömmlinge des Bildungsbürgertums (32,6%) vor solchen aus den alten
Mittelschichten (27%), während neue Mittelschicht und Besitzbürgertum
fast gleichauf rangierten (18,3 % bzw. 17,7%). Neben der deutlich höheren
Repräsentanz von Söhnen aus dem neuen Mittelstand in Preußen lag der zweite
gravierende Unterschied im Vorhandensein von Arbeiterkindern: In Wien und
Prag gemeinsam immerhin 5,8%, in Wien allein doch noch 4,4%.
Es wäre höchst interessant, Cohens Studie im Hinblick auf Fakultäten und
Religionen der Studierenden weiter zu verfolgen, doch mangelt es hier am
nötigen Platz. Interessant ist die - allerdings nur vorläufige, aber effektvolle -
Schlussfolgerung, dass im Vergleich mit Deutschland, „Austrian higher education
was expanding at a tempo that was somewhat faster than the evolution of its
econonmic and social structures even in the Alpine and Bohemian lands.“62
Reaktionen
Wenn sich in einer multinationalen Gesellschaft, wie jener der Habsburgermonarchie,
selbstbewusste sprachnationale Einzelgesellschaften als zentrale
integrative Elemente etablieren, wird das »nationale« Erklärungsmodell zur
Erklärung der durchaus eigentümlichen altösterreichischen Hochschullandschaft
jedenfalls zu berücksichtigen sein. Diese Hochschulen lehrten als staatliche
Instrumente zur Zeit des zentralistischen Absolutismus durchwegs in deutscher
Sprache (wenn es nicht noch irgendwo Reste von Latein gab). Mit der
Konstitutionalisierung des politischen Lebens wurde die Hochschulpolitik
zu einem jener Felder, auf dem sich eine gewisse Kompromissbereitschaft
demonstrieren ließ. So wurde als Folgen der galizischen Autonomie zuerst in
Krakau ( 1870), dann in Lemberg ( 1871 ) die polnische Vortragssprache eingeführt
(die deutsche blieb für einige Fächer bestehen, die ruthenische erhielt 1879
einige Nischen zugesprochen), seit 1844 existierte eine technische Hochschule
in Lemberg, dazu kam noch das Landwirtschaftsstudium in Krakau 1890. Den
Tschechen kam man weniger gern und weniger rasch entgegen. Immerhin wurde
unter Taaffe im Studienjahr 1882/83 die traditionsreiche Alma mater Carolina
geteilt, eine rein tschechische Anstalt entstand. Schon 1869 war eine selbständige
tschechische Technik aus dem Prager Polytechnikum verselbständigt worden,
1899 folgte die Brünner tschechische Technik.63 Damit waren die Tschechen zwar
noch keineswegs zufrieden, aber der Staat hatte ein gewisses Entgegenkommen
gezeigt. Als man auch den Italienern gegenüber ein solches Signal setzen
wollte, hatte man die vielleicht nicht besonders glückliche Idee, ein italienisches
62 Cohen, Education, 207.
63 Haan, Streiflichter, 206 f.
Parallelstudium an der Jus-Fakultät in Innsbruck (bzw. an einer eigenen,
neuen) zu installieren, was zu wilden Protesten und Exzessen führte.64 Auch
die Bemühungen der Slowenen um eine eigene Universität waren vergeblich,
immerhin wurden vom Unterrichtsminister Wilhelm von Hartei (Minister von
1900 bis 1905, übrigens der Sohn eines Webers65 und damit ein schönes Beispiel
für die Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten durch Bildung!) Habilitationsstipendien für
junge Slowenen vergeben, womit ein zunächst noch kleiner Grundstock für eine
künftige akademische Elite auch bei dieser Nation gelegt wurde.66 Die (Serbo-)
Kroaten hatten ja eine eigene Universität (aber ohne medizinische Fakultät!) in
Agram, für österreichische Staatsbürger also im »Ausland«. Dennoch war der
Bedarf nach einer nationalen Hochschule vielleicht nicht so bedeutend.
Versuch einer Zusammenfassung
Der hier ausführlicher referierte Bericht von Hugo Freiherrn von Haan
charakterisiert die österreichische Hochschulfrequenz, aufbauend auf den Daten des
Studienjahres 1910/11, als keineswegs zu billigenden Massenandrang. Er analysiert
diese Situation zunächst einmal im internationalen Vergleich, sodann mit einem
genaueren Blick auf die religiösen, regionalen und nationalen Komponenten des
Phänomens. Vor allem im Vergleich mit dem Deutschen Reich, mit dessen Hohen
Schulen ja die österreichischen vielfach in engen Beziehungen standen, zeigen
sich eine Reihe interessanter Unterschiede: Dort, im Deutschen Reich, neben den
wenigen großen Universitäten zahlreiche kleine an traditionsreichen Standorten;
in Österreich neben der auch in europäischen Dimensionen sehr großen Wiener
Universität weitere quantitativ sehr stark besuchte Universitäten, aber nur wenige.
Im Jus- und Technikstudium übertraf das damalige Österreich (gerechnet pro
Kopf der Bevölkerung) die deutschen Frequenzzahlen bei Weitem, ebenso beim
Technikstudium. Umgekehrt bei Philosophie und bei den Handelsstudien: Die
letzteren waren in Deutschland stark vertreten, in Österreich noch kaum. Die
philosophischen Richtungen, in Deutschland ebenfalls sehr stark, spielten eine
geringe Rolle. Für die großen Studentenzahlen konnte unser Gewährsmann
einige Faktoren verantwortlich machen: Universitäten und Hochschulen im
eigenen (Kron-)land bzw. (noch wichtiger!) mit der eigenen Muttersprache
als Vortragssprache; und schließlich: Die besonders ausgeprägte Tendenz der
64 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, 317 f. - Übrigens waren die Slowenen entschieden gegen eine
italienische Universität in Triest, was wiederum die Italiener ebenso unablässig forderten.
65 Wilhelm von Hartei (1839 - 1907), Altphilologe, ab 1900 gleichzeitig auch Vizepräsident der
kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, verdient um zahlreiche Publikations- und
Editionsvorhaben, als Minister um den Bau der neuen Kliniken in Wien (9. Bezirk). Vgl. ÖBL
Bd.2, 192.
66 Sergij Vilfan, Art. “Pravna znanost”, in: Enciklopedija Slovenije Bd. 9, Ljubljana 1995, 235 - 237,
hier 236, verweist auf mehrere Juristen, die durch solche Stipendien auf ihre spätere universitäre
Laufbahn (die meisten tatsächlich in Ljubljana, seit 1919) vorbereitet wurden.
Angehörigen der israelitischen Religion zum Universitäts-, und hier wieder zum
Jus- und Medizinstudium. Wobei diese Tendenz wiederum die dominante Rolle
der Sprachgruppen Deutsch und Polnisch (und wohl nur in geringerem Umfang
auch Tschechisch) in der Universitätsfrequenz verstärkte.
Zwei Fragen drängen sich auf. Die erste lautet: Waren die österreichischen
Hochschulen tatsächlich so überfüllt, wie das die zeitgenössischen Klagen
vermuten lassen? Im Verhältnis zu unseren Tagen waren die damaligen
Studentenzahlen ja lächerlich gering. Warum das als so katastrophal empfunden
wurde, war wohl eine Folge des explosiven Wachstums der Inskribentenzahlen
gerade in den letzten beiden Jahrzehnten vor 1914. An der Wiener Universität
wurde 1891/92 ziemlich genau 5.000 Hörer inskribiert, zu Ausbruch des Ersten
Weltkrieges waren es mehr als 9.000.67
Tatsächlich gibt es genug Zeugnisse, die den Tenor der Ausführungen
unseres trefflichen Haan voll und ganz teilen. Der von uns schon herangezogene
Stefan Zweig spricht von der Wiener Universität »(...) mit ihren sechs- oder
siebentausend Studenten, die durch Überfüllung den so fruchtbaren persönlichen
Kontakt zwischen Lehrern und Schülern von vornherein hemmte (...)«, ohne
positive Erinnerung.68 Im Juni 1913 interpellierten mehrere (deutschnationale)
Abgeordnete den Unterrichtsminister wegen der unhaltbaren Zustände an der
medizinischen Fakultät der deutschen Prager Universität, wo für die Chirurgie 600
Hörer inskribiert seien, der Hörsaal aber kaum die Hälfte fasse; bei Operationen
könnten nur die dem Operationstisch zunächst Stehenden etwas sehen, die
hygienischen Zustände seien skandalös, usw. Diese Umstände wurden dem
vermehrten Zustrom ausländischer, »namentlich russischer und südslawischer«
Studenten zugeschrieben, es handle sich um eine »schwere Benachteiligung des
deutschen Volkes«.69 Und als der Ministerialrat Ritter v. Pollack eine Studienreise
nach Deutschland zur Besichtigung mehrere technischer Hochschulen
unternahm, berichtete er abschließend, die Professoren in Deutschland hätten
ihm rund heraus erklärt, »(...) dass sie sich einen entsprechenden Unterricht
unter den österreichischen Verhältnissen bei dem Mangel an Laboratorien
und der verschwindenden Zahl von wissenschaftlichen Hilfskräften gar nicht
vorstellen können (...).« Kein Österreicher, der einmal nach Deutschland als
Professor gekommen sei, würde wieder zurück kehren - das habe ihm auch ein
Österreicher, Professor Krainer70 an der TH Berlin zu Charlottenburg, durchaus
bestätigt.71 Der Bericht Pollacks kam auch ins Finanzministerium, wo man schlicht
67 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Grafik auf S. 514
68 Zweig, Welt, 78.
69 ÖStA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium, 1913, Karton 458, Nr. 1797,20. Juni 1913. Die Interpellation
blieb unbeantwortet, “mit Rücksicht auf erfolgten Schluß der XXI. Session des Reichsrates”.
70 Paul Krainer (1869 - 1935), Sohn eines Chefkonstrukteurs der österreichischen Marine,
studierte in Wien und Darmstadt Maschinenbau und war von 1906 bis 1935 o. Prof. an der TH
Berlin. Mitbegründer der Schiffbautechnischen Gesellschaft. Vgl. ÖBL 4, 1969, 194.
71 ÖStA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium 1911, Karton 424, Nr. 1009.
und ergreifend mitteilte, es gebe kein Geld, worauf der Referent hinzufügte,
eine Ausgestaltung der technischen Hochschulen sei dennoch unvermeidlich,
weil sonst die Konkurrenzfähigkeit Österreichs »auf industriellem Gebiete«
geradezu unterbunden würde.72 Verschiedene Beschränkungen für technische
Hochschulen waren übrigens in Bayern und Preußen in Kraft, auch für Wien
verfügte der Unterrichtsminister, dass hier nur Studierende aus Niederösterreich
und aus Kronländern ohne eigene Technik studieren dürften.73
Es gab also genügend Nachholbedarf. Dazu kamen die zahlreichen Wünsche
nach neuen Universitäten und Hochschulen. Die Tschechen wünschten eine zweite
Universität in Brünn (prompte Ablehnung der Deutschen! ), dazu eine Tierärztliche
Hochschule mit tschechischer Vortragssprache.74 Den Italienern wollte man mit
einer italienisch-sprachigen Jus-Fakultät in Innsbruck entgegenkommen, aber
das scheiterte am wütenden Widerstand der deutschen (deutsch-nationalen)
Innsbrucker Studenten. Eine italienische Universität in Triest wurde dafür von
den Slowenen heftig bekämpft, der mögliche Kompromiss einer italienischen
Fakultät in Wien fand bei den Italienern selbst keine Zustimmung. Die Forderung
der Ukrainer (Ruthenen) nach einer Universität in Lemberg75 mit ukrainischer
Vortragssprache lehnten die Polen ab. Das Forderungspaket der Südslawen, die
sich benachteiligt fühlten, weil es keine slowenische Universität gab, während
die kroatische Universität in Agram/Zagreb keine medizinische Fakultät hatte
und zudem stets Probleme mit der Anerkennung der kroatischen Diplome in
der österreichischen Reichshälfte auftraten, enthielt, neben der Forderung nach
der fehlenden slowenischen Universität und nach der Anerkennung der Studien
in Agram auch die nach der Schaffung medizinischer Fakultäten in Agram und
Belgrad (!).76
72 Ebd.
73 ÖStA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium 1912, Karton 444, Nr. 2081 vom 3. August 1912 - Protokoll
über die Konferenz von Vertretern von Hochschulverwaltungen aus dem Deutschen Reich und
Österreich (Zisleithanien) in Goslar am Harz vom 21. und 22. Juni 1912: Mehrfach numerus
clausus und höhere Gebühren für Ausländer. - Die neuen, rigiden Vorschriften für Wien 1902
bei Cohen, Education, 117. Dennoch erhöhte sich die Zahl der Studierenden an der Wiener
Technik von etwa 2.500 (1901/02) auf mehr als 3.200 im Studienjahr 1910/11. Ähnliche
Restriktionen wurden auch für die übrigen Technischen Hochschulen verfügt, nicht immer
zur Freude der Professoren (und, klarerweise, der Studenten). Cohen, Education, 118.
74 ÖStA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium, 1911, Karton 422, Nr. 516 vom 18.2.1911 - Eine neue
tierärztliche Hochschule mit böhmischer Unterrichtssprache könne “(...) nicht in Aussicht
genommen werden, da die zur Verfügung stehenden Mittel durch die im Zuge befindliche
Reorganisation der bestehenden tierärztlichen Hochschulen, insbesondere jener in Wien (...)”
in Anspruch genommen würden.
75 Z.B. ÖstA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium 1912, Kartin 444, Nr. 2139 vom 9. August 1912. -
In zahlreichen ruthenischen Ortschaften Ostgaliziens werden Resolutionen in Angelegenheit
der Universitätsfrage beschlossen, gefordert wurde darin die Errichtung einer ruthenischen
Universität in Lemberg,
76 ÖStA, AVA, Unterricht - Präsidium, 1911, Karton 423, Nr. 864, 18.3.1911: Ausführliche
Zusammenfassung eines Berichts des Landespräsidiums von Krain über diverse
hochschulpolitische Forderungen der Slowenen, aber auch der Kroaten und Serben. Die
Die Minister standen allen diesen Wünschen eher defensiv gegenüber. Auf
eine der beliebten parlamentarischen Anfragen nach der Förderung dieser
diversen Hochschulwünsche antwortete das Unterrichtsressort, dass man die
Entwicklung beobachte, derzeit keinen Grund zu weiteren Aktivitäten erkennen
könne, dass man aber zur »Heranbildung von Lehrkräften an Hochschulen« der
wissenschaftlichen Lehre in den Sprachen jener vier »Nationalitäten«, (Ruthenen,
Slowenen, Italiener, Serbo-Kroaten) die eben keine »eigenen« Hochschulen
hatten, vermehrt Förderungsstipendien vergeben werde.77 Man bereite damit
spätere mögliche Gründungen sozusagen vor.
Die Ursachen für die Bildungsexplosion zwischen etwa 1890 und 1914
sind vielfältig. Ganz spezifische lokale und regionale Gegebenheiten, wie der
Existenz einer Universität in Czernowitz, die der Bukowina ein für ein Agrarland
unerwartet hohe Studentenzahlen beschert hat, sind ebenso zu beobachten
wie ganz allgemeine Tendenzen, etwa das Streben nach höherer Bildung als
Voraussetzung für eine besserer Berufslaufbahn und - mit Matura - für das
Einjährig-Freiwilligen-Jahr mit der Möglichkeit, zum Leutnant der Reserve
aufzusteigen. Daneben steht das Streben der jüdischen Bevölkerung nach
sozialer Emanzipation durch Bildung. Das langsame Wachstum an materiellen
Möglichkeiten bei breiteren Bevölkerungsschichten hat ebenso wie die Zunahme
von Schulen und Hochschulen Mitgliedern solcher sozialer Schichten den
Zugang zu Matura und Hochschulstudium ermöglicht. Dagegen hat das Streben
nach Studienmöglichkeiten für Frauen gegen den hinhaltenden Widerstand
des Unterrichtsministeriums ebenso wie gegen den akademischer Funktionäre
noch kaum Erfolge gezeitigt und fiel auch quantitativ nicht sehr ins Gewicht. Im
Gegenteil: Mit den sechsklassigen „Lyzeen“ wurde ein Schultyp gefördert, der
keinen Maturaabschluss brachte, während Gymnasien für junge Damen praktisch
nur als Privatschulen ins Leben traten. Aber als ab 1897 der Hochschulzugang
für Frauen möglich wurde, stieg der Anteil an weiblichen Studenten dennoch
rasch an und erreichte an der Universität Wien 1909/10 schon mehr als 7
Prozent, 1914/15 schon 15 Prozent.78 Da diese Anteile an einer rasch wachsenden
Inskribentenzahl erreicht wurden, war der Zuwachs an weiblichen Studierenden
doch beträchtlich.
Erinnern wir uns nochmals des Zitats aus Gary Cohens grundlegender
Studie, wonach das Wachstum der höheren Bildung in Österreich schneller
Forderung nach Anerkennung der Reziprozität mit Agram sowie die nach Schaffung von
medizinischen Fakultäten in Agram und Belgrad sowie einer slowenischen Universität in
Laibach /Ljubljana auf einer Zusammenkunft von Vertretern slowenischer, kroatischer und
serbischer Kulturvereine auf Einladung der “Slovenska matica” aus Anlass des 100. Geburtstags
des “Illyrers” Stanko Vraz, die von Dr. Franz Ilešič (Gymnasialprofessor in Laibach) zum
11./12.12.1910 einberufen wurde.
77 ÖstA, AVA, Unterricht- Präsidium, 1911, Karton 422, Nr. 515, vom 18.2. 1911, Antwort auf
eine Interpellation des Abgeordneten Dr. Görski. - Man vergleiche auch Vilfan, wie Anm.66.
78 Engelbrecht, Geschichte, Bd.4, 292.
vor sich gegangen sei als die Entwicklung seiner ökonomischen und sozialen
Strukturen. Die Bildungspolitik der Wiener Regierung hat diese von Zeitgenossen
so beklagte Tendenz zur »Massenuniversität« keineswegs geplant. Der zweifellos
bemerkenswerte und seit etwa 1890 rasch wachsende Ansturm auf Hochschulen
und Universitäten kann jedenfalls nicht als Folge einer planvollen Bildungspolitik
interpretiert werden, er ist vielmehr vielfach gegen den ausgesprochenen
politischen Willen der Regierungen »passiert«.79
79 Robert Musil, Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften, Hamburg 1952,35: “Es ist passiert, sagte man dort,
wenn andre Leute anderswo glaubten, es sei wunder was geschehen; das war ein eigenartiges,
nirgendwo sonst im Deutschen oder einer anderen Sprache vorkommendes Wort, in dessen
Hauch Tatsachen und Schicksalsschläge so leicht wurden wie Flaumfedern und Gedanken.”
Nun ja.

Predrag Markovič
University Education: A Shortcut to
Modernity or a Blind Alee? Student
Political Activism as an Agent of
Modernization
Abstract: In this paper the author tries to analyze connections between
the development of the university education, student political activism and
modernization. It seems that university education is among the first spheres
of society that has been “modernized/westernized” in the 19th century. As for
the role of the student political activism, it has been an ambivalent one. Student
political activists were more radical in the countries where they were isolated
from the rest of the society. Even the greatest student rebellion of 1968 had no
undisputed consequences upon the social development. Generally speaking, the
main problem with universities since the 19th century has been the bureaucratic
orientation of the entire education system, and the belief in “national/political
mission” of the politically active students. Instead of becoming professionals,
they rather became identity/political entrepreneurs.
Why a Shortcut?
The universities were important agents of profound social and cultural
changes since their beginnings. The same is true for the student activism that
emerged almost simultaneously with universities. Already in the 13th century,
students in Paris and Bologna clashed with the church or with the city magistrates
demanding more freedom.1 Furthermore, universities were not only the bastions
of the free political thinking. They have been crucial institutions for the overall
modernization of a society. As Diana Mishkova wrote it, “Education was one of the
first, if not the very first, modernized social sphere where the Western standards
were adopted and institutionalized; thus education and universities themselves
were among the first modern and ‘European’ institutions in the Central and
1 J. Le Goff, Intelectuels au Moyen Age (Oxford: English edition, 1993), pp. 68-69.
South-Eastern Europe.”2 They really came before other modern institutions and
social categories. Many societies developed universities before the modern social
structure. Universities were decisive for the creation and social reproduction of the
Bildungsbürgertum. The more eastward one went in Europe, the more important
was a role of this subgroup within the Bürgertum.3 Actually, one could claim that
the professionals with university degrees resembled their Western counterparts
more than any other social group. We could even paraphrase professor Kocka
and say that they were Ersatzbürgertum, or a functional equivalent to the middle
class in the Western sense of the word.
East-West Differences within Europe
Mishkova also pointed out the significance of universities as principal
channels not only for academic and cultural transfer, but also for the transfer of
all other features of the Western/ modern societies (until recently, for the most of
the South-Eastern Europe, and perhaps for the most of the world, Westernization
and Modernization were practically synonyms). It has been much easier to
accept Western political, scientific, cultural and artistic ideas, especially when
the intellectual elite was concerned, than to import some less transferable
“items”, such as technology, work ethic, etc. The more remote had “intelligentsia”
been from other parts of the middle class, the more radical students’ political
movements were.4 It seems that political activism of the students was reversely
proportional to the level of development in certain societies. Nowhere could one
have found greater contrast between the general level of a society and educated
“intelligentsia” than in Russia during the 19th century.
In the Western Europe, students were active participants in the revolutions
of 1830 and 1848. Victor Hugo immortalized the student revolutionaries of 1830
in Les Miserables. Their leader, Enjolras, was the only son of rich parents, from
the South, “a priest of ideals”.5 According to John Plamenatz, students started
the revolution of 1848 in Paris. In Germany they were only “a voice in the great
chorus of the revolutionary movement” (Jarausch).6
However, nowhere was the student radicalism so widespread and as ardent
as in the Tsarist Russia. It has been a good example for the hypothesis made
2 See the Mishkovas contribution to this volume.
3 J. Kocka, Bürgertum im 19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen, 1995); J. Kocka, ‘‘The Middle Classes in
Europe”, The Journal o f Modern History, 67, December 1995, pp.783-806. Herafter J. Kocka,
“The Middle Classes in Europe”.
4 About distance between the .inteligentsia’ and oth re parts od the middle class see J. Kocka,
“The Middle Classes in Europe”, p.974.
5 It is from chapter “ABC friends” from fourth book within the third volume differently paginated
in different editions.
6 J. Plamenatz, The Revolutionary Movement in France 1815-1871 (London, 1953), p.63; K. H.
larausch, Deutsche Studenten 1800-1970 (Frankfurt am Main, 1984), p.51. Herafter K. H.
Jarausch, Deutsche Studenten.
above in the text that radicalism of the students grows with the distance from the
rest of a society (especially from the middle classes). Alexander Herzen wrote that
n o w h e r e else did the contrast between the “common life” and “education” reach
such proportions as among the Russian nobility.7 Actually, most of this “nobility”
w,ere declassed small aristocrats, noble only by name, but living from poorly paid
administrative and intellectual professions. The curious fact is that the percentage
of priests’ sons among student activists was proportionally high.8 However, one
should not jump to the conclusion that radicalism of the Russian students was
somehow connected to the eschatological and millenarian traditions of the Russian
Orthodox Church. Neither should their revolutionary zeal be reduced to the
social frustrations, as the author from the previous footnote (Feuer) implied by
accentuating an origin from declassed families. Some of the most famous Russian
student revolutionaries came from the very top of the society. (Sofia Perovskaya, for
example, was a daughter of the former military governor of the Saint Petersburg).
Furthermore, one could find a faith in a social mission among many student
activists coming from privileged social groups, from the above mentioned Hugos
Enjorlas to the students of both Americas in the 1960s. Not to mention the first
generation of the post colonial Third World leaders, who had very often been the
descendants of political elites educated in Western capitals. It seems that in the 19th
century Russia, like in many 20th century developing societies, students believing in
their special social role tried to find a shortcut’ to a bright future, a way out from
the backwardness, injustice and poverty. The Russian students mixed the quasi
religious sense of the mission with a “scientific” worldview, like Bazarov, the hero of
Turgenev’s novel Fathers and sons. Therefore, they were the first to accept Marxism,
organizing commemoration at the time of Marx’s death in 1883. Marx himself was
surprised by the fact that the first translation of the Kapital was in Russian, noticing
thereafter that Russian aristocratic students educated in the West were inclined to
the most extreme Western ideas.9
However, Russian students anticipated the future activities of all student
political radicals in several ways. For example, a specific dressing code designed
to stress the rebellion against the system, such as long hair “patented” by German
students Burschenschaften, or the acceptance of the lower classes “fashion” that
resembles blue jeans fashion also initiated by American students one century
later. “Going to the people” movement organized by Narodniks in 1870s had some
similarities to the Freedom Summer of the elite American students in 1964.10
7 A. Herzen, My Past and Thoughts:The Memoirs o f Alexander Herzen, Vol. 2 (London, 1924), p. 141.
8 L. S. Feuer, The Conflict o f Generations. The Character and Significance o f Student Movements
(London, 1969), pp. 113-116. Hereafter L.S. Feuer, The Conflict o f Generations.
9 L. S. Feuer, The Conflict o f Generations, p. 119; K. Marx, Letters to Dr. Kugelman (New York,
1934), pp. 77-78.
10 L. S. Feuer, The Conflict o f Generation, pp. 97-98, p. 128; for blue jeans see E.Hobsbawm, The
Age o f Extremes (New York, 1996), p.331. Hereafter E.Hobsbawm, The Age o f Extremes; for
Freedom Summer in A. Marwick, The Sixties ("Oxford-New York, 1998), pp. 565-569.
On the other hand, the unique trait of the Russian students’ political activism
was violence demonstrated by both sides in this war of terror. From the first
student protest in Harkov in 1858 to the 1905 revolution, students and the
Tsarist regime were engaged in a literally mortal combat. In 1861, 43% of the
St. Petersburg university students were arrested, while in the 1870s, 2.5% of the
Moscow students were jailed every year. On the other hand, nowhere else did
students kill so many state officials. The tsar Alexander II himself had been a
target of several assassination attempts (1866, 1879, 1880, 1881) before he was
murdered in 1887. Most of the assassins were ex- students.11
The 19th Century Serbian Experience: "Pale, Young
Men with Long Hairs"
The quotation comes from Slobodan Jovanovič who continues “....they
went in groups always discussing something.”12 Even before the real University
was established (in 1905), the Belgrade students had been restless. The first
prohibition of a student organization occurred in 1851, the first “students” strike
in 1858, a year of the liberal St Andrew Assembly. Then they rioted regularly
every few years. Some of the riots were in a dominant, liberal spirit of the time.
For example, in 1861 students protested against the regime’s attempt to force
students to go to the church on Sundays. In a petition they asked for a religious
freedom and for a rule of law. Two years later, Belgrade students demonstrated
in support to two professors who had proposed Garibaldi as a member of the
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts.
During the 1870s, the Serbian students were influenced by Russian Narodniks
and nihilists. Jovan Žujović, a scientist and a politician, claimed that in this decade,
almost all students knew and read Russian. According to Jovan Skerlić, a famous
Serbian literate and a critic, Serbian students “admired” Chernysevsky. During
the 1890s, Belgrade intellectuals could have read direct references to Marx and
Engels in the magazine Delo, and not from Russian translations as before.
After 1900, the significance of the student activism grew, with the legitimacy
crisis of the Obrenović dynasty. The students went on a successful strike that
lasted throughout the spring semester in 1902. They decisively contributed to
the overthrow of the Obrenović dynasty in 1903, because the students were the
organizers of the March demonstrations, when several participants were killed by
the police. These demonstrations finally discredited the Obrenović regime, which
was overthrown two months later.13
11 L. S. Feuer, The Conflict o f Generation, p. 127; J. N. Westwood, Endurance and Andeanour.
Russian History 1812-1912 ("Oxford, 1993), pp. 99,112,116-118.
12 Slobodan Jovanovič, Vlada Milana Obrenovića (Beograd, 1931), p. 261.
13 P. Markovič, “Predistorija studentskog pokreta- uporedna pesrpektiva” [a History of Student
Movements- a Comparative Survey up to World War II], Istorija 20.veka, 1, 2001, pp. 19-32.
The students enjoyed a high esteem in the Serbian society. After one clash
with police in 1902, the police officially expressed regret because their officers
had been forced to treat students “as any other rascals, at the expense of the
prestige of our highest educational institution.”14
Students themselves were sensitive to their public image. Several riots
broke out because they felt insulted. In 1882, students interrupted a theatre play
Rabagas, which allegedly mocked the radicals and socialists. Twelve years later, in
1 8 9 4 , they attacked and destroyed several coffeehouses, for the singers there had
made ironical couplets about students.15
Turn to the Right in Europe after the WWI
In the interwar time, the political mood of students changed in line with the
general crisis of the middle classes and liberal values in this period. In almost
all European countries, students became more nationalist and more right wing
oriented. The nationalism of the students’ movements was not a novelty, for
the first Burschenschaften at the beginning of the 19th century in Germany had
been nationalist organizations.16 The same is true for the revolutions of 1848.
The novelty of the interwar period was that, at least in Europe, nationalism lost
its connection with liberal and emancipatory ideology. It was especially the case
in the countries frustrated with the outcomes of the Great War. So, the German
revolution of 1918 was in Meinecke words, “a revolution without students”,
which was in a dramatic contrast to 1848. During the Weimar Republic, German
students mostly disapproved of the parliamentary regime. From 5% to 10% of
German students were NSDAP members as early as 1930. In Italy, 13% of the
fascists were students, even before the fascist rise to power.17 In Serbia, the
situation was the opposite.
"The Red University"
It has been a common position in the Yugoslav historiography after the
WWII that the Belgrade University was a “cradle of the Communist cadres” in
the interwar Yugoslavia. The political activity of differently oriented students has
been mostly neglected. However, the very fact that out of 1322 “peoples heroes”,
Hereafter P. Markovič, “Predistorija”; From the same author, “Die Vorgeschichte der serbischen
Studentenbewegung im europäischen Kontext” , Comparativ 14, 5/6, 2004, pp. 173-198.
Herafter P. Markovič “Die Vorgeschichte”.
14 M. Vojvodić,’’Demonstracije velikoškolaca u Beogradu 1902.godine”, in Univerzitet u Beogradu
1838-1988, (Beograd, 1988), pp.774-786.
15 P. Markovič, “Predistorija”, p. 24.
16 K. H. Jarausch, Deutsche Studenten, pp. 35-38.
17 K. H. Jarausch, Deutsche Studenten, pp. 118-214; E.Hobsbawm, The Age o f Extremes, p. 122.
313 or 23.68% were students (mostly from the Belgrade University) shows
the importance of students in the Yugoslav Communist movement and in the
partisan resistance.18 The proportion of students among the “people’s heroes”
was almost 230 times bigger than the proportion of students in the general
population (in 1939, there were 16,978 students in approximately 15 million of
Yugoslav population ).19 Furthermore, the majority of the student participants in
the Communist movement and resistance came from the Belgrade University.
The left oriented students changed their political agenda during the interwar
period. During the 1920s, before the abolishing of the parliamentary regime
in 1929, the main students objective had been the autonomy of the University.
Thereafter, one of the first signs of the limited liberalization of the regime was the
demonstration around the biggest students’ dorm in 1931. In this and the following
years, students tried some of the tactics used in later periods by students all over
the world, such as an occupation of lecture halls and dorms. Student leftist activists
attracted more public attention and sympathy during the Popular Front phase
(1935-1939), for they were the most vocal antifascist group within the society. They
temporarily abandoned antifascist rhetoric after the sudden reversal of the Soviet
foreign politics after August 1939.20 But eventually, students regained the leading
role within the Communist resistance after the occupation in 1941.
Why the Belgrade students joined the ranks of the Communist Party in such
numbers? And more to the point, how did they obtain the leading role within
the Communist wartime resistance, concerning that the Communist Party
had in principle been suspicious of intellectuals? Similarly to all other student
movements, Belgrade students in this period were not children of the poor. If
not from the elite, they came from middle class families. Although, the statistics
of the interwar Yugoslavia is very deceptive, for it tracks the occupation rather
than social status. This means that the statistics does not differentiate between
the rich and the poor “peasants” or “artisans”. Nevertheless, the proportion of
the students coming from peasants’ and workers’ families grew faster than the
proportion of the other social groups in the period 1930-1940.21 Even so, the
students coming from villages were mostly children of wealthier peasants. Their
origin from the respected peasant families became extremely important during
the WWII, when many of them became leaders of the resistance fighters in
their village communities. In addition, the politics of the occupying forces and
some quislings (“ustashas” in the first place) unintentionally cleared the social
ladder. Namely, Germans took the majority of officers and middle aged soldiers
as war prisoners. “Ustashas” simply exterminated or forced to emigration the
18 Lj. Petrovič, “Narodni heroji u jugoslovenskom društvu 1942-1980. godine, Prilog istraživanju
položaja boračkih elita u posleratnoj Jugoslaviji”, Vojnoistorijski glasnik, No. 1-2, Beograd, 2001.
19 Jugoslavija 1918-1988.Statistički godišnjak (Beograd, 1989), p. 368.
20 P. Markovič, “Die Vorgeschichte”, pp. 173-198.
21 Statistički godišnjaci Kraljevine Jugoslavije, 1930 (pp. 346-347); 1935 (pp. 320-321); 1940 (pp-
364-365).
traditional Serbian elite in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, creating a social
and generational vacuum. It opened an additional political space for the younger
leaders, especially students and ex-students. After the literal destruction of the
old society, their vision of the new society became more convincing.
Educational Explosion
After the WWII something that could be named „educational explosion“ took
place. Before the WWII even Germany, Britain and France had no more than
150,000 university students (one student per one thousand inhabitants). After the
■WWII, number of university teachers in these countries surpassed this number. In
Germany, the percentage of students tripled between 1937 and 1957 (from 0.72%
to 2.38% of the generation cohort), rising to 4.2% in 1960. Even in the USA, which
already in the 1940s had the biggest proportion of students, the so called “G.I. Law”,
which enabled free university education for the war veterans, produced millions of
students. This „educational explosion“ was even more dramatic in the developing
countries. In some of them, such as Ecuador, the percentage of university students
among the general population grew to 3.2%.22 A greater demand for jobs changed
the ways of life and education everywhere. University education was not a privilege
of the rich anymore. Hartmuth Kaelble compares this process without a precedent
with the Alphabetisierungprozess in the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th century.
This educational explosion was by no means an undisputed process. In some
countries the university education rose faster than other kinds of education. In
Egypt, for example, the percentage of the university students within their generation
cohort in 1960 was bigger than in Germany. On the other hand, the percentage
of children in the age 6-11 attending school was only 40%.23 This disproportion
deserves a special attention. We are going to address this issue later in this text.
Apolitical 1950s?
In the beginning, democratization of the university education did not
increase a political engagement of the students. On the contrary, everywhere
social scientists complained about the indifference, egoism and conformism
of students in the 1950s. David Riesman ironically called this generation “cool
student”. In Italy one coined for them a name “3M Generation” (Mestiere-
Maccina-Moglie; Workplace-Automobile-Wife).24 Even at the beginning of the
1960s, two “experts” from two different ends of the world agreed about the non
22 E.Hobsbawm, The Age o f Extremes, pp. 295-296; K. H. Jarausch, Deutsche Studenten, p.215;
M. A. Jones, The Limits o f Liberty. American history 1667-1992 (Oxford-New York, 1995), p. 588.
23 The Cambridge History o f Africa, Vol. 8 (Cambridge, 1984), p.180.
24 Quoted by: G.Stassera, Death o f an Utopia (New York, 1975), p. 4.
to make money in this country. Contrary to the regime intentions, most of the
scholarships went to the children of state officials.28
In spite of the efforts of the government, students were frustrated by the low
living standards. They rioted in 1954 against an increase in prices in the biggest
dormitory of the region (Studentski grad - the Student City, where several
thousand students lived). Despite the clashes with the police on horses, the highest
Party officials Aleksandar Ranković and Veljko Vlahovič (the latter was a leader
of the student movement in 1930s) suggested mild punishments for rebellious
students. Only few students lost scholarships, even fewer were temporarily
expelled from the University. The riots of 1959 were much more interesting, for
they broke out in several cities almost simultaneously (Zagreb, Rijeka, Skopje,
and Belgrade). They were called “Cafeteria riots” for they were triggered by the
bad quality of the food in the students’ cafeterias.29 These demonstrations would
have stayed curiosities, had they not indicated a broader issue. Namely, the rising
expectations did cause frustrations among the growing body of students, in spite
of the all pampering of the generally benevolent regime. It was going to have
more serious consequences in the connection with other frustrations, such as the
nationalist ones.
1968: a Year of Global Dreams
There are few better researched topics in the social history of the 20th century
than the ‘68 student rebellion. The new books emerged periodically, mostly
in the jubilee years (1978, especially 1988 and 1998 when the 68ers were fully
established, somewhat less in 2008). Even in the underdeveloped Serbian social
history research, this topic got more attention than most of the other issues of
the period (actually, no other topic from the period after the 1950s is so well
covered). 2008 was particularly fruitful in Serbia, when the aged 68ers were in the
very hearth of the establishment.30
The results of the 1968 were ambivalent. The rebellion failed to produce
political change, it in some cases even frightened middle class voters to vote
28 D. Bondžić, Beogradski Univerzitet 1945-1952 (Belgrade, 2004), pp. 329-339. Hereafter
D.Bondžić, Beogradski Univerzitet; D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socijalizmu (Beograd, 2010), pp.
449-484. Herafter D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socializmu.
29 D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socijalizmu, pp. 428-430.
30 The first publications emerged almost immidiately: Jun-Lipanj 68. - a special edition o f the
Praxis magazine, with some censored pages (Zagreb, 1969,1971). Hereafter Jun-Lipanj 68; Much
more in the liberalized atmosphere of 1980s and after see in N. Popov, Društveni sukobi-izazov
sociologiji (Beograd, 1983,1990,2008); M. Arsić, D. R. Marković, ’68.Studentski bunt i društvo
(Beograd, 1984,1985); Ž. Pavlović, Ispljuvak pun krvi (Beograd, 1990); Đ. Malovrazić, Šezdeset
osma.Lične istorije (Beograd, 2008). Hereafter Malovrazić, Šezdeset osma.Lične istorije; I.
Miladinovič, 1968.Poslednji veliki san (Beograd, 2008); R. Radić, 1968.Četrdeset godina posle
(Beograd, 2008).
to make money in this country. Contrary to the regime intentions, most of the
scholarships went to the children of state officials.28
In spite of the efforts of the government, students were frustrated by the low
living standards. They rioted in 1954 against an increase in prices in the biggest
dormitory of the region (Studentski grad - the Student City, where several
thousand students lived). Despite the clashes with the police on horses, the highest
Party officials Aleksandar Ranković and Veljko Vlahovič (the latter was a leader
of the student movement in 1930s) suggested mild punishments for rebellious
students. Only few students lost scholarships, even fewer were temporarily
expelled from the University. The riots of 1959 were much more interesting, for
they broke out in several cities almost simultaneously (Zagreb, Rijeka, Skopje,
and Belgrade). They were called “Cafeteria riots” for they were triggered by the
bad quality of the food in the students’ cafeterias.29 These demonstrations would
have stayed curiosities, had they not indicated a broader issue. Namely, the rising
expectations did cause frustrations among the growing body of students, in spite
of the all pampering of the generally benevolent regime. It was going to have
more serious consequences in the connection with other frustrations, such as the
nationalist ones.
1968: a Year of Global Dreams
There are few better researched topics in the social history of the 20th century
than the ‘68 student rebellion. The new books emerged periodically, mostly
in the jubilee years (1978, especially 1988 and 1998 when the 68ers were fully
established, somewhat less in 2008). Even in the underdeveloped Serbian social
history research, this topic got more attention than most of the other issues of
the period (actually, no other topic from the period after the 1950s is so well
covered). 2008 was particularly fruitful in Serbia, when the aged 68ers were in the
very hearth of the establishment.30
The results of the 1968 were ambivalent. The rebellion failed to produce
political change, it in some cases even frightened middle class voters to vote
28 D. Bondžić, Beogradski Univerzitet 1945-1952 (Belgrade, 2004), pp. 329-339. Hereafter
D.Bondžić, Beogradski Univerzitet; D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socijalizmu (Beograd, 2010), pp.
449-484. Herafter D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socializmu.
29 D. Bondžić, Univerzitet u socijalizmu, pp. 428-430.
30 The first publications emerged almost immidiately: Jun-Lipanj 68. - a special edition o f the
Praxis magazine, with some censored pages (Zagreb, 1969,1971). Hereafter Jun-Lipanj 68; Much
more in the liberalized atmosphere of 1980s and after see in N. Popov, Društveni sukobi-izazov
sociologiji (Beograd, 1983,1990,2008); M. Arsić, D. R. Marković, ’68.Studentski bunt i društvo
(Beograd, 1984,1985); Ž. Pavlović, Ispljuvak pun krvi (Beograd, 1990); Đ. Malovrazić, Šezdeset
osma.Lične istorije (Beograd, 2008). Hereafter Malovrazić, Šezdeset osma.Lične istorije; I.
Miladinovič, 1968.Poslednji veliki san (Beograd, 2008); R. Radić, 1968.Četrdeset godina posle
(Beograd, 2008).
for right wing politicians (In France and the USA). But, it put in motion a far
reaching cultural revolution.31 This year changed everything in the realms of
counter culture (that later became a main stream culture), gender relations
identity politics, ecological consciousness, etc. In a word, in almost all areas but
the politics itself.
The student revolt of the late 1960s was global not only because the ideology of
the revolutionary tradition from 1789 to 1917 was universal and internationalist,
but because the world, or at least the world in which student ideologists lived,
was genuinely global for the first time. The same books appeared, almost
simultaneously, in the student bookshops in Buenos Aires, Rome and Hamburg
(in 1968, almost certainly including Herbert Marcuse). The same tourists of
revolution crossed oceans and continents from Paris to Havana, from Sao Paolo to
Bolivia. The first generation of humanity to take rapid and cheap global air travel
and telecommunications for granted, the students of late 1960s had no difficulty
in recognizing what happened at the Sorbonne, in Berkeley, in Prague, as a part of
the same event in the same global village in which, according to the Canadian guru
Marshall McLuhan (another fashionable name of the 1960s) “we all lived.”32
Despite the criticism, the ‘68 movement still occupies the minds of its
contemporaries, as well as various scholars and artists for its essential romantic
and idealistic nature. The basic fact about 1968 is that in this year, a most privileged
generation in entire humane history rebelled for higher causes. Namely, the baby
boomers generation which came to universities in the late 1960s had less reasons
to be angry than any other previous or next generation. They were used to living
better every year, to expecting good and secure jobs. And yet, they rebelled
because of the Vietnam, because of human rights and social injustice. This was a
rebellion of the people who were hungry for freedom and justice, not for bread.
We could have hardly imagined such an agenda deprived of any rational “interest”
in any other period than in 1968.33
1968: A Yugoslav Experience
The outbreak of the 1968 rebellion in Yugoslavia, first in Belgrade, then in
almost all university centres, deeply shocked the Communist nomenclature.
Although the first reaction of the police had been brutal, later developments
show a very peculiar approach to the student protesters. Already in the first
days, a highest delegation of the state officials visited students (Miloš Minić,
Veljko Vlahovič, Stevan Doronjski and Branko Pešić). One could have hardly
31 E. Hobsbawm, The Age o f Extremes, pp. 444-445.
32 Ibid., pp. 446-447.
33 P. Markovič, Godina kada je svet sanjao zajednički san, a Beograd bio svet (introduction to the
catalogue o f the exibition Juni ’68), Studentski protest u Beogradu (Beograd,2008).
imagined such a high profile visit anywhere else, from Berkeley to Sorbonne, not
to mention Prague or Warsaw Perhaps their own past in 1954, being themselves
student leaders played its role in such a relatively benevolent attitude. In the end,
on 9 June, came the most surprising official reaction. Tito himself seemingly
supported students. He said how he was happy “that we have such mature youth”,
but implicitly he also accused “foreign elements” (he mentioned various enemies
in a single sentence; Djilas, Ranković and Mao followers) who had tried to
“infiltrate.” Anyway, it was not only internal, but also an international triumph.
Even the conservative Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung wrote that Tito had shown
more political wisdom than De Gaulle.34 The repression came later.
As for the nature of the student rebellion in Yugoslavia, it resembled the
Western student movements more than those in Poland and Czechoslovakia. In
fact, the Polish students who were chronologically among the first who raised (in
March 1968) and who inspired many others in Europe, from Daniel Cohn-Benditt
to Belgrade student organizations, demanded intellectual and artist freedom too,
but their principal request was a patriotic (a nationalist?) one. Their rebellion
was triggered by a ban of the Mickiewicz's play Dziady (Ancestors), because of
its anti-Russian message.35 Even one of the most prominent Western student
movements, the German one, was perhaps not a nationalism free movement.
One of the veterans, Rabehl, claimed in the late 1990s, that he and Dutschke had
fought for the German independence from the USA. Such an attitude caused an
avalanche of revolts, as the other German ‘68ers accused Rabehl of right wing
extremism.36 In Yugoslavia, situation was exactly the opposite one. As Dennison
Rusinow remarked: ”It was perhaps the first (we would add the last as well,
P.M.) time in the fifty years since the creation of Yugoslavia that ethnicity played
no role in an important political event.”37 Therefore, more nationalist oriented
politicians, such as the leaders of the Croatian Spring, tried to downplay 1968
in Zagreb, claiming that the student strikes of 1971 were much more popular
among the Croatian students. The first exclusively nationalist student movement
in Yugoslavia occurred among the Albanian students in November 1968. There
were no social demands among their slogans (except maybe about “colonialist
politics toward Kosovo”). These demonstrations actually belonged more to the
Croatian students’ demonstrations of 1971, than to those of 1968.38
34 “Kaiser, Volk und Adel”, FAZ, 12.06.1968.
35 J. Eisler, “March 1968 in Poland”, in C. Finke-P. Gassert-D. Junker, 1968: The World Transformed
(Washington, 1998), pp. 237-253; Jun-Lipanj 68, pp. 35-42.
36 P. Markovič, “Studentski pokret u Jugoslaviji 60-ih godina 20.veka: između nacionalizma i
internacionalizma, između reformizma i dogmatizma”, in .H. G. Fleck-I. Graovac (eds.), Dijalog
povjesničara/istoričara 7 (Zagreb, 2003), pp. 393-414. Hereafter P.Marković, “Studentski pokret
u Jugoslaviji 60-ih godina”.
37 D. Rusinow,The Yugoslav Experiment 1948-1974 (London, 1977), p. 234.
38 S. Dabčević-Kučar, 71-hrvatski snovi i stvarnost (Zagreb, 1997), p. 88; P.Marković, “Služba
državne bezbednosti i albanske demonstracije 1968. godine”, Istorija 20.veka, 1-2,1999, pp. 169-
180.
There is another ambivalent issue concerning the student demonstration
of 1968 in Yugoslavia. Were they too much influenced by the fashionable New
Left ideas, and hence against the painful market reforms of 1965? Already on
30 September 1968, members of the Central Committee Commission for the
Ideological and Political Work at their session accused the students for ultraradical
and ultra-leftist thinking. This attitude has been accepted by some
historians. John Lampe claims that the student demands for social justice and
equality allowed Tito and Kardelj to more easily abandon market reforms.39 Truly,
many student demands were aimed against inequality, against the privileges of the
“red bourgeoisie” (“a wheel of a Mercedes is not a wheel of history”, said one of the
slogans). One could compare student protesters with religious dissenters in the
Middle Ages. They both had to conceal their basically subversive ideas by quoting
“holly texts” and by claiming that they only defended the purity of “original”
faith. The students also criticized the establishment for abandoning the official
socialist ideals. Such ideological “purism” included a psychological component.
Namely, among the protesters there were many children of the pre-war political
activists and the WWII veterans. This generation had often been patronized by
their parents, criticized by newspapers and teachers, for their “easy” and “spoiled”
life. Rebellion gave them an opportunity to prove a real revolutionary spirit,
tacitly abandoned by the parent generation.40 And of course, they were willing
to abandon the ideals, even for the sake of a career. It happened everywhere,
especially in poorer countries, where jobs in the state and party apparatus were
the most desirable jobs. Like in Mexico, where “the more revolutionary they were
as students, the better jobs they were likely to be offered after graduation.”41 This
dependence from the state hides one of the principal weaknesses of the student
activism as an agent of the modernization.
"The More Students, the Better"?
One of the stereotypes concerning students is that an increase of the university
education automatically brings progress and modernity. We have already
mentioned the case of Egypt, where the percentage of university students rose
faster than percentage of those attending primary schools. Such a development
resembles a hydrocephalus with a big head and a small body. Something similar
happened in Yugoslavia. A percentage of illiterate dropped modestly. For
example, from 1948 to 1971, it dropped from 25.4% to 15.1%. In central Serbia
these percentages were 27.3 and 17.7%, respectively. The more backward a region
39 P. Markovič, “Studentski pokret u Jugoslaviji 60-ih godina”, p. 406; J. Lampe, Yugoslavia as
History (Cambridge, 1996), pp. 295-296.
40 Such an attitude is frequent among interviewees in Đ. Malovrazić, Šezdeset osma.Lične istorije.
41 E. Hobsbawm, The Age o f Extremes, pp. 299-300.
was the bigger was the jump in university education, but also the gap between
those with university degrees on the one side, and those without any education
on the other. The latter did not decrease as it had been expected. In Kosovo in
the period from 1948 to 1971 the percentage of illiterate not even halved, i.e.
from 62.2% to 32.2%.42 The percentage of university educated people in Kosovo
rose in the period from 1953 to 1981 by amazing 33 times, from 0.1% to 3.3%. In
the most developed Republic of Slovenia this rise was modest 7.37 times (from
0.8 to 5.9% of the population). In 1981, within the generation cohort from 25
to 34 years, there were 10.6% students among the Kosovo Albanians, and 9.9%
among Slovenes.43 At the same time, the number of people without any education
sunk in Slovenia 4.2 times (from 15.2% to 3.6%) and in Kosovo only 2.7 times
(from 71.2 to 27.9%).44 In 1978, the number of students per 10,000 inhabitants in
Kosovo was bigger (299) than in central Serbia (237), Slovenia (158), Germany
(81), USSR (190), Romania (77) and even the USA (290).45 According to these
percentages, Kosovo should have become a knowledge based prosperous society.
It did not happen. Why?
Why Growth of Universities does not Inevitably
Launch Modernization?
The case of Kosovo is only the most absurd one. Many other societies in the
region had a similar problem with university education. It is, roughly speaking,
in the effectiveness and the purpose of the university education. As early as in the
19th century, the universities were oriented to produce people for state apparatus
in the whole region. That meant too many lawyers and philosophers and too few
engineers and physicians. This has been proven by the contributions of Trgovčević
and Preshlenova in this conference. What is wrong with that? Were not Prussia
and France built upon educated bureaucracy?
We are coming to the core of the issue. What is a personal and a social purpose
of the university education? The most politically and socially active students
in the region have rarely wanted to be only professionals and experts. Their
surrounding also did not want them to be “mere” specialists. They were meant to
be the “leaders”. And this led to such an imbalance between production-oriented
and politically-oriented professions. In these backward societies, where politics
has decisively determined most of the personal and social gains, intellectual
career has often been only a waiting room for the political/national work. That
42 Jugoslavija 1918-1988. Statistički godišnjak,39; Yugoslavia 1945-1985, Federal Statistic Office,
pp. 112,114,118. Hereafter Yugoslavia 1945-1985; Društveno ekonomski razvoj Socijalističke
republike Srbije 1950-197 (Beograd, 1972), pp. 8-10.
43 M. Blagojević,’’Obrazovna struktura jugoslovenskog društva”, Socioliogija 1-2,1986, pp. 43-62.
44 Yugoslavia 1945-1985, p.l98.
45 B. Prpa, Moderna srpska država 1804-2004.Hronologija (Beograd, 2004), p. 369.
was especially the case in the communities that lived in foreign or multinational
states. Their intellectual members often became identity/political entrepreneurs.
By building and defining their national identity and/or political community, they
could also secure their existence.
Aleš Gabrič
From Gender Segregation to Gender
Equality in the School System
The purpose of this paper is not to discuss the education of women or female
education, as this topic is often discussed separately from the schooling of the
other gender. The paper will focus on the opportunities for equal integration
of both genders into different stages of education, which only a few papers that
otherwise generally touch upon what is described as female education have dealt
with in detail.1 Usually this issue is also overlooked in the more extensive reviews
of the Slovene schooling.2
The modern Jesuit school system, which reflected the viewpoints of the
Roman Catholic Church, was, of course, inaccessible to girls. Even after the state
enactment of the elementary education with the Maria Theresa's 1774 reform,
the school system provided for the separation by gender. For example, in 1805
it was written into the political constitution of the Austrian schools that in rural
schools, where boys and girls sat together in a single classroom, »girls should be
separated from boys, partly due to the promotion of morality and partly because
of different education with regard to gender«. In the cities separate schools for
girls and boys were to be established. Girls could only attend the 3rd year of the
main schools in the case that no special schools for girls were located in that
city and not enough boys were enrolled that year.3 At the special girls' schools,
women's handiwork was emphasised. The traditional or conservative nature of
1 For more see the two miscellanies on female education: Tjaša Mrgole Jukič et al. (eds.),
Izobraževanje in zaposlovanje žensk nekoč in danes (Ptuj: Zgodovinski arhiv, first miscellany
in 1998, second miscellany in 2000). See also: Tatjana Hojan, »Žensko šolstvo in učiteljstvo
na Slovenskem v preteklih stoletjih«, Zbornik za historiju školstva i prosvjete, 4, 1968, pp. 47-
81; Tatjana Hojan, »Slovenske učiteljice ob koncu 19. stoletja«, Šolska kronika — Zbornik za
zgodovino šolstva in vzgoje, 7 — XXXI — 1998, pp. 134-149; Mirjam Milharčič-Hladnik, Šolstvo
in učiteljice na Slovenskem (Ljubljana : Znanstveno in publicistično središče, 1995); Mojca
Peček, »Feminizacija učiteljevanja 1869-1941«, Šolska kronika — Zbornik za zgodovino šolstva
in vzgoje, 26, 1993, pp. 61-73.
2 Vlado Schmidt, Zgodovina šolstva in pedagogike na Slovenskem 1 - 3 (Ljubljana: Delavska
enotnost, 1988); Jože Ciperle - Andrej Vovko, Šolstvo na Slovenskem skozi stoletja (Ljubljana:
Slovenski šolski muzej, 1987).
3 Quoted by: Hojan, »Žensko šolstvo in učiteljstvo na Slovenskem«, p. 53.
individual lands was also evident from the low number or special schools f0r
girls. In the Gorizia and Trieste region, there were 50 such schools in 1851, but
Styria only had 14. However, there were only 4 girls' schools in Carniola and 4 in
Carinthia!4
Until the middle of the 19th century, girls’ schools - save for rare exceptions -
were private. They were partly established by church orders, Ursulines and School
Sisters, and partly by wealthier noblewomen and members of the bourgeoisie.
Even the school reform after 1848 has not changed these characteristics quickly,
and as late as at the end of the 19th century the percentage of public and private
girls’ schools in Slovenia was about equal. Public schools were also separated by
gender, in order to avoid the morally »disputable« association of girls and boys.5
After the reforms following the Spring of the Nations, the attitude to
the education of girls changed slightly. High schools (i.e. gymnasiums) and
universities, which reformed after 1849, were still inaccessible to girls. However,
the reform of elementary education according to the Act of 1869 brought some
changes, since it provided for the establishment of women's teachers' colleges
- the continuation of the education of girls after the conclusion of the people's
schools.
Thus teachers’ colleges were the first sort of schools where girls could
continue their education as men's equals after completing their elementary
education; of course, not in the same classrooms or schools, since schools were
divided by gender into men's and women's teachers' colleges. This »concession«
of the legislators did not take place due to the aspirations for equal participation
of both genders in education, but mostly because of practical reasons. After the
1869 school reform, the teaching profession became even less interesting for
men, since they had to give up certain sources of secondary income they had
had before. Therefore, there was a lack of candidates for teachers’ colleges and
teachers at the time when all the youth had to be put into the classrooms. The
relaxed conditions for the enrolment in the teachers’ colleges failed to remedy
the problem. However, the solution was to allow girls to enrol into teachers’
colleges. This presents yet another proof that throughout history the receding
respectability of a certain profession in the society has usually been related to the
féminisation of that profession.
It was very interesting that by entering teachers’ colleges, girls improved the
average education level of the students at this kind of schools. They came from
higher social strata than their colleagues, and »it generally held true that girls
were better educated than their male peers«.6 The state took the responsibility for
the education of teachers, but due to the lack of staff the establishment of private
teachers’ colleges was allowed. However, the candidates had to pass final exams
4 Ibid., p. 55.
5 Ibid., pp. 51-58.
6 Schmidt, Zgodovina šolstva in pedagogike na Slovenskem 3, p. 243.
at the state schools. Private teachers’ colleges for women enabled the Roman
Catholic Church to preserve at least some of the influence on the education of
the youth that had been taken away from it. Thus, apart from state teachers’
colleges in Ljubljana and Maribor, there were also a few private teachers’ colleges
on Slovene territory, which in a few years acquired public concession.
The establishment of women's teachers’ colleges, girls' high schools and
secondary schools (in 1896 the municipal council of Ljubljana founded the first
public high school for girls on Slovene territory) can be assessed from several
perspectives, but the struggle of women for the introduction of gender equality
in the school system is definitely among the most important of them. At that time
special associations of women teachers, who came to realise that the demands
for equality cannot even be implemented within their own profession, were also
established.
The possibility of girls from people's schools attending the further education
process did not imply that the attitude of the legislators to the issue of equality of
genders with regard to the accessibility of education changed significantly. The law
may not have demanded that the schooling of girls should necessarily end after
the people's school. However, we should not overlook an important fact - until as
late as the World War I, teachers’ colleges were subject to special legislation and
were not included in the legislation on secondary schools! Therefore, officially,
secondary education was still the privilege of the male gender. We cannot deem
the establishment of women's teachers’ colleges, girl's higher primary schools and
secondary schools as the efforts for gender equality in the secondary education,
since girls were not able to conclude the secondary school with the »matura« exam
(the final exam that was the condition for going to the university). Furthermore,
the establishment of gender-specific schools did not exactly encourage the equal
attitude to the genders.
Only as late as in 1872 were girls allowed to enrol in high schools, but not in
order to attend classes but just to pass the exams. According to the instructions of
the Ministry of 1877, the school had to evaluate every application of these girls and
assess whether »any serious concerns of moral or disciplinary nature existed«. At
the end of the schooling they could take the »matura« final exams; but, according
to the guidelines of 1878 the documents thus acquired could not be marked as the
»matura« exam certificates. According to the regulation of 1896, the certificates
stated that these girls had passed the »matura« exam, but left out the statement that
they had acquired the maturity necessary for the entry to the university. Only at the
turn of the 19th century, in 1897, were the first individual women able to enrol in
the Austrian universities.7 However, even after they had been allowed to peek into
7 Tatjana Hojan, »Naše prve maturantke«, in Mateja Ribarič (ed.), Od mature do mature :
zgodovinski razvoj mature na Slovenskem (Ljubljana: Slovenski šolski muzej, 1998), pp. 68-
70; Alojz Cindrič, Študenti s Kranjske na dunajski univerzi 1848-1918 (Ljubljana: Univerza v
Ljubljani, 2009), pp. 250-257.
— n
The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization Processes
the high school classrooms, a different regime was in use for girls than for boys. \
pupil of the high school in Ptuj remembered that girls (occasional students) had to
gather in a special room. A teacher came looking for them before the class and took
them into the classroom, where they had to sit separated from the boys. After the
class was over, the teacher took them back to »their« room, where they were again
»picked up« by the teacher of the following class.8
Due to numerous restrictions, girls barely managed to struggle through the
system in which everything was decided by men, who deemed the schooling of
women to be a danger to moral life, an abandonment of the traditional values
according to which the women's place was within the inner family circle, and
later also an increasingly dangerous competition for workplaces. Girls at high
school were few and far between, and, of course, not all of them managed to
cope with the final exams. Even less of them continued their education at the
university level. According to the information available, the first Slovene woman
to receive a university degree graduated as late as in 1906 from the Faculty of
Arts in Graz. Her name was Marija Wrigler, born in 1879 in Novo Mesto.9 Since
before the World War I female secondary school graduates were extremely rare,
it is obvious that finding any university graduates was even harder.
Even after they had graduated from certain schools, women were not equal
to their male peers - we have already mentioned the restrictions with regard to
the »matura« final exams. The differences were most evident to those educated
women whose numbers were the greatest, who thus »caught« the eye of men as
they became the competition in the struggle for income. These were, of course,
female teachers. In accordance with the legislation, their wages were lower than
those of their male colleagues, since as single women they supposedly did not
have the same material needs as their male colleagues who had to take care of
their families. Namely, female teachers had to remain celibate, and their marriage
without the consent of the competent school authorities was considered a
voluntary resignation from their post. At the end of the 19th century, the formal
approximation of the wages of male and female teachers began, but in reality the
situation of women was still worse. Namely, their male colleagues took better and
higher positions as well as advanced faster through the wage grades.10
The attitude of men towards the schooling of women in Slovenia generally
remained negative, even after more liberal school legislation had been adopted.
According to the articles of the teachers in the Slovene pedagogical publications,
women should take čare especially of morality and religion, and if they had to be
educated at all, they should have primarily been schooled in practical things that
8 Tjaša Mrgole Jukič, »V šolo grem, pa pika!«, in Tjaša Mrgole Jukič (ed.), Izobraževanje in
zaposlovanje žensk nekoč in danes (Ptuj : Zgodovinski arhiv, 1998), p. 113.
9 Aleksandra Serše, »Profesorice«, in Nataša Budna Kodrič and Aleksandra Serše (eds.), Splošno
žensko društvo: 1901 - 1945 (Ljubljana: Arhiv Republike Slovenije, 2003), p. 232.
10 Peček, »Feminizacija učiteljevanja 1869-1941«, pp. 62-68.
mothers and housewives had to know. Even the opposing Slovene political blocs
_ the clericals and liberals - did not argue for significantly different principles
in this context. To put it differently: while the clericals saw this issue through
a prism of their narrow ideological viewpoints, according to which women did
not have the same rights as men, liberals also failed to step up, since they did
not argue for any concrete and clear standpoints with regard to the question of
women's education.
Despite the changes in the attitude towards the schooling of women in the
last twenty-five years of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, it has to be emphasised
that a vast gap still persisted between the possibilities of boys and girls in terms of
education. Any kind of education was available to boys, while few girls managed
to overcome the obstacles and attain the education they were capable of attaining.
Schooling was, with the exception of the people's schools, mostly separated by
gender. Boys were taught by male teachers and professors, while girls learned
from female teachers; for them it was rare to be instructed by males. Until 1918,
two segregated worlds existed in the field of education (with the exception of the
lowest level): male and female. Little of it involved mixed genders.
After the overthrow of 1918, the most important changes of the school system
involved the introduction of the Slovene language and the perfection of the
school system, while the third novelty - the opening of the whole school system
for women - has not been discussed extensively in the overviews of the history of
Slovene education. After the change of the state framework, the administrations of
the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs and then the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and
Slovenes abolished the obstacles restricting the entry of girls into schools without
any special statements. Women finally had access to all levels of education. As if
they tried to emphasise this symbolically - as a sweet revenge for all the centuries
of being pushed away from schools - at the promotion protocol (with registered
promotions of new doctors) of the University in Ljubljana established in 1919, a
woman was registered under No. 001 as the first doctor promoted in Slovenia;
it was Ana Mayer, who received her doctorate at the Faculty of Arts. Of course,
there were no women among the first eighteen appointed professors.11
Thus women were finally able to attain the highest education possible,
which still did not mean that the gender segregation in the school facilities
was over. Certain secondary schools and teachers’ colleges remained male or
female exclusively, which especially holds true of Catholic schools with public
concessions and teachers’ colleges. However, unlike the situation before the
World War I, the »mixed« gender education at all levels of schooling became
increasingly prevalent, while gender segregation remained as a heritage of past
days and as the consequence of ideological outlook on different requirements in
the education of boys and girls.
11 First page of promotion protocol published in Mojca Repež (ed.) 75 let Univerze v Ljubljani: 75
let neprekinjenega delovanja Univerze v Ljubljani: 1919 - 1994 (Ljubljana: Univerza), p. 16.
Initially in secondary schools, i.e. high schools, a percentage of girls allowed
in the class was specified, but this was soon abolished. The number of girls at
what had once been exclusively male schools increased constantly. Before the
World War I, only a handful of female occasional students and those who only
took exams were present in the high school classrooms. In the first year thereafter,
the number of girls to boys was one to nine. However, before the World War II,
already two out of five high school pupils were female.
Number of male and female pupils in the Slovene high schools between the
two World W a r s12
Total Girls Percentage of girls
School year 1918/19 4914 578 11.8
School year 1928/29 6960 1972 28.3
School year 1937/38 12.135 4282 35.3
The percentage of female students at the University in Ljubljana also
increased, but more slowly, with more than a ten-year delay in comparison to
high schools. This is completely understandable, since the generations of girls
allowed to take part in education had to complete their secondary schools first.
Despite the apparent equality, women probably still felt certain reservations
about studying certain subjects due to discouraging employment opportunities.
Thus contradictory peculiarities took place. For example, women could study and
graduate in law, equally as men; but they could not become judges, since only men
could be judges. Therefore, for women, the possibilities in terms of education still
failed to bring all the practical results that graduating in certain studies should
entail. At the university level, girls remained restricted from studying at one of
the five Faculties of the University in Ljubljana: the Faculty of Theology.
Number of students enrolled in the University in Ljubljana between the two
World W a rs13
Total Girls Percentage of girls
School year 1919/20 695 25 3.6
School year 1928/29 1353 154 11.4
School year 1937/38 1873 346 18.5
After the establishment of the Kingdom of SHS in 1918, the changes in the
school politics on gender (in)equality also involved the situation of female teachers.
12 Jože Lavrič et al. (eds.), Spominski zbornik Slovenije : ob dvajsetletnici Kraljevine Jugoslavije
(Ljubljana: Jubilej, 1939), p. 184.
13 Ibid., p. 306.
They were now equal to their male colleagues, which meant that the regulations
on unequal wages and celibacy of female teachers were abolished. However, the
1930s showed that the issue had not been completely forgotten. Namely, during
the economic crisis the government wanted to reduce education expenditure.
Female teachers were the first that the government thought of: they lost certain
cost-of-living bonuses, and in 1937 a partial celibate was even introduced.
However, the Ministry soon repealed these thoughtless measures.14 The Slovene
part of the state had a »surplus« of teachers, which caused controversies at the
level of teachers vs. unmarried female teachers vs. married female teachers. If
some funds had to be saved or some staff laid off, the authorities always turned to
the married female teachers.
However, the values still fostered today became increasingly prominent: that
just like everyone else, female teachers had the right to choose their profession
freely, and that the teachers' profession called for an appropriate wage according
to the »equal pay for equal job« principle. The argument inherited since the
Austro-Hungarian times that female teachers were first-class pedagogues due to
their inherent maternal instinct (which they were supposed to transfer to their
pupils and should not get married in order not to waste these instincts on their
own children) was gradually forgotten.
The final abolishment of gender separation in the classrooms took place in the
communist Yugoslavia a couple of years after the World War II. Already with the
nationalisation of all school facilities and the abolishment of private education,
which especially involved Catholic schools that kept separating boys from girls,
the percentage of gender-specific school departments decreased significantly in
the first post-war school year (1945/46). The majority of single-gender school
departments were abolished in passing - in the time when the new role of women
in the society was emphasised, when women got their voting rights and were
also allowed to peek into the world of politics. There were no more obstacles
for the education of women in the Slovene school system. The differences
in the percentages of boys and girls in individual types of schools were thus a
consequence of the traditional division into female and male jobs. Both genders
were also more and more equally represented in the teachers' staff rooms, and
unlike in the preceding years an increasing number of principals were women.
The authorities also tried to affirm gender equality by appointing women to
leading posts. In 1946 the management of education at the state level was taken
over by a woman for the first time. Lidija Šentjurc was appointed the Minister
of Education of the People's Republic of Slovenia. Before the following school
year of 1947/48 began, on 7 August 1947 minister Šentjurc signed the following
Decree:15
14 Peček, »Feminizacija učiteljevanja 1869-1941«, pp. 71-72.
15 Vestnik ministrstva za prosveto Ljudske republike Slovenije, II, No. 11, 28.8.1947, p. 116.
According to the proposal of the Department of Education
I decree
that on all primary schools and high schools where until now gender-separated
classes had taken place, joint classes for boys and girls shall be introduced as of
the school year of 1947/48.
In accordance with the proposals of the education sections of Municipal
People's Departments, the Ministry of Education shall establish school districts
and rename the schools.
Thus, gender segregation in schools lasting for centuries was formally
abolished. Due to this abolishment the schools also had to be renamed
accordingly. However, since exceptions prove the rule, we also have to look at the
exceptions which this Decree had not yet dealt with. The Decree was limited to
elementary and secondary schools, but it did not refer to the university studies.
Therefore the exclusion of girls from the study process continued at one of the
faculties - the Faculty of Theology. For the following four decades and a half,
when this faculty operated as a private Church institution, this together with two
new private Church’s high schools that were established later, remained the only
educational institution intended for men exclusively.
If we take a look at the proportion of girls and boys at secondary and higher
education institutions, we can establish that it corresponded to the traditional
outlook on the division into male and female jobs. Apart from students at schools,
an increasing number of women also appeared in the teachers' staff rooms and
offices, as the percentage of women among secondary school and university
professors, where men still dominated, was also on the increase.
Number of pupils enrolled in Slovene high scools in the second half of the 2 0 th
century16
Total Girls Percentage of girls
School year 1959/60 7,484 4,030 53.8
School year 1969/70 13,416 8,743 65.2
School year 1999/2000 31,426 18,661 59.4
Thus, in the last fifty years women also became dominant in what had once
been traditional male fortresses: the high schools (“gymnasiums”). The female
majority was stronger in the times when high schools were neglected under the
communist rule. However, after high schools had been re-enacted in the 1990s
and when professional and technical high school programmes were introduced,
the proportion of boys even increased. The female majority became significant
16 Data for this and next table are taken from Statistični letopis Slovenije (Ljubljana: Zavod za
Statistiko, relevant years).
at secondary schools of certain humanist and social studies orientations, for
example at schools for teachers as well as at the administrative, hospitality and
tourism, health, textiles schools, etc.
Number of students enrolled in higher education institutions in Slovenia in
the second half of the 2 0 ,h century
Total Girls Percentage of girls
School year 1953/54 5,992 1,763 29.4
School year 1969/70 21,632 9,163 42.4
School year 2000/01 82,812 47,460 57.3
The trends from the former example were also present in higher education.
The percentage of female students first became equal to that of boys in the 1950s
and 1960s, after which women took over the majority at the humanist-social
sciences faculties and high schools, for example Faculty of Arts, Economics,
Law, Administration, Social Sciences, etc. At the turn of the 20th century, more
than two thirds of all students enrolled in some of these schools were women. At
some technical and natural science studies, the percentage of female students was
extremely low (mechanical engineering, electro-technology, mining engineering);
at others the share became quite significant (architecture, civil engineering,
geodesy, mathematics - physics, etc.); while elsewhere the percentage of female
students has already exceeded that of male students (chemistry - pharmacy, food
technology, biology). At the studies of medicine women have also become more
numerous than men, and at the studies of dentistry the percentage difference to
the advantage of women has been on the increase.
The last fortress of the exclusively male studies fell after the next political
overturn - the démocratisation of Slovenia and its attainment of independence.
After the reintegration of the Faculty of Theology into the University in Ljubljana
at the end of 1992, the administration of this faculty started bringing their
regulations in line with the University regulations. One of the more significant
changes that took place in the following years was the possibility of women to
attend theological studies. The enrolment in the Faculty of Theology soon started
following the trends of the other humanist studies; already in a few years time the
number of women students there exceeded the number of male students.

Mitja Sunčič
Towards Educational Typology of Slovene
Industrial Entrepreneurs
Some methodological notes
The central idea behind my paper is to present the educational typology
of Slovene industrial entrepreneurs active in the 19th and the first half of the
20th century. As the goal was to create a typology based on the entrepreneurs’
level of education, some methodical shortcomings could not be avoided, such
as oversimplification, which occurs when one tries to rank individuals into
certain cohesive and representational types, and thus neglects the complexities
and manifoldness present in the individual fates of industrial entrepreneurs.
But considering that the school system, albeit being very intricate and prone to
change, was still a coherent system, its roughest outlines could be schematized.
The main goal was to study the biographies of Slovene industrialists and try to
arrive at general conclusions by following the path of inductive reasoning. This
brings me to the second methodological problem with which I was confronted,
and that is the scarcity of information about the level of education achieved by
industrialists, which can be found in various biographical sources. But all this
considered, it is still possible to make some generalizations.
When speaking of education and entrepreneurship, there is one question that
poses itself with regard to the interconnection between the level of education and
an individuals disposition towards industrial activity. The burning question I was
confronted with is the following: what role was played by education in the turn of
events that led an individual to become an industrialist? To put it otherwise: was
the level of education linked to someone becoming an entrepreneur? My thesis
would be: the level of education played a minor role in shaping of entrepreneurs.
The changing tendency of the level of education over the course of time suggests
that it was a part of the changing social structures which shaped entrepreneurs’ lives
as an outward force. The change in the level of entrepreneurial education mirrors
the tendency of a rising level of education of the capitalist society as a whole and
thus does not have much to do with the inward, i. e. subjective, forces that made
someone become an industrial entrepreneur. The merely objective conditions
can thus not be fully responsible for shaping an industrial entrepreneur, there was
always a subjective element at work, that is a certain “something” contained in
an individual’s dispositions. There were different objective outside factors besides
education that shaped an industrialists life: his social origin and his profession.
It is likely that the noticeable rise in the educational level of Slovene industrials
over time was the consequence of society’s structural changes in the modern
era marked by increasing institutionalization of all areas of life. This process of
institutionalization made itself evident in the area of education, resulting in an
increased societal demand for formal knowledge.
Parallel to the increase in the number of various institutions controlling
the lives of the individuals, we need to mention the magnified complexity of
the production process and the machines used therein, which demanded an
increasingly scientific approach and the application of a more abstract knowledge.
To put it in Marxist terms, the changing processes and means of production
caused the changes in the society’s superstructure, including education. If the
early industrialists still gathered their knowledge of how factories are run and
how machines work on an empirical basis and by following the relevant literature,
their sons already received a degree of formal education higher than that of their
fathers. The world became increasingly complex and those who wanted to be
successful businessmen had to be flexible and follow those changes. But it was not
just technology that had changed, also the society and the network of its relations
became more and more diverse. A number of laws regarding all manners of
business conducts and the employer-employee relations increased to the levels
of unprecedented complexity. In this respect, it is possible to understand the
increasing amount of lawyers involved in running of the companies. Their job
was to navigate the often turbulent waters of relations between the workers
and the company, company and the state and company and its various business
partners. There was always a threat of something going wrong and the nature of
lawyers’ education vested them with an ability to take care of troubles in a way
that was in accordance to the law.
As it will be seen from the next chapter, the contemporaries living in the
period under discussion cited the lack of quality (vocational) education in
Slovenia as one of the greatest hindrances to increased industrialization. In this
case, the same question can be posed again about the role of education in an
individual becoming an industrial entrepreneur. My answer would once again be
“no”. The examples of early industrialists show that they mostly possessed quite
a low level of education, or that their education was of a decidedly humanistic
profile. So what are the factors that made someone an entrepreneur? I think
they are twofold: on the one hand there are the objective factors: social origin,
profession and education; and on the other hand there are the subjective factors
that instigated that final “push” between objective predispositions and the
actuality of becoming an entrepreneur. The subjective factors can be subsumed
into something called “an entrepreneurial spirit”, that is into something purely
subjective, independent of objective circumstances, meaning that there is certain
“something” in an entrepreneur that eludes being classified and explained in
an objective manner. The argument that lower education caused the lack of
industrialization was accurate in the sense of the Slovene people as a whole. It
was correct in its assumption that the lack of technically educated cadre not only
hindered managing of the factories, but also in the sense that the pool from which
entrepreneurs would emerge was definitely more limited. But the component of
“entrepreneurial spirit” still came into consideration on an individual subjective
level.
As the Slovene society was progressing on its way to modernity, one of the
key structural changes was the rising level of formal education. So it comes as
no surprise that the overall educational level of industrialists rose accordingly.
Here is how Narte Velikonja, a writer and a lawyer, summed up the evolution
of Slovene educational system in the ten years after the end of the First World
War: “If we look at the development of the school system in the past decade,
we can mark the establishment of the Ljubljana University, a vast expansion of
elementary, secondary and vocational schooling and a tendency of founding new
“realka“ schools.”1 Taking into account the efforts to modernize education, which
the Habsburg government undertook prior to 1918, it comes as no surprise that
the general level of education in the society as a whole increased considerably. All
the structural changes undertaken in the previous 100 years made a merchants’
magazine called Trgovski tovariš (Commercial Companion) to publish this
ironical statement in the late twenties: “Why today we demand from every
barber to have a degree.”2 This assertion, by pointing to a contradiction, perfectly
illustrates society’s growing demand for formal education and the decrease of
importance of apprenticeship. The dilemma implied in the joke is this: why would
a barber need a formal education, if he can be schooled by his artisan master?
The answer lies in the increased institutionalization of every aspect of society in
the modern world. The main point of vocational schooling was not to transfer
the core of artisan training from practical to abstract knowledge (which it did
in a synthetic fashion by blending together abstract and practical knowledge
into a new and modern whole), but to rid the master of the control he once had
over the apprentice, and to transfer this power to the state and specifically to the
educational institutions.
The first prerequisite in creating an entrepreneurial typology based on
the level of an entrepreneurs education is to define these levels. In the period
discussed here, the nineteenth and the first half of the twentieth century, when
Slovene industrial entrepreneurship was starting to develop, there was already
1 Narte Velikonja, “Razvoj šolske uprave”, in Josip Mal, Slovenci v desetletju 1918-1928 (Ljubljana,
1928), p. 694.
2 “Trgovec in njegov sin kot naslednik”, Trgovski tovariš, Vol. 26, No. 8-9,1929, p. 199.
165
an established educational system which bore the basic traits of a modern school
system and can thus roughly be divided into three levels: primary, secondary
and tertiary level. Each levels peculiarity and history will be the subject of the
following short and cursory overview which is meant to give the reader a basic
understanding of the educational system and its complexity.
The primary level was, at least after its 1869 reform quite a simple field. The
compulsory schooling on the elementary level was instituted at the time of the
enlightened empress Maria Theresa (1717-1780). The important part of the
process of modernization she initiated was the establishment of the state school
system. 1774 brought the legal establishment of compulsory education on the
primary level. The rulers realized that the modern economic development was
impossible without their subjects possessing at least basic formal knowledge. The
organization of elementary schooling was fairly complex: it incorporated three
types of schools: “normalke” (normal) schools were the rarest as there was only
one per historical land and they had a very wide school program. The second
type was the main schools organized in bigger cities, at least one per county. The
last type of schools was the most wide-spread as it was organized in small towns
and the countryside: the “trivial” schools, lasting only one year and providing its
students with basic knowledge of how to read, write and calculate. The compulsory
schooling encompassed all children between the ages of 6 and 12. Yet, the schooling
was not free of charge. Although the elementary schooling was slow to take off, it
nonetheless reached more and more children in the course of time.3
It was not until 1869 that a new law about elementary schools was enacted.
It brought about deep changes; previously dispersed into three different types
of schools, the new law brought about the unified, so called “peoples” (ljudska)
elementary school encompassing eight grades. The compulsory elementary
education now lasted eight years, instead of the former six. This meant that all
kids from the ages of 6 to 12, or sometimes even 14, were integrated into the
system of compulsory elementary schooling. The new law also instigated the
multiplication of the number of elementary schools, which were meant to reach
as many children as possible. The curriculum was expanded from four subjects
(writing, reading, arithmetic and religion) to teaching of the basic elements of the
natural sciences, history, geography, geometry, singing and physical education.4
This law was in effect until 1929, when a new law divided elementary schools into
two levels: lower and higher. The lower consisted of four grades (first to fourth),
the second from fifth to eighth grade.5
3 Bogo Grafenauer, “Podržavljenje šolstva in splošna šolska obveznost”, Zgodovina Slovencev
(Ljubljana, 1979), pp. 379-381.
4 Peter Vodopivec, “Razvoj šolstva na Slovenskem”, in Jasna Fischer et al.(eds.), Slovenska novejša
zgodovina 1, (Ljubljana 2005), p. 61. Hereafter Vodopivec, »Razvoj šolstva«.
5 Ervin Dolenc, “Izobraževanje”, in Jasna Fischer et al. (eds.), Slovenska novejša zgodovina 1,
(Ljubljana 2005), p. 424. Hereafter Dolenc, »Izobraževanje«.
The secondary level of education was far more complex consisting of different
types of schools. There were secondary schools which enabled their graduates
to further study at the universities, technical or merchant higher schools. The
two basic kinds of these schools were the classically oriented “gymnasiums”
and “realke” (real) schools which were more concerned with teaching natural
sciences and mediating knowledge which could be used in industry, artisanship
and trade. 1849 brought about the reform of “gymnasiums”, which became
institutions disseminating general humanistic knowledge. The learning period
lasted eight years, but they were split into lower and higher “gymnasiums”
and only by finishing eight grades students were allowed to receive a “matura”
(graduation exam) degree which enabled them to go to a university. The classical
“gymnasiums” were mostly transformed into real “gymnasiums” after the end of
the First World War. The “realke” schools were meant as general middle vocational
schools. The schooling period lasted three, six or eight years. Thus they were
divided into higher and lower schools. After 1870 the eight-year “realka” school
gained equality with a “gymnasium” and made it possible for its graduates to
continue studying at the university. The graduates of the six-year program were
able to study on technical or merchant higher schools. The lower “realka” school
enabled its students to enrol in various vocational schools. In Ljubljana there was
a “realka” school established in 1852. At first it only lasted three years, but in 1865
it became a six-year school.6
The other types of secondary schools were various artisan and merchant
vocational schools. Since the 1880s, the government started to care more about
artisan and merchant education on the secondary level. On the Slovene territory
there was a state artisan school in Ljubljana (Državna obrtna šola) established in
1888 as a vocational school for lumber industry and artisanship. Since 1910, there
was also a merchant school in Ljubljana, which accompanied the oldest merchant
learning institution on the secondary level in Ljubljana, the Mahrs Merchant
School established in 1834.7 In the interwar period, the type of “meščanska”
(civic) school already present in the pre-war times became very popular and
its spread was sponsored by the government. The enrolment was possible for
those who had finished five grades of elementary school. The schooling on a
“meščanska” school lasted three years and was focused primarily on practical
knowledge. After finishing “meščanska” school, pupils were able to continue
schooling on various vocational schools or a teachers’ school. The network of
various vocational schools also grew in the interwar period. The artisan vocational
6 Vodopivec, “Razvoj šolstva”, p. 61; Enciklopedija Slovenije (hereafter ES), book 10, (Ljubljana,
1996), pp. 126-127 , Vladimir Schmidt, Zgodovina šolstva in pedagogike na Slovenskem, book 3
(Ljubljana, 1966), pp. 135-136, Magda Prevc, Ljubljanska realka skozi čas (Ljubljana, 2009), pp.
21-58, Festschrift zur Feier des fünfzigjährigen Bestandes 1852-1902 (Ljubljana, 1902), pp. 7-30.
7 Aleksandra Serše, Strokovno šolstvo v osrednji Sloveniji do leta 1941 (Ljubljana, 1995), pp. 30-
65.
schooling was concentrated in Ljubljana’s Technical High School (Tehnična
srednja šola). Two merchant academies were also founded on the Slovene soil:
one in Ljubljana and one in Maribor. The highly developed system of vocational
schooling was the pride of Slovene school system, as opposed to the other parts
of Yugoslavia. By providing properly educated cadres, it played an important role
in the Slovenization of the industry.8
The tertiary or the higher education consisted of universities and higher
technical and merchant schools. The primary factor that separated them from
schools on the secondary level was the demand that those who wanted to enrol
had to have degrees from the two main types of secondary schools: “gymnasiums”
or “realka” schools. As mentioned above, the degree from a six-year “realka”
school allowed pursuing the study at higher technical or merchant schools, while
a degree from the eight-year “gymnasium” enabled one to study at the university.
Since the mid-nineteenth century, “realka” schools split into six or eight year
schools, the latter of which also allowed the students to study at the university.
Before 1919, there was no Slovene university in Ljubljana, despite multiple efforts
to establish one. Considering this situation, Slovene students were forced to study
at the universities in Graz, Vienna and Prague (established in the early 1880s).
The Austrian universities were thoroughly reformed after 1848. The philosophical
faculties, which included also the study of mathematics and various natural
sciences, became the backbone of the whole university. The reorganized system
of higher learning also included higher technical and merchant schools. Prior to
the start of the 20th century, the Slovene students were mostly theology students.
This changed at the beginning of the 20th century, when law students took the
lead. The students of technical sciences were the least numerous.9 This greatly
contributed to the lack of proper technical cadres of Slovene origin in industrial
enterprises and resulted in an “import” of technicians from abroad. This was a
situation that many Slovene entrepreneurs and engineers tried to remedy with
the promotion of technical studies among the Slovene youth. The downfall of
the Habsburg Monarchy and the establishment of Yugoslavia brought about
important changes in the field of tertiary education. The most important was
the establishment of the Slovene university in Ljubljana in 1919, containing five
faculties, among them a technical faculty which provided Slovene industry with
engineers. The departments of technical faculty were: construction, architecture,
electro-technical, mining, geodetics and chemistry.10 The establishment of a
technical faculty in Ljubljana greatly minimized the need for foreign technicians
in Slovene industry.
8 Spominska knjiga 1888-1938 (Ljubljana: Državna tehniška srednja šola v Ljubljani, 1938), pp.
7-62; Mihael Presl, Namen, razvoj in organizacija obrtnega in strokovnega šolstva drugod in pri
nas (Ljubljana, 1920), pp. 26-36; Dolenc, »Izobraževanje«, pp. 426-428.
9 Vodopivec, “Razvoj šolstva”, pp. 60-61.
10 Dolenc, “Izobraževanje”, pp. 428-429.
Basic entrepreneurial types
The two basic types of individual industrial entrepreneurs according to the
level of their education are: the traditional type and the modern type. The naming
of the types is based on two key elements: firstly, on purely chronological order
of things, as the modern type of entrepreneur first emerged in the period when
the process of industrialization had already begun in Slovenia, which meant that
the modern type was not involved in the early stages of industrialization; and
secondly, on the qualitative aspect of an entrepreneur’s educational level, which
existed on two levels: the modern types all had tertiary education, while traditional
types posed a more varied picture, as they possessed primary, secondary or
tertiary educations. This brings me to the next qualitative difference between
the modern and traditional type, and that is the difference within the tertiary
education itself. What distinguished the modern types from the traditional types
was their technical, natural-science, or merchant education on a tertiary level. To
summarize, the modern types’ educational specificity was twofold: they had an
overall highest level of education, and at the same time their education itself was
a novelty among Slovene industrial entrepreneurs. So, what defines the newness
of the modern type of industrial entrepreneur is not his level of education, but
the quality of the said education; and it is this quality that manifested itself as
a consequence of the modernization of the school system and the capitalist
production process.
Both basic types of entrepreneurs consisted of different subtypes. The traditional
type is especially very diverse, as it contains entrepreneurs with three
different levels of education. The first category included entrepreneurs without
much formal education, usually consisting of only elementary schooling and an
artisan or a merchant apprenticeship. This subtype of entrepreneur was present
mostly in the early stages of the industrialization and faded from the ranks of
entrepreneurs as time went on and vocational secondary schooling further
developed. This brought about a change in the relationship between the artisan
master and his apprentice, as the importance of the institution of apprenticeship
began to lose its role of a vessel for the knowledge transfer. This task was now
taken over by the formal state school system. The second traditional subtype
was the industrial entrepreneur educated on a secondary level. As noted above,
the secondary level was quite varied containing different kinds of schools. It is
safe to say that industrialists-to-be preferred vocational schools of the artisan
or merchant variety. The entrepreneurs with a merchant education on a
secondary level were quite numerous, as well as those who got the knowledge
of their industrial branch through vocational schooling. With regard to the two
main types of secondary education, the “gymnasium” and “realka” school, the
latter was much more popular with entrepreneurs. Some of the early industrial
entrepreneurs were enrolled in a “gymnasium”, but would soon drop out and
pursue business careers.11 So, the “gymnasium” stayed reserved mostly for those
who intended to go to the university, which brings me to the third traditional
subtype: the jurist. More about this subtype is discussed below, in the case of the
Kozler brothers.
It is easy to understand why “gymnasiums” presented an unattractive choice
for the future entrepreneurs; their curriculum based on humanistic sciences
had little to offer to the budding industrialists. There was a great divide between
the reality of developing capitalist world and the world of the antiquity the
“gymnasium” curricula were primarily concerned with. It comes then as no
surprise that “realka” school, “gymnasium” greatest rival in the field of secondary
schooling in the 19th century,12 derives its name from reality itself: its main
goal was namely to provide its students with knowledge based on the so called
“real” sciences, and thus equip them to find their place in the “real world”. As
such, “realka” schools represented a strong opposition against the “unreality” of
“gymnasium” school program, its supposed out-datedness, and its inability to
keep in step with the changing times.
The available data suggests that there was an overall rise in the level of
entrepreneurial education in the time-frame discussed here. This rise took place
among the traditional types, and created the modern type, which would not have
existed had it not been for the structural changes in the realm of education in the
second part of the 19th century. The most notable change detected in the traditional
type was the increase of entrepreneurs’ education on a secondary level, as more
and more industrialists gained their education from various secondary schools.
Of great importance is also the development of vocational schooling. The two
main reasons for this, as was already at some length stated above, were the rising
complexity of the productive processes, tools of production and social networks,
accompanied with the rising institutionalization of society. But even in times when
a lot of modern types got involved in industry, especially in the interwar period,
they never constituted a majority of industrial entrepreneurs; both the traditional
and modern types of entrepreneurs coexisted and complemented their activities
in the economic field. It would seem that the level of an individual entrepreneur’s
education played a part in the choice of the company-type which he was involved
with. Judging from the available historical data, it can be deducted that the level
of entrepreneurial education was mostly higher in joint-stock companies, as
opposed to smaller companies or single-owned industrial enterprises, but further
research would be needed to confirm or refute this claim.
11 Such was the case of Jožef Blaznik, bookbinder and cardboard producer. Rudolf Andrejka,
Znameniti slovenski obrtniki (1575-1940) ( Ljubljana, 1940), p. 14.
12 ES, book 10, Ljubljana 1996, p. 126.
T h e t rad it io n a l ty p e
The story of Fidelis Terpinc, the first and undoubtedly the greatest Slovene
industrialist of the 19th century, shows an interesting discrepancy between
the formal school system and an industrialist’s needs in the early stages of
industrialization. Although Fidelis Terpinc finished two grades of the lower
“gymnasium” in Ljubljana - his father sent him there because he considered
Fidelis to be a gifted child - he gained most of his knowledge of industry in
an empirical manner, mostly by travelling abroad. It also has to be taken into
consideration that he was born in 1799 and attended “gymnasium” in the school
years 1813- 14, when Austrian curriculum was re-established after a transitional
period of four years (1809-14), when part of the Slovene lands was occupied
by France, which introduced its own school-system.13 Fidelis’ schooling at the
“gymnasium” lasted for only two years. The curriculum of the two beginning
grades was strictly focused on Latin: Fidelis had 18 hours of classes per week,
of which half were devoted to elementary Latin. Three hours per week were
reserved for history and geography; religion and morals were taught two hours
per week. The natural sciences were not given much space: there was two hours
of mathematics and two hours of various natural sciences (biology, physics,
chemistry, etc.) combined per week.14 Fidelis thus gained some basic knowledge
that can probably be considered useful in the field of industry, but it still was not
much use to a young man aspiring to become an entrepreneur. So, after finishing
the two years of “gymnasium”, Fidelis discontinued his schooling and at the age of
16 he started working in his father’s shop. He became a merchant by profession,
gaining all the necessary knowledge at his father’s successful business. Later he
started his own trade in Ljubljana, but Fidelis could not settle with being just
a tradesman. He searched for other business opportunities and found them in
industry. He bought a castle near Ljubljana and took advantage of the nearby
river to create a modern and successful mill industry.
After marrying a woman from a respectable Ljubljana family, he spent a lot
of years travelling abroad, attending world fairs and visiting various factories.
All this supplied him with the knowledge of the latest technological advances in
the fields of industry and agriculture, which enabled him to become a pioneer of
paper-making, as well as chemical (on a smaller scale) branches of industry in
Slovenia; he was also one of the biggest advocates of agricultural mechanization
and overall modernization of farming.15 The conclusion drawn from this account
can only be that in the early days of industrial development in Slovenia there was
no educational system appropriate for the people who were thinking of becoming
active in this field. This lack of a possibility to gain formal knowledge caused
13 Vladimir Schmidt, Zgodovina šolstva in pedagogike na Slovenskem, book 1 (Ljubljana, 1963), pp.
78-79, 252.
14 Ibid., p. 40.
15 Rudolf Andrejka, “Fidelis Terpinc”, Kronika slovenskih mest, Vol. 1, No. 2,1934, pp. 114-120.
these ambitious individuals to seek alternative ways of learning, and there was
only one path to do it: through practical training and empirical knowledge. This
is why travelling and the institution of world fairs played such an important role
as a means of disseminating information in times when technical literature was
still scarce.
The lack of formal vocational and technical schools was especially felt in the
relatively backwards Slovene lands. In the 1852 report of the Ljubljana Handelsund
Gewrbekammer16 it is written that the two biggest obstacles standing in the
way of the development of Slovene industry were the shortage of sufficient capital
and low technical knowledge. In this respect, they called on the ministry of trade
to work towards providing a better education for Slovene apprenticeship. The
concrete solution they recommended was the establishment of a lower “realka”
school in Ljubljana and the granting of scholarships for technical schools,
which would provide those from poorer families with a chance of gaining an
education bound to bring them success in the modern times. The Ljubljana
merchants claimed that only reading and writing were not enough anymore, but
that unfortunately, people still were not persuaded about the usefulness of the
theoretical technical knowledge. The view of the businessman writing the report
was that there would be no progress until people realized that the technical field
provided humanity with endless possibilities for a better life.17 It is interesting to
note that 68 years later, when Slovenia was on the brink of a rapid industrialization,
the same complaints about the connection between the lack of quality vocational
schooling and industrialization can be found in a booklet written by Mihael
Presi, a professor at a State Artisan School in Ljubljana (Državna obrtna šola v
Ljubljani). His main claim was that the lack of vocational schooling meant the
lack of industry and his goal was to show, through the description of vocational
schooling in the West, the paths that Slovenia needed to take. He viewed the First
World War as a fundamental break with the past. With its massive mechanization,
it showed the tremendous importance of industry, and thus the striving for a
qualified workforce was a matter of Yugoslavia’s national security.18
If Fidelis Terpinc was not destined to receive a very helpful education on a
secondary level, and had to realize his goals through gaining empirical knowledge,
the case of Avgust Žabkar, one of the pioneers of Slovene iron industry, serves
as an example of the importance that the secondary vocational schooling had
16 The “Gewerbs- and Handelskammer”-s were compulsory organizations comprised of the
representatives of the Habsburg monarchy’s historical lands’ trade, industry and artisanship.
The organizations were meant as intermediaries between business world and the state; their
aim was to coordinate the interests of both parties with the goal of their mutual satisfaction.
Österreichisches Staatswörterbuch, book 2 (Vienna, 1906), pp. 687-690.
17 Bericht der Handels- und Gewerbekammer fü r das Kronland Krain (Ljubljana, 1852), pp. 16, 27-
28.
18 Mihael Presi, Namen, razvoj in organizacija obrtnega in strokovnega šolstva drugod in pri nas
(Ljubljana, 1920), p. 3.
gained in the course of the 19th century in helping to shape new entrepreneurs.
Avgust Žabkar was born in 1854, 55 years after Fidelis Terpinc, near Mokronog
in the region of Lower Carniola. His father was a forester. After he finished
elementary school he started his apprenticeships with various locksmiths in
Novo Mesto and Ljubljana. His ambition and a will to learn probably caused him
to start attending the Sunday vocational school organized by Katoliško društvo
rokodelskih pomočnikov (Catholic Society for Artisan Apprentices), meant to
expand the education of artisan apprentices. There, Avgust was learning German,
arithmetic and technical drawing among other subjects. But there was some force
that pushed him on, and in 1873 he went to Vienna on foot to attend the world
fair. He stayed there for a while, combining practice as an apprentice with gaining
theoretical knowledge by studying relevant technical literature. And thus, having
attained much knowledge in an informal way, he returned to Ljubljana in 1885,
where, three years later, he established his own locksmith workshop, which he
would transform into a factory for iron constructions in the early 20th century.19
The case of Avgust Žabkar shows that the various endeavours for expanding
vocational education on a secondary level proved to be successful in creating new
entrepreneurial cadre, of course only in combination with the individuals striving
to broaden his empirical and theoretical knowledge. The Sunday vocational
schools provided Žabkar with some basic knowledge which enabled him to take
further steps, but it was his entrepreneurial drive that made him an industrialist.
The third subtype of the traditional group is the jurist. A good case of early
industrial involvement of this subtype is the Kozler family, one of the richest and
most successful dynasties living on Slovene soil in the 19th and 20th centuries. The
family’s roots were in a remote and poor Kočevska region south of Ljublj ana, whose
peasant occupants had to restore to other types of activity besides agriculture, if
they wanted to survive: their specialty became peddling. The dynasty’s originator
Janez Kozler I was born in a small village called Kočevska Reka in 1780. He spent
his youth as a herdsman and started going to a local auxiliary elementary school
only at the age of 13. But this did not last long, because soon the boy decided to
become a peddler. He learned the trade on his travels throughout the monarchy,
on which he escorted his relative who sold horses. As he grew up, he became
independent and started peddling oranges and other tropical fruit. After moving
to Vienna, he started a successful tropical fruit trade in 1812. He gained most
of his fabulous wealth during the Vienna Peace Congress of 1814-1815. As his
riches grew, he bought himself and his family a castle near his native region.20
19 Slovenski biografski leksikon (hereafter SBL), book 15 (Ljubljana, 1991), pp. 915-916, Rudolf
Andrejka, Znameniti slovenski obrtniki (1575-1940) (Ljubljana, 1940), p. 18.
20 Ivana Kordiš - Irena Škufca, “Po hribih, po dolih razširjen njih rod”, in Ivan Kordiš - Irena
Škufca, Peter Kozler in prvi zemljevid slovenskega ozemlja (Kočevje, 1996), pp. 13-62; Arhiv
republike Slovenije (ARS, i. e. Archive of the Republic of Slovenia), AS 811.
This was the social environment appropriate for the emergence of entrepreneurs
with a university-level education. Despite having almost no formal
education and perhaps even because of that, Janez Kozler I made sure that his
three sons got a better schooling than him. The firstborn Janez Kozler II, who
was destined to inherit the castle and the surrounding estate, graduated from
the Ljubljana “gymnasium”. The second-born Josip and the third-born Peter both
finished law and worked as lawyers. It seems that their father was determined
to provide for them the best possible education. Perhaps them not being meant
as heirs to the estate played a part in having a higher education than their older
brother. But after their father had died, the two younger brothers gave up the law
practice and started to run the business of the deceased. The speed with which
the sons stopped their law practice leads one to speculate that their father was
the one who wanted them to become jurists. Speculations aside, it is clear that
all three sons were men of action, interested in industry, mechanics, machines
and modernization of agriculture. They possessed a knack for all technical
things and were eager innovators.21 All this considered, it comes as no surprise
that they established the first modern steam-driven beer brewery in Ljubljana,
which developed into one of the biggest Slovene breweries, and still exists today.
The explanation for this action found in literature is that the brothers wanted
to protect the large amount of money left to them by their father from the
threat of a future war.22 Taking all this into consideration, there must have been
another motif for their action; some amount of entrepreneurial spirit, drive and
a preparedness to take risks had to play a part in deciding to invest into industry.
Peter Kozler, the former lawyer, took over the management of the company. In
1867, when the three brothers registered their firm Gebrüder Kosler, Bier und
Spirituserzeugung (Kozler Brothers, Beer and Spirit Production), the brothers
got involved in industry. But the Kozler brothers’ ties with Slovene industry did
not stop there. In 1873, Janez and Peter played a part in the establishment of the
first construction joint-stock company in Ljubljana and Slovenia.23
Aside from the Kozler brothers, there were other jurists involved in industrial
joint-stock companies in the 1860s. The information about three early
industrial joint-stock companies24 established in Ljubljana shows that lawyers
were participating in the leadership of industrial companies at the early stages
21 Ivan and Josip were involved in promoting agriculture in the marshy area around Ljubljana
called Barje, Josip even did some experiments on his estate. Ivan was a big promoter of turfusage
as an alternative to coal. He was also a master of building watermills and water saw-mills.
Peter was the creator of the first map of Slovene territories in the Habsburg Monarchy. SBL,
book 4 (Ljubljana, 1932), pp. 542-543.
22 Rudolf Andrejka, “Najstarejše ljubljanske industrije”, Kronika slovenskih mest, Vol. 1, No. 4, p.
290.
23 Zgodovinski arhiv Ljubljana (ZAL, i. e. Historical Archive of the City of Ljubljana), LJU 88,
register družbenih firm.
24 They were called: Krainische Baugesellschaft, Narodna tiskarna and Laibacher actiengesellschaft
fur Gasbeleuchtung. AU information op. cit.
of Slovene industrialization. This participation was twofold: monetary (capital)
and entrepreneurial. Capital involvement meant they were shareholders and
the entrepreneurial involvement meant they had a say in the running of the
companies as members of the boards of directors. All three above-mentioned
industrial companies were spawned in the decade from 1863 to 1873, i. e. in
the years of a quick industrial development of the Habsburg Monarchy.25 It is
understandable that such distinguished and wealthy members of society such as
lawyers would seek to increase their riches by investing into blooming industrial
activity by becoming share-holders. What distinguished the subtype of lawyerentrepreneur
from other traditional entrepreneurs was not just his higher
level of formal education, but also the types of companies they preferred to be
involved in. The lawyers were namely present mostly in joint-stock companies,
often as bank representatives. Contrary to this, a lot of early industrialists started
out with single-owned firms or in companies with only a few partners. It was
only later that they got involved in joint-stock companies. In time the lawyers’
ties to banking institutions became more and more tight. At the early stages of
industrialization, the lawyers often invested their own savings into joint-stock
companies and thus, as members of boards of directors, represented their own
individual interests. As time went on and the Slovene banking system evolved, the
lawyers more and more often became involved primarily with banks, which was
a career opportunity granted to them by their education, and so turned into the
representatives of banks in the boards of directors of large industrial companies.
Their immediate monetary participation in joint-stock companies began to lose
its importance, with bank capital taking the forefront. The consequence of this
was that the jurists progressively adopted a purely entrepreneurial function. This
process came to its full fruition in the interwar period.
Rounding up the overview of traditional entrepreneurial subtypes, it is
necessary to present an example of the first subtype. There are a lot of cases of
industrialists who only finished elementary school and later became merchants
or artisan apprentices. The story of Karel Poliak, one of the greatest Slovene
leather industrialists, serves as a good example. Karel Poliak was born in Kranj in
1853 as an only son of a local tanner. After his fathers early demise, he became an
apprentice at his uncle’s leather workshop in Tržič, a town in the Upper Carniola
region, famous for its leather artisanship. In 1873, when he was just 22 years
old, he started his own export leather trade in Ljubljana and used the capital he
had saved to open leather factories first in Kranj and later in Ljubljana. His foray
into leather industry happened in the late 19th/early 20th century and proved
to be a success. During the First World War, when army’s demand for leather
products caused production to skyrocket, he opened another factory in Vrhnika
25 Roman Sandgruber, Ökonomie und Politik. Österreichische Wirtschaftsgeschichte vom Mittelalter
bis zur Gegenwart (Vienna, 1995), pp. 245-251.
near Ljubljana.26 He came out of the war as an owner of one of the biggest
industrial empires in Slovene history and managed to achieve all that with just an
elementary formal education.
The modern type
The first subtype of the modern industrial entrepreneur is the engineerentrepreneur.
Slovene engineers were schooled on technical faculties throughout
the monarchy. The most popular were schools in Austria, especially in Graz
and Vienna, but due to the cultural and political ties between Slovene and
Czech lands, also in Brno and Prague. The founding of the technical faculty in
1919 as part of the Ljubljana University played an important role in shaping
the upcoming entrepreneurial and professional cadres for the jobs in industry.
This contributed to the process of Slovenization of the industry, a goal coveted
for by the Slovene nationalists since the 19th century. The second subtype of
modern industrial entrepreneur was distinguished by a degree from higher
merchant schools. These merchant schools on the tertiary level, as for example
the Hochschule fü r Welthandel (Higher School for International Trade) in Vienna,
were those where the enrolment was only possible with a “matura” degree from
the “realka” school. This distinguished them from merchant vocational schools
on the secondary level, and placed such learning institutions firmly into the
realm of tertiary education. The third subtype is the industrial entrepreneur who
finished the study of natural sciences on the university level. They were only a
few and it seems that individuals with this type of education were more interested
in academia (research and teaching) than the entrepreneurial activity. Generally
speaking, engineers numerically dominated the ranks of modern entrepreneurs.
Their massive engagement in industry began in the interwar period.
There are many interesting examples of the modern type of industrial
entrepreneurs. As my aim is not to bore the readers, I will limit myself to three
cases. The first is Alojzij Krai from Moravia. Born in 1884, he was schooled in the
Czech lands: after finishing secondary education (it is unclear whether he went
to a “realka” school or a “gymnasium”), he graduated from the Brno Technical
Faculty in 1910 as a building engineer and got his doctor’s degree from the same
school in 1916. Alojzij Krai is especially interesting as an example of a highly
educated constructor involved in industry. He came to Ljubljana already in 1912.
Here, he was employed with the state building administration until 1920, when
he became a professor on Ljubljana’s technical faculty.27 Around this time he also
got involved in the nascent Slovene building industry. As a member of the board
of directors, he was active in two joint-stock companies in this field: Slograd,
slovenska gradbena in industrijska d. d., Ljubljana (Slograd, Slovene Building
26 SBL, book 7 (Ljubljana, 1949), p. 438.
27 Spominski almanah slovenskih strokovnih pisateljev, publicistov in projektantov (Ljubljana, 193?)
[the exact date of publication is nowhere to be found], p. 297.
and Industrial Joint-Stock Company, Ljubljana) where he was active from 1922-
1927 and Opekarna Emona d. d. v Ljubljani (Emona Brickworks, Joint-Stock
Company in Ljubljana) from 1922-1926.28 The first company started out in 1921
as a smaller firm involving mostly building engineers of Czech origin - the reason
for its establishment was probably the liveliness of the post-war building activity
- and was later turned into a joint-stock company when banks got involved. The
second company was founded for the same reasons as the first: the entrepreneurs
involved wrote that their goal was to provide the Yugoslav building industry
with adequate building materials. Krai was involved in it as a representative
of Slograds interests; Slograd was namely a stock-holder in Emona.29 In both
companies, Alojzij Krai figured as a highly qualified expert involved in the bodies
authorized to make chief entrepreneurial decisions. He was also one of the major
stockholders in Slograd, showing that he was not just a scientist, but also an
entrepreneur ready to take risks in the field of industry.
The next example of a natural-sciences-degree-holder-come-entrepreneur
is even more interesting, because it involves not only one of the rare Slovene
entrepreneurs with a degree in chemistry, but this individual also happened to
be one of the rare women active in Slovene industry. Her name was Ana Kansky
and she owned a company called Dr. A. Kansky, kemična tovarna, Podgrad pri
Zalogu (Dr. A. Kansky, Chemical Factory, Podgrad near Zalog) and also a shop
selling chemicals and laboratory equipment in her and her husbands house in
Ljubljana. The extraordinary thing about Ana is not just her doctoral degree in
chemistry, a title rare even among men at the time, but that her company was one
of the most advanced factories in Yugoslavia. The factory was rather small,30 but
nonetheless the principles on which it was run were ahead of its time and it sticks
out as one of the most ahead-of-its-time companies of the period. In the sense
that the scientific and technical innovation was its main principle, it was a sign of
the direction that the whole industry would take in the future. Such companies of
course were not rare in the West at the time, but it definitely sticks out from the
rest of the Yugoslav industry. It was run strictly scientifically and innovation was
its main goal. Having a function of an industrial outlet for scientific research, it
supposedly did not yield much profit, although its almost two decades long run
bears witness to its relative success. It was founded by consorts Kansky in 1922
with the money left by Evgen Kansky’s recently deceased mother.
The Kanskys were a very interesting couple: both were highly educated and
competent scientists. Evgen Kansky was a Russian emigrant living in Ljubljana.
He was a prominent researcher in the field of biochemistry and a professor on
Ljubljana’s medical school. Ana Kansky’s maiden name was Mayer and she was
born on 20 June 1895 in a small village Lože pri Vipavi as one of the five children.
28 ZAL, LJU 88, Trgovski register oddelek B, book 2, delniške družbe.
29 ARS, AS 76, konvoluta 118 and 125.
30 In 1937 there were 29 people employed. ARS, AS 448, fascikel 309/5.
She was from a quite well-to-do family. Her father was a land-owner. She spent
her childhood in the family mansion and started elementary school in the nearby
Vipava village in 1902. During weekdays she lived at her grandmother (on her
fathers side) who was a land-owner and a post-station leaseholder. In 1907, she
departed to Ljubljana to get her secondary schooling in Ljubljana’s city lyceum for
girls. Because the lyceum could not provide her with a “matura” degree equal to
that of a “gymnasium”, as it only constituted of six grades, she had to take up private
lessons, which enabled her to complete the seventh and eighth grade and gain the
“matura” degree at Ljubljana’s classical “gymnasium” in 1914. This made possible
her enrolment on the philosophical faculty of the University of Vienna. During
the First World War, from 1914 to 1918, she studied chemistry as her major, and
physics as her second subject. The chaos of the ending war and the crumbling
Habsburg Monarchy forced her to cut her classes short and on 1 November
1918, three days before Austria’s capitulation, she left for home. The next year she
continued her studies on the newly established University of Ljubljana. In quite
a short time she prepared her doctoral dissertation on the effects of formalin
on starch and in July 1920 she became the first woman with a doctor’s degree in
Slovenia, as well as the first doctor to be habilitated by the University of Ljubljana.
For some time she continued with her research activities at the university. In
1921 she married Evgen Kansky and soon afterward they established their own
company. It seems that Ana Kansky was not satisfied with just pure research,
her entrepreneurial drive made her establish a company which, at the time, was
a unique synthesis of scientific research and industrial production. The list of
innovative products the company brought onto the Yugoslav market is a long
one. Suffice to say that it provided the Yugoslav industry with many necessary
chemical products. It was also pioneering in the production of many chemicals
until then only available as imports. Factory’s specialty was the production of
technologically complex chemical products. Besides providing materials for
chemical industry, Ana Kansky started company’s own line of pharmaceutical
products. In conclusion: Ana Kansky’s company presented the apex of the
combination of education and entrepreneurship in the pre-war period.
The third and last example pertains to the subtype of industrial entrepreneurs
educated on the higher merchant schools. Such was the case of Branimir Tuma,
the son of a distinguished Slovene politician, Henrik Tuma, born in Gorica in
1904. In 1922 he finished the “realka” school in his home town. Gaining the
necessary “matura” dègree meant that he could enrol in the Hochschule für
Welthandel (Higher School for International Trade) in Vienna. He studied there
from 1922 to 1925. After he had graduated he returned to Yugoslavia and after
having worked as an employee in a pencil-producing plant, he started his own
chemical factory in Ljubljana. His business associates were his three brothers,
who all together had a winning educational combination for a successful running
of a modern factory: Branimir had a merchant education, Boris was a jurist, Ostoj
an electro-technical engineer and Zoran a chemical engineer. The company was
aptly named “Bratje Tuma” (The Tuma Brothers) and serves as a good example of
the increase of the number of modern-type entrepreneurs in the interwar period,
as well as an example of an overall increase in the level of education of those
involved in the industry.

Željko Oset
Acceptance of Modern Scientific
Achievements in Slovene Communication
Network. Example of Evolution Theory
and Formation Process of Slovene
Technical Terminology
“Animals, whom we have made our slaves, we do not like to
consider our equal.”
Charles Darwin1
“I stand here before you with a basket full o f German knowledge
and only a handful o f Slovene words.”
Jožef (Joseph) Stefan2
“I f we completely denounce German language, we will soon
forfeit to insignificance and ultramontanism.”
Dragutin Dežman3
Previously, the declaration that the world will stay the same was quite close
to the truth. In the last 250 years, the applicable science brought unimaginable
achievements by merging the knowledge of natural regularities with technics and
turned the previously mentioned declaration and the world upside down. Epochmaking
changes brought about excitement over technics (science) in the 18th, even
more so in the 19th century, which subsided at the beginning of the First World
War, which brought to the surface the negative side of technical acquisitions. In the
technical inventions era, engineers non-critically acquired the status of modern
Prometheuses. The world exhibition in Paris in 1900 exposed the expectation
for technics to improve life. In the words of Karl Popper we can say that human
1 Quoted by: URL: http://www.brainyquote.eom/quotes/authors/c/charles_darwin.html (25. 10.
2007).
2 Josip Stefan, “Naturoznanske poskušnje: II”, Slovenski glasnik, No. 6, 1859, p. 96.
3 Vasilij Melik, Slovenci 1848-1918 (Maribor, 2002), pp. 188-189.
spirit progressed as 2nd evolutionary stage in modernization era. The 2nd stage
differs from the 1st stage of biological evolution by rapid changing, advancement
and includes a dynamic component (variability, causing uncertainty).4 The
key condition which enabled “intellectual evolution” is scientific and cultural
progress. Max Weber thought of it as being a result of the victory of intellect over
magic (“Entzauberung der Welt”).5 It has to be emphasized that the modern time
researchers and scientists did not undertake their research work with a desire to
change, but were motivated by searching for the truth.
Technicians as modern Prometheuses must also be seen with regard to their
philosophical and national self-image. This is especially important regarding the
competition between “greater” nations in the scientific field (so called Kampf des
Geistes). Technics was an important part of national identity and self-image because
of its sole meaning for everyday life and also its influence on political and military
power of the state. Milan Vidmar called attention to the importance of technics for
the nation by writing in his memoir that most of the technicians in Cisleithania
were “not only Germans, but also very devoted to all German ideology”.6
Modernization essentially changed the external image of existential habitat as
well as the life conditions and spurred dynamic processes noticeable on all levels
of society. Modernization processes were concentrated in urban centres, which
allowed strengthening the position of urban environments in society.7 One of the
decisive measures that accelerated modernization and thus social transformation
was a far-reaching secondary and higher education schools reform.8 In the 19th
century, Slovenia was a development region without a higher education centre
and a European cultural focus. For this reason, Slovenia was dependent on the
cultural transfer or complex interchanges in cultural and language heterogeneous
space. The cultural transfer was successfully maintained irrespective of the
strained national question in the Habsburg Monarchy till the First World War.
Those responsible for the transfer were intellectuals, entrepreneurs, and students
at the Austrian, German, Italian and other European universities.9
4 Heinz Dudeck, “Die Zukunf beginnt in den Köpfen: Ingenieure und die Geisteswissenschaft”,
Forschung und Lehre, No. 1, 1997, pp. 3-6.
5 Gregor Schöllgen, “Ein wilder Hazard: Max Weber Rede “Wissenscahft als Beruf””, Forschung
und Lehre, No. 5,1999, pp. 246-248.
6 Milan Vidmar, Spomini: I , (Maribor, 1964), p. 149.
7 Monika Stromberger, Stadt, Kultur, Wissenschaft: Urbane Identität, Universität und (geschichts)
wissenschaftliche Institutionen in Graz und Ljubljana um 1900 (Köln, 2004), pp. 10-43; Monika
Stromberger, “Znanost kot dejavnik kulturnega transferja: Ljubljana na začetku 20. stoletja”,
Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, No. 2, 2007, pp. 7-11.
8 Robert A. Kann, The multinational Empire nationalism and national reform in the Habsburg
Monarchy 1848-1918:1. (New York, 1964), pp. 4-5. Janez Bleiweis also wrote an article on the
importance of reforming formal education with emphasis on national needs. In his article
Bleiweis estimated the reform as the key change of era after March Revolution. J. B. (Janez
Bleiweis), “Vedna Pravda”, Glasnik slovenski, No. 5,1864, pp. 152-154.
9 Peter Vodopivec, “Slovenski študentje in Dunaj pred prvo svetovno vojno”, in Darja Mihelič
The secondary and higher education schools reform in 1848 could not be
carried out undisturbedbecause ofthe Neo-Humanistic Prussian system on the one
side and national demands, mostly of non-German inhabitants on the other side.
Among the requirements in the field of education, the requirement for inclusion
of Slovene language in secondary schools and requirement for establishment of
University in Ljubljana should be mentioned. Establishment of University was
proposed by the students of Lyceum in Ljubljana.10 These requirements should be
understood in the context of similar requirements and revolutionary enthusiasm
formed by the liberalist belief in progress and legal equality. The function of these
requirements was not so much changing the behavioural style (Hochkultur),
but they represented the application of modern liberalist ideas in socially less
developed environment (by proportion of townspeople, value added at economy,
and number of students). The school reform in 1848 accelerated modernization
processes and increased the importance of science and the importance of
conducting research in schools. The important aspect of reform was enthroning
universities as strongholds of civic liberalism.11 This is especially noticeable in the
desire to be intellectually independent from Church, which was reflected by the
struggle against the Faculty of Theology.12
The main goal of Slovene cultural programs after the March Revolution was
manifested in the adoption of neo-humanistic principle of universal education;
Slovenes expressed the desire to be educated in their mother tongue. This desire
was expressed upon the establishment of Slovenska matica society (1864) and
also later in private letters and forewords to popular science books. This raised
a question as to what kind of education Slovenes wanted. The answer to this
question came from Zgodnja Danicas circle, which emphasized the need for
education based on Christianity. An education inconsistent with tradition must
be refused. Acceptable education should be permeated with traditional Christian
values. This was also confirmed by the adoption of Popes encyclical “Quanta cura”
in Slovenska matica society. At its 1st general assembly in May 1865, a viewpoint
was offered according to which it was not necessary to write an encyclical on
society’s regulations, since theses in the encyclical were a well-known fact.13
(ed.) Dunaj in Slovenci (Ljubljana, 1994), pp. 89-97; compare to Alojz Cindrič, Študenti s
Kranjskega na dunajski univerzi 1848-1918 ( Ljubljana, 2009).
10 Janko Polec - Bogumil Senekovič, Vseučiliški zbornik (Ljubljana, 1902), pp. 21-35.
11 Hans Lentze, Die Universitätsreform des Ministers Graf Leo Thun-Hohenstein (Wien, 1962), pp.
276-277. The indicator of liberal citizenry power was visible at the establishment of Austrian
Academy of Sciences and Arts (1847), and was understood as Metternichs concession.
12 This state was confirmed by record of scientific freedom and freedom of learning-teaching as
essential liberal privilege written in December constitution. Susanne Preglau Hämmerle, Die
politische und soziale Funktion der österreichischen Universität: Von Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart
(Innsbruck, 1986), pp. 108-110.
13 Archives of the Republic Slovenia (ARS), AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 1. It should be noted
that an that time, a half of founding members were priests, as well as one quarter of committee’s
Forming of terminology of a language community is an indicator of its
spiritual and cultural or scientific conquering of the world; moreover, following
of common cultural-scientific currents demonstrates an inclusion into a wider
European context in the field of researches, ideas, concepts, and methodologies
of scientific research work and knowing of sources and literature. The fact that
Slovenes used scientific terminology was a sign of deepened perception. One
should show some restraint for the use of individual invention or the term
can only indicate personal knowledge and not a common situation.14 With the
adoption of inventions, appropriate terminology is formed. Slovene terminology
was formed simultaneously with acceptance.
The secondary schools reform represents an important incentive to the
formation of Slovene terminology. Thus, Slovene language gained importance and
became an obligatory subject for students whose mother tongue was Slovene. The
curriculum included two to three hours of Slovene per week. The sole inclusion
of Slovene as a subject of the secondary school curriculum did not start on the
language hierarchy and behavioural style connected to it. Slovene as a school
subject helped young intellectuals to better express themselves in Slovene than
those intellectuals who attended secondary school before the March Revolution.
The cultural societies in Slovenia still more often used German language.15
Language hierarchy was natural. Therefore one should not be surprised by the
members. The society was organizing local networks with the help of church’s network,
especially in Carniola, which basicaly means that priests raised annual membership dues
and distributed published books. The importance of priests is visible in the fact that 44 out of
62 literary writers had theological education in the period from 1825 to 1848. Melik Vasilij,
“Problemi v razvoju slovenske narodne identitete (1941)”, in Dušan Nečak (ed.), Austria,
Yugoslavia, Slovenia: Slovenska narodna identiteta skozi čas (Ljubljana, 1997), p. 44; Olga A.
Valkova, “Konflikte unter russischen Naturwissenschaftler in der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts”,
in Ralph Jessen and Jakob Vogel (eds.) Wissenschaft und Nation in der europäischen Geschichte
(Frankfurt an der Main - New York, 2002), pp. 59-79.
14 Erich Prunč, “Prispevek k poznavanju virov za Gutsmanov slovar”, in Boris Paternu (ed.), Obdobje
razsvetljenstva v slovenskem jeziku, književnosti in kulturi (Ljubljana, 1980), pp. 209-211.
15 Henrik Schreiner, physics professor in Bolzan, called attention to the communication problem
among Slovene intellectuals in his letter to Slovenska matica committee on the 19th of June in
1890. For better understanding I quote a part of the letter: “Slovene papers are not satisfying the
scientific needs o f Slovene intellectuals, the fa c t that cannot be held against them, fo r there is no
Slovene paper with the main or the only goal to cultivate science /.../ and we complain that our
intellectuals do not always interact in Slovene language. How could they, when we do not have
sufficient scientific vocabulary? Do we not all take knowledge from foreign sources in foreign form ?
Give us Slovene spiritual fo o d and Slovene word will flourish’.’ ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica,
box 13. Very condensed description of inferiority and the feeling of incapability to live a quality
and independent life was given in the survey of Veda paper in 1913 by Fran Milčinski: “Our
home is tight, tight as a family coffin! The most natural solution to depressing shackles is merging
with Croatians. /.../ Popular and applicative science in schools is somewhat developed, but real
science cannot thrive, /.../fo r there are not enough people interested in special branches o f science
to fill the table.” Miličinski Fran. In: Veda, 1913, p. 226.
harsh rejection of Tomans proposition in the Carniolan regional assembly in
1861 that Slovene should become a debate language.16
The establishment of Slovenska matica was a turning point for publishing of
Slovene scientific and school books. The regulations of Slovenska matica society
were confirmed on 4 February 1864. The purpose of the society was defined as
publishing of “scientific as well as generally beneficial books in Slovene language
or support issuing o f the latter’.17 The society was active in addressing the pressing
cultural problems (standardization of Slovene language, forming of Slovene
scientific terminology, striving for Slovene secondary schools and establishment
of a Slovene university, etc.).18
The first integrated natural scientific terminology execution plan by J. G.
Verdelski was published in the paper Glasnik slovenski. In his article, Verdelski
paid attention to the most pressing problems that oppressed the young Slovene
culture in all fields of human society. Verdelski emphasized underdeveloped
natural science (written in Slovene) as the most pressing problem. He ascertained
analytically that this resulted from cultural underdevelopment and the lack of
normative measures in technical terminology.19 Verdelski also considered
problematic any non-critical adoption of foreign expressions and every writers
ambition to form his own expressions. He suggested using Kopitars approach
when searching for new expressions, which means that appropriate expressions
should be sought in a spoken language. Verdelski and Jožef Stefan were opposed
to violent “Slovenisation” of the already established foreign expressions.20
Verdelski suggested that “every newly introduced word is to be defined and its
meaning explained, and these steps should be taken with all technical terms.”21
Verdelski and also other writers of natural scientific papers of Slovenski
glasnik expressed Illyrian tendencies.22 Verdelskis, Jožef Stefans and Ferdo
Kočevar s “natural scientific” contributions are interesting for the formation of
terminology. They were publishing plans and suggestions for the formation of
Slovene culture, which reflected their romantic belief in the newly commenced
Slovene nation’s project in the field of culture. They were striving for an increased
activity in the field of natural science in Slovene language. Jožef Stefans statement
was of some significance: “I stand here before you with a basket full o f German
16 Joka Žigon, Veliko pismo slovenske duhovne združitve: Ustanovitev Slovenske matice (Ljubljana,
1935), pp. 73-75.
17 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 2.
18 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, boxes 7-16.
19 J. G. Verdelski, “Potrebe Slovencov glede prirodnih ved”, Glasnik slovenski, No. 2,1858, pp. 52-56.
20 “Terms o f European science that can be told in Slovene language and are already acclimatized
and used by Slovenes should be kept.” J. G. Verdelski, “Potrebe Slovencov glede prirodnih ved”,
Glasnik slovenski, 1858, No. 2, p. 52-56.
21 “Glasnik literarni: Odgovor sostavku “Potrebe Slovencev glede prirodnih ved””, Glasnik
slovenski, 1858, No. 3, pp. 87-90.
22 J. G. Verdelski, “Potrebe Slovencov glede prirodnih ved”, Glasnik slovenski, No. 2,1858, pp. 52-56.
knowledge and only a handful o f Slovene words. It would be easy to take from the
basket, not so much to find in a curtailed fist. And they cannot be sent into the
Slovene world naked. For Slovenes are modest, and language deficiencies are thorns
in their sides. They are disgusted with all words that are not spoken by a Slovene
farmer from morn till dawn.”13
The natural science terminology obtained more defined and systematic contours
with publishing of the first Slovene school books for secondary schools. At about
the same time, there was an incentive for publishing Slovene scientific terminology
in the publishing house Slovenska matica at the end of the 60s. Thus, scientific
terminology became the primary item of German opposition to secondary schools
utraquisation in Carniola, and to a lesser extent, in Styria and Carinthia.24
Formation of terminology triggered severe personal and ideal-conceptual
conflicts. The first victim of those conflicts was Matej Cigale. In his letter to
the committee in December 1869, he complained over a severe aggression of
“Narodovci” (a circle around the newspaper Slovenski narod) making jokes at his
expense.25 Cigale understood criticism at his own expense as a personal attack and
as being negative for Slovene language development. In his opinion, this kind of
behaviour led to a ruin of Slovenehood. Fractions also started in Slovenska matica
project of translating Schödler s Buch der Natur to Slovene. The key protagonists of
language-terminology conflict were Ivan Tušek, Viljem Ogrinec, Janez Zajec, and
Fran Erjavec. The first book that was published was Physics, translated by Tušek.
Tušek demanded his work Physics to be a normative framework for Slovene natural
scientific terminology. Tušek’s demand and friendly correspondence assured
committees support. After evaluation of Astronomy, the committee requested
Ogrinec to “change terminology in accordance to Physics.” Ogrinec disagreed
and was prepared to only “fine-tune his work grammatically”. Ogrinec also
rejected Tušek’s reproach over too frequent use and citing of German literature,
instead of his own articles published in the newspaper Novice. Ogrinec was
especially dismayed by the reproach over the use of Germanisms. The committee
empowered Tušek to rewrite Astronomy in an appropriate manner. Josip Pajek,
who precisely analysed Tušek’s Physics in Slovenski narod, was disturbed by this.
Pajek published his analysis in an article where he determined inclusion of many
23 Jožef Stefan, “Naturoznanske poskušnje”, Glasnik slovenski, No. 6,1859, pp. 96-98. On the basis
of Gutsman’s dictionary vocabulary analysis Prune warned that Slovene abstract vocabulary
heavily depends on German. The most words taken possesion of are those from the field
of higher culture or dominating cultural educational practice; Erich Prune: “Prispevek k
poznavanju virov za Gutsmanov slovar”, in Obdobje razsvetljenstva v slovenskem jeziku,
književnosti in kulturi (Obdobja, 1980), pp. 209-211.
24 Compare to Željko Oset: “Vpliv modernizacije na oblikovanje slovenskega naravoslovnotehničnega
besedišča”, in Žarko Lazarevič, Aleksander Lorenčič (eds.), Podobe modernizacije
(Ljubljana, 2009), pp. 350-373.
25 “In Slovenski narod a real adder has bred that is poisoning the heart of Slovene nation. Is there
not a single intelligent man in Styria anymore, who would see this kind of treatment as ruin of
Slovenehood?!” ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 3.
Croatisms.26 Pajek was disturbed by the committees use of Physics as an example,
due to which the characteristics and needs of Slovene language were forgotten
and led to a narrow “Slovene orientation”. Tušek refused Pajek’s reproaches in
his letter to the committee and determined the existence of national mavericks
- “Zvekanovci” in Slovene nation.27 Thus, the inability of protagonists to reach a
compromise led to a disunited vocabulary, which was in Maksimiljan Pleteršniks
opinion less damaging than the compulsory language standardization, which
would (has) discourage(d) many writers. For this reason, Pleteršnik later refused
Cigalets suggestion for language standardization. As a result of the discussion
on scientific terms writing and scientific apparatus standards, the committee
adopted a decision that the key criterion for acceptance is quality writing. The
responsibility for writing and style lied with the writers. The committee assumed
the responsibility for review implementation. This passage was also a victim to
conflicts. Due to the conflicts the committee approved a principle according to
which the authors would not be allowed an insight into critics’ opinions.28 It is
necessary to emphasize that Slovenska matica gave fee for translation, which was
intended for original authorial works.29
Publishing a scientific dictionary was a significant step towards standardization
of natural scientific terminology. The idea for publishing first appeared
in 1867. The society would publish a professional dictionary as planned. Due to
the lack of interest and vast expenses, the idea was not realized. The interest to
read scientific contents in Slovene is indicated in a survey on the subscription
to a paper Slovenska matica. 73 Slovenska matica members showed interest in
subscription.30 9 years later, the president of Slovenska matica Janez Bleiweis
tabled a motion for the issue of “Naučni slovnik”, intended for a wider circle of
subscribers. Dictionary would thus comprise words, “which are today common
in scientific, political, technical, commercial, and other domains, which cannot
be transferred from other languages to Slovene language, and are also not used
in the original form in other languages; and every person who is at least a little
educated, notwithstanding the class they come from, must understand that a
book or a paper is not incomprehensible,”31 The motion gained support despite
the tense ideal-political conditions governing Slovenska matica committee.
26 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 4.
27 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 4.
28 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 6.
29 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 4-6.
30 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 4.
31 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 7. The number of members decreased from 1595 in year
1872 to 980 in year 1880. The most members withdrew from the society in the years between
1872-1874, due to political conflict between members of Staroslovenci (“Old Slovenes”) and
Mladoslovenci (“Young Slovenes”). Even after the settlement of disagreement, the number of
members was dropping, especially because of debtors cancellation. The number of members
started to increase after the death of Slovenska matica president Janez Bleiweis (1881). ARS, AS
621 Slovenska matica, box 7-9.
Matej Cigale was chosen scientific terminology editor.32 The editor addressed the
project in accordance with Bleiweiss guidelines. He used two scientific dictionaries,
Czech and Croatian, as a basic template, considering hitherto generally accepted
terminology. Cigale used Russian dictionaries and Miklošič’s old Slovene dictionary,
albeit to a lesser extent. Cigale labelled his work as “searching fo r a middle ground
between classicism and purism”. Composing technical terminology presented an
especially pressing problem. He decided to make use of modern internationally
accepted and established technical and scientific terms. In the foreword, he
emphasized the necessity for “forming homogeneous international terminology for
strictly scientific matters and products o f higher education”.33 In a private letter to
Janez Bleiweis, Cigale lamented that while composing the book, he realized “how
awkward, inflexible and modest our language is.” A monograph was an indicator
of cultural development and showed, to paraphrase Verdelski from the beginning
of 1860’s, happier times for Slovenes. Publishing of the monograph resulted in
popularization of science, especially among young people, for whom the book was
intended. The book was well accepted, especially by students in Graz and Vienna.
It, therefore, represented the first stage of Slovene terminology development; later
it was developing simultaneously with science. With the dictionary Znanstvena
terminologija, the connection to German cultural space in the field of terminology
was finally reinstated; it lasted till the 1950s.34 Successful realization indicates
freedom, political, economic, and ideal, all the necessary conditions for science.35
Even after publishing of Znanstvena terminologija, problems with forming
terms did not become any smaller. Fran Hauptmann complained over the troubles
with forming terms understandable to scholars. He had the most problems with
clear conceptual definition of terms, which is the reason for his being uninclined
to violent Slovenisation of technical terms, the products of modern era.36
Ivan Šubic had a similar opinion of Slovenisation of terms; he claimed that
technics “is today a common property o f all cultural languages on the Earth, it is
vain and causes unnecessary pains fo r a writer and a reader; it is a waste which
even greater nations do not afford.” Ivan Šubic is the author of the first technical
monograph in Slovene, and thus a very important example of forming technical
terminology. In the foreword to his work Elektrika (Electricity), he wrote that he
32 Matej Cigale was an editor for Slovene part of Reicsgesetzblatt entitled Občni državni zakonik
in vladni list Avstrijanskega cesarstva in years 1849-1852. Janez Kranjc, “Prispevek Frana
Miklošiča k oblikovanju slovenske pravne terminologije v prvem letniku dvojezičnega izhajanja
državnega zakonika in vladnega lista avstrijskega cesarstva”, in Jože Toporišič, Tine Logar and
Franc Jakopin (eds.), Miklošičev zbornik (Ljubljana, 1992), pp. 117-122.
33 Matej Cigale, Znanstvena terminologija s posebnim ozirom na srednja učilišča (Ljubljana, 1880),
pp. VI-VIII.
34 Milan Vidmar, Spomini: I (Maribor, 1964), pp. 192-194, pp. 238-239.
35 Josip Pajk, "Svobodne misli o našej izobrazbi”, Kres, Poučen in znanstven list, No. 9, 1881, pp.
510-520.
36 Fran Hauptmann, “ Neprodirnost, v fiziki nepotreben izraz”, Kres, podučen in znanstven list,
No. 1, 1885, pp. 45-53.
used expressions with “cosmopolitan right”. In the foreword to the monograph,
Šubic complained that “he had to break a lot o f new ground”. Despite all his efforts,
he was gladdened by the fact that natural science and technics were not so exposed
to internal cultural struggle (“occupation with electro-technical science is a real
comfort and consolation”)37 and were also less involved in direct national struggle; as
such, they maintained international cooperation in the era of national competition
which escalated to “Kampf des Geistes” due to French-German rivalry.
Slovene technical terminology developed further. Ivan Šubic made an
ambitious suggestion about publishing a Slovene technical dictionary in March
1904 in Slovenska matica. Šubic drew attention to the activities of the Prague
society Ilirija and the societies of Slovene and Croatian technicians in Vienna,
who collected useful technical terms. On his proposal, the committee of
Slovenska matica established a steering subcommittee for publishing a Slovene
technical dictionary. Despite good intentions, this project phase of collecting the
terms was not carried out. Publishing a great technical dictionary was a huge
financial undertaking; according to an engineer Gustinčič from the Association
of Engineers in Ljubljana, there were between 100 and 200 potential subscribers.38
The establishment of the University in Ljubljana represented a major turning
point. Lecturers prepared lectures in Slovene language. The study program was
based on German books, as none of the publishers dared to publish the scripts
of Milan Vidmar. Professors were publishing their research mainly in a German
professional periodical publication and at German publishers.39
The extension of the Engineering Faculty after the Second World War and
the establishment of Terminological Commission of the Slovene Academy of
Sciences & Arts was a turning point for technical and engineering terminology.
With systematic work, the engineering section of the Commission published the
first general technical dictionary in the years from 1962 to 1964.40 The dictionary
was published in collaboration between researchers and engineers in the work
process.41 This was the end of an era of testing and creation of a coherent scientific
and technical terminology.42
*
The process of acceptance of the evolution theory was something completely
different. Firstly, it is worth stressing that Darwin’s theory was not oriented
37 Ivan Šubic, Elektrika, nje proizvajanje in uporaba (Ljubljana, 1897).
38 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, Box 26.
39 Milan Vidmar, Spomini: I. (Maribor, 1964), pp. 238-239.
40 Archives of SAZU, 2 Presidency of SAZU, the Presidency Meetings 1953-1963, folder 9.
41 Archives of SAZU, 2 Presidency of SAZU, the Presidency Meetings 1953-1963, folder 1.
42 General technical dictionary (Ljubljana, 1962-1964).
anti-religiously. As Darwin pointed out in his letter to a Cambridge professor
Adam Sedgwick, he only published the results of his work, in which he put all his
best efforts. Completely different views on the evolution theory developed on the
continent, notably in Germany. The main advocate of the theory Ernst Häckel set
the theory against religion. Therefore, Darwinism was a part of a cultural battle
scheme. The Slovene area is a typical example of an area where the theory was not
accepted because the mentality was saturated with Christian beliefs. Nevertheless,
Slovene intellectuals were familiar with it since its coming out, or in particular
since the German translation of Origin of Species in 1860, which proves that they
were integrated into the European scientific transfer. This was mainly thanks to the
students, as some of them (privately) accepted the evolution theory.43 This raises a
question of freedom as a necessary condition for scientific activity. The question of
freedom was one of the criticisms as to why not establish University in Ljubljana.
Despite everything, the evolution theory was enforced gradually, ultimately after
the Second World War.44 Hence, everything not based on this theory was rejected.
Within this frame, we need to understand the newspaper controversy with German
press, which was criticized by Slovene public for deteriorating Christian mentality
and for being linked with Judaism and Freemasons.45 The evolution theory was
integrated into Slovene-German antagonism (the advancement as apotheosis
of Germanhood, traditional regression as basic characteristic of Slovenehood).
Journalists frequently criticized religion for inhibiting the progress. A similar
criticism was addressed to national programs which exposed religion as one of
the key components, therefore national programs were an obstacle to progress. In
the constitutional period, these criticisms were often launched to Slovene national
leaders by German politicians and publicists.46 The state of mind at the beginning
of the constitutional era can be illustrated by a rhetorical question put by a Slovene
correspondent in Vienna: “Cant we exist without that mighty education? Cant we
just live without following the same educated ideas? /.../ empty and in vain, which is
written in journalistic workshops, is sinful not only to nations, but even more against
the most sacred, against religion.” The acceptance of the theory by a few professors
and students at the Austrian universities has not gone unnoticed in the Slovene
press. It was underlined in Slovene journals that German universities teach new
knowledge, “the wisdom that fills geography, nature science, history and religions o f
all scholarliness with its errors, and wants to discourage readers from religion, from
God, peace and from salvation.”47
43 Željko Oset, “Recepcija evolucijske teorije in enciklike Quanta cura”, Prispevki za novejšo
zgodovino, No. 2, 2009, pp. 7-20.
44 Jovan Hadži, “Darwin in njegovo delo”, in Charles Darwin, O nastanku vrst (Ljubljana, 1954), pp. 5-19.
45 Zgodnja danica, 17. 1. 1861, p. 15; Zgodnja danica, 11. 4. 1861, pp. 60-61.
46 “Živi, živi duh slovenski”, Slovenec, 5. 2. 1867, No. 15, p. 64; Vasilij Melik, Slovenci 1848-1918
(Maribor, 2002), pp. 188-189.
47 “Ein Schurke, der sein Vaterland nicht liebt”, Zgodnja danica, 25. 11. 1858, p. 187; Zgodnja
danica, 28. 3. 1861, p. 51.
Slovene newspapers insisted that Darwinism was accepted mainly by
German students. A report from the banquet of a German politician and poet
Arndt, which was organized in Prague by a German student association Germanija,
is an example. It stated: “Some scientists teach that human is brother to a
monkey /.../ we heartless Slavs shall not accept this!”48 Another example of this
period which alarmed the Slovene public was the speech of Oskar Schmidt
upon taking up the position of a chancellor at Karel-Franc University in Graz
in October 1865. A correspondent from Graz wrote for Slovenec that “chancellor
is one o f those Forschers who only acknowledge Stoff as their God, each divinity is
nonsense.” The chancellor emphasized that religion cannot set bounds to “free
knowledge”. Knowledge is namely “absolutely” free and has nothing to do neither
with religion nor with enactments or self-willed laws of church authority. The
correspondent of Slovenec circulated a rumour in his report saying that the
chancellor is a member of the Masonic lodge. He specifically emphasized the
demonstration by theology students and the German students’ (Burschen) vote
of confidence. The said motion of confidence introduced to the chancellor was
signed by 232 out of 620 students of the Graz University. The author pointed out
that the letter was signed by only a few Slovene students.49 The fear of Slovene
students in Austrian schools of losing their Slovene (read Christian) spirit is clear
from the aforementioned letter. This theme was present in Slovene journals till
the First World War.50 This fear was one of the reasons for establishing a Slovene
university in Ljubljana. Josip Puntar wrote a few years before the First World
War that the planned Slovene university would not be “a shelter and a fireside o f
freethinking propaganda”. According to Puntar, “decisive factors” would oppose
that kind of university. It is necessary to mention that Puntar did not exclude the
possibility of accepting science based on non-Christianity. This might become a
reality after the past “rather cultural crises”.51
An unpublished detailed theological report entitled “Moses hexameron and
Darwin’s theory” is the most comprehensive review of the evolution theory and
its critical analysis in Slovene language. An unknown writer domiciled at Sent
Pavl in Savinjska dolina prepared it before 1889. In the report, he summed up
a chronology of different views on the creation of man and discussions on this
topic. All who have publicly questioned the biblical story of the creation of life
48 “Košček slepe culture”, Zgodnja danica, 20. 3. 1862, p. 72.
49 “Chancellors speech”, “Živi, živi duh slovenski”, Slovenec, 6. 12. 1865, No. 94, p. 378. Due to
the views of laic faculties on theology, in the early 1860’s Cardinal Rauscher was thinking of
establishing a Catholic University. In Zgodnja danica, No. 8, 14. 4.1859, p. 64; Zgodnja danica,
24.11.1859, No. 25, pp. 190-191; Compare to Hans Lentze, Die Universitätsreform des Ministers
Graf Leo Thun-Hohenstein (Vienna, 1962), pp. 36-49.
50 Vasilij Melik - Peter Vodopivec, “Slovenski izobraženci in avstrijske visoke 1848-1918”,
Zgodovinski časopis, No. 3, 1986, pp. 275-281; Josip Puntar, “Na poti do vseučilišča: I.” Dom in
svet, 1909, pp. 319-325.
51 Josip Puntar, “ Na poti do vseučilišča: II.” Dom in svet, 1909, p. 355.
are briefly presented. In the text, the author referred to the Bible, to Lavoslav
Gregorc (Mala apologetika or Prijazni zagovori sv. katoliške vere) and to J. M.
S. (Lesefrüchte, Christlichen Freunden der Natur gewidmet), Martin Konrad
(Lehrbuch des katholischen Glaubens und Sittenlehre), Leopold Libermann
(Institutiones theologicae) and to the newspaper Rad of the Yugoslav Academy of
Sciences (volume 30).52 The point of the article is the rejection of Darwinism. The
author uses a neotomistic view. Namely, he emphasizes that the adoption of the
evolution theory would cause a demolition of the existing Christian civilization.
According to author, the first opponents of the biblical dogma of the creation
of life were “pagan Gnostics and Manicheans” from the second and third century.
The French Encyclopaedists were the next opponents, especially Voltaire and
Rousseau. In fact, the Encyclopaedists “kept the creation from nothing secret”. They
are accredited the key role in the development of materialism and pantheism. In
the 19th century, the creation from nothing was opposed by “so called modern
philosophers, great and small nature scientists - naturforschers and especially
geologists.” The question of the beginning was a question of a biblical dogma of
direct creation of man. A Calvinist Izak Peyere, a doctor from Bordeaux in the
17th century, was the first who publicly opposed this. The Encyclopaedists also
expressed concerns about the creation of man. Among others, Voltaire opposed
the dogma of a common origin of mankind from the relationship of Adam and
Eve. Considering various identifiable characteristics, humanity must have come
from a number of relationships. The author of study indicates that Voltaire was
followed by nature scientists who formed a theory of the creation of man through
the evolution from less developed living species. Darwin was stated as the main
agent (“o f this theory - not so much an inventor, but rather an interpreter”), and
Ernst Häckel as the main advocate. Hereby we have to stress that Darwins theory
was opposed by renowned nature scientists like Aleksander Humboldt, Rudolf
Virchow, H. Burmeister, Augusst Quenstedt and Charles Lyell. As a basic slogan,
the author stated: “a human is nothing but an animal, though the most developed”.
He criticized Darwin for not substantiating the theory by evidences, “which with
their logical consistency would force us to confirm them”. Therefore, he described
the theory as “fantasy at best”. The author pointed out some thoughts he found
particularly controversial: beside their instincts, animals have got a mind (an
example of ownership), the ability to speak, an aesthetic sense of beauty, and
even some kind of a sense of religious devotion. The writer of the mentioned
52 In Croatia, the public debate on Darwins doctrine was held since 1870 onwards. In this
discussion participated Dr. A. Kržan, a Slovene from Bizeljsko. In years from 1874-1877 he
published a series of articles in Katolički list. A key supporter of the evolution theory professor
Spiro Brusina honored Kržan for his sober and learned approach. We should stress that Jovan
Hadži (a Zoology professor after the establishment of University of Ljubljana) published several
articles on the evolution theory in Croatian newspapers. ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box
36; Miroslav Zei, “Darwinizem pri Slovencih”, in Marcel Prenant et al., Knjiga o Darwinu
(Ljubljana, 1959), pp. 265-269.
detailed report was especially disturbed by the fact that Darwin mentioned that
evolution of man happened naturally, in his fight for survival. Hereby he made a
cynical remark: “Then why didn’t a human inherit all the characteristics that would
facilitate his survival.”53
The article discusses the relationship between Darwinism and Christianity.
The author is convinced that the adoption of the evolution theory would put humanity
back to savagery, consequently, the civilization achievements would be lost
(“this would be followed by a period o f selfishness and profanity, moral delinquency
and anarchy, cultural people would become savages and the world would withdraw
into the darkness o f the toughest moral night”). The author describes Darwinism
as “atheism in the worst hopeless manner”, but he believes that its purpose is to
prepare a man for religion, that “God has nothing to do with or is not interested
in human affairs.” Therefore, the author believes that the evolution theory cannot
be consistent with the Bible, especially not with the story from the first Book of
Moses, nor with fundamental thoughts of revelation (with the fall from Eden
or with the original sin and salvation of a man). He pointed out that Darwin
mentions God, but not as a creator. This is characterized as a deliberate deception.
He rejected the thought of freedom as a “natural inevitability”. He mentioned the
linguistic diversity, which casted first doubts on the veracity of the biblical story
on the creation of a man. The author cautioned that contemporary comparative
linguistics defines lesser language diversity. This should be a proof for greater
affinity between language groups as it was the case hitherto.54
In the context of the acceptance of the evolution theory, Pajek’s experiment in
the 1880 s on the compatibility of the evolution theory and the biblical story on
creation is interesting. Pajek highlighted the significance of education and freedom
for scientific activity.55 The failure is a result of strengthening of differentiation
of ideas and principles, which is why opponents were becoming more and more
sensitive to changes. Pajeks attempt was not successful. Darwinism was still a theory
based on non-Christian background. Nevertheless, some premises of the evolution
theory were adopted, notably the contemplation on the survival of a stronger
offspring.56 Meanwhile, different standards were shaped in literature, which can be
seen from a harsh response of the reviewers of Strekelj’s project of Slovene folk
songs. Reviewers evaluated the syntagm “poor animal” as an example of Darwinism
and materialism. In a letter of 2 June 1896 to the committee of Slovenska matica,
Karel Štrekelj rejected the allegations as unfounded and emphasized that the critics
were using “Mahnics methods".57 These tensions between the reviewers and Štrekelj
represented the first in a series of misunderstandings which caused the ideological-
53 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 36.
54 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 36.
55 Janko Pajk, “ Svobodne misli o našej izobrazbi Kres, No. 9, 1881, pp. 512-516.
56 Gvidon Sajovic, “ Predgovor” in Fran Erjavec, V naravi: Izbrani naravoslovni spisi Frana Erjavca
(Ljubljana, 1909), p. 3.
57 ARS, AS 621 Slovenska matica, box 33.
conceptual tensions in Slovenska matica.5* In the era of ideological-conceptual
differentiation in the early 20th century, Darwinism gained a passionate advocate
Gvidon Sajovic. He published a series of articles entitled “O človeškem pokolenju”
(On Human Generation) in Naši zapiski (Our Notes) in the years from 1904 till
1905. Pavel Grošelj was another defender besides Sajovic in the early 20th century.
He popularized the evolution theory and shared his cognitions at numerous public
lectures.59
We should recognize that both the defenders and the opponents of the
evolution theory were avoiding public controversy. However, the controversy
developed in 1904 when Boris Zarnik published an article on Ernest Häckel in
the newspaper Slovenski narod on the occasion of his 70th anniversary.60
Before parliamentary elections in 1907, a more substantial public controversy
flared up. Liberals organized a lecture of professor Dr. Gorjanović Kramberger
at the Ljubljana Union hall. The theme of lecture was “Diluvial man and his
relationship with a modern man”. As the invitation promised an interesting
lecture, they expected great participation.61 Two days after the invitation had
been published, the newspaper Slovenec reported on the discussions of Erich
Wasmann (“an educated and famous catholic nature scientist”) and Ernst Häckel.
In addition, Slovenec published a series of Wasmanns extensive monograph
summaries “Die moderne Biologie und die Enwicklungstheorie”. The newspaper
Slovenski narod reacted with a series of criticisms on Wasmanns monograph.62
Slovenec described the lecture organization as an inability of the liberal party
to collect sufficient number of voters. Therefore, the liberal party election program
was described with the following words: “to recognize free-thinking false doctrines,
lies and tricks.” They also commented on the evolution theory that “scholars gave
Darwins theory ad acta”. The liberals’ views were described as conservative, since
the theory would take human mentality back to the age of the Krapina man.
Eventually, a new species “homo priigenius liberalis” might develop, they added at
the end of the article.63
Both newspapers, Slovenec and Slovenski narod published a lecture report.
After the lecture, a newspaper controversy arose as to whether Kramberger
marked morphological similarity with Krapina man as analogies or homologies.
58 Željko Oset, “Idejnopolitični spori v Slovenski matici od konca 19. stoletja do prve svetovne
vojne”, Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, No. 1, 2009, pp. 93-108.
59 Miroslav Zei, “Darwinizempri Slovencih”, in Marcel Prenant et al., Knjiga o Darwinu (Ljubljana,
1959), pp. 265-269.
60 Marko Aljančič, “Boris Zarnik v slovenskem kulturnem življenju”, in Ivanka Brglez, Velimir
Vulikič, Zora Konjajev (eds.), Zbornik skrajšanih referatov: II (Ljubljana, 1985), pp. 45-46.
61 “Akademija”, Slovenski narod, No. 37,14. 2.1907, p. 2.
62 “Slovenec in Wasmann”, Slovenski narod, No. 39, 16. 2. 1907, p. 3. Author of the review was
Boris Zarnik, a doctor of nature sciences who managed to habilitate at University in Würzburg
at Zoology in 1910. Boris Zarnik, “Curriculum vitae”, in Ivanka Brglez, Velimir Vulikič, Zora
Konjajev (eds.), Zbornik skrajšanih referatov: II (Ljubljana, 1985), pp. 35-38.
63 “Homo primigenius”, Slovenec, No. 40,18. 2. 1907, p. 1.
Slovenec emphasized that the lecturer talked about analogies, while he abstained
from defining of “tendentiously fictional hypotheses”. At the end of the report,
Slovenec added views of eminent scientists who expressed methodical doubt on the
evolution theory.64 Despite this, the report of the lecture represents a substantial
progress in the adoption of the evolution theory. Namely, Slovenec expressed its
position on man and ape being the top of a food chain of two completely different
developmental species, but they do meet in a hypothetical phylum.65
Pavel Grošelj, correspondent of Slovenski narod, wrote in the report that
Kramberger in a private conversation expressed his view that man and human
ape were two parallel lines from one common origin.66 A correspondent of
Slovenec found the use of a private conversation an abuse. He stressed that years
ago Grošelj had publicly lectured the ape theory.67
In this period, the views on the evolution theory converged to a considerable
extent. Celebrating the centenary of the birth of Charles Darwin, the editorial
of Slovenec published Boris Zarniks article entitled “Darwin and the World
Opinion” accompanied with a longer explanation.68 This gesture of the Slovenec
editorial was unique as it gave an opportunity to the most articulated advocate
of the evolution theory. At this point we should emphasize that since the cultural
issues had been exposed, communication became more difficult. A symptomatic
case was the organization of celebration of the 400th anniversary of Primož
Trubar’s birth, which jagged relations within Slovenska matica.69
Speaking of acceptance, we have to mention the attitude of Slovene opinion
makers towards eugenics. The first records of this appeared in 1912, namely within
the context of a nation hygiene. The Catholic Church was against the abortion and
sterilization as those were the basic methods for achieving objectives of eugenics;
consequently the church opposed the ideas of eugenics. The anthropological
section of the Hygienic Institute in Ljubljana was responsible for spreading of
eugenic ideas in the 1930 s. Among them we have to mention dr. Božo Škerlj70, dr.
Franc Derganc71, dr. Ivan Jureček and dr. Nik Župančič.72
64 To intellectual authority reffered also Grošelj, who stated a part of Darwin’s letter to Häckel
from 1879: “Virchows conduct is shameful, and I hope he will someday feel ashamed.”; “Homo
primigenius in homo sapiens recens”, Slovenec, No. 40, 18. 2. 1907, pp. 2, 4.
65 Ibid., pp. 2, 4.
66 “Diluvijalni človek in njegovo razmerje do modernega človeka: Nekoliko misli k predavanju
prof. dr. Gorjanovič Krambergerja”, Slovenski narod, No. 43, 21. 2. 1907, p. 2.
67 “Iz Savla Pavel”, Slovenski narod, No. 44, 22. 2.1907, p. 2.
68 Marko Aljančič, “Boris Zarnik v slovenskem kulturnem življenju”, in Ivanka Brglez, Velimir
Vulikič, Zora Konjajev (eds.), Zbornik skrajšanih: II (Ljubljana, 1985), pp. 45-46.
69 Compare to Željko Oset, “Idejnopolitični spori v Slovenski matici od konca 19. stoletja do prve
svetovne vojne”, Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, No. 1, 2009, pp. 93-108.
70 Škerlj was carrying out “eugenic investigations” on “less talented” children and prostitutes. He was
also the editor o i “Evgenika”, the enclosure of “Zdravniški vestnik”, issuing from 1935 till 1938.
71 He was engaged in natural selection at Sokol’s gymnasts. Franc Derganc, “Poglavje o telovadcih
in duhotelovadcih”, Sokolski glasnik, 1920, pp. 159-165.
72 Andrej Studen, Pijane zverine: O moralni in patološki zgodovini alkoholizma na Slovenskem v
dobi meščanstva (Celje, 2009), pp. 152-160.
As a private lecturer at the University in Ljubljana, Božo Škerlj wrote in the
script that Yugoslavia was among a few countries where anthropology was not given
a suitable space in higher education. Namely, anthropology was taught as optional
and special subject at all three Yugoslav universities. In the aforementioned script, he
caught the essence of the problem of the evolution theory adoption - unimaginable
kinship of man and ape. The kinship can be proven only with precipitin reaction,
which was successfully carried out already in 1900.73
The evolution theory was incorporated in other levels of formal education
after the Second World War in a changed social-economic system.74 As early
as in 1929, the evolution theory was incorporated indirectly, when Sokol of
the Kingdom of Yugoslavia took over physical education by the new school
regulation.75 All this triggered a lively debate and a more intense cultural struggle.
At the end of 1929, Pope Pius XI released an encyclical “Divini illius magistri”.
With it, he wanted to stress the primary role of the church in youth education.76
Following this guideline, we should mention the debates of the bishop from
island Krk Jožef Srebrnič, who analysed Tyrss spirit as basics of Sokol ideology
for this purpose. He paid particular attention to the evolution theory (struggle
for survival), ideas of French revolution, Greek ideals of harmony, commitment
to terrestrial life and a relativity theory. Srebrnič estimated that philosophy of
Sokol is in contrast to the Christian religion. He stressed that Tyrš’s philosophy is
being hidden from the members.77 Srebrnič made a correct estimation, as in the
gazettes of Sokol, the evolution theory was in the background compared to the
professional matters (exercise methods).78
73 Božo Škerlj, Človek: Izbrana poglavja izprirodoslovja človeka (Ljubljana, 1934).
74 Jovan Hadži wrote in the accompanying study to the Slovene translation of Origin of Species
that translation is necessary because of the knowledge of the turning point in the original. As
he pointed out, the theory of evolution is available in Slovene, which is in logical connection
to dialectical and historical materialism. The need for translation was greater because of the
fact that materialism represented an assumption of Marxism. Jovan Hadži, “Darwin in njegovo
delo”, in Charles Darwin, O nastanku vrst (Ljubljana, 1954), p. 5, pp. 18-19.
75 Ervin Dolenc, Kulturni boj: Slovenska kulturna politika v Kraljevini Jugoslaviji 1918-1929
(Ljubljana, 1996), pp. 273-277.
76 Tomaž Pavlin, Razvoj sokolstva v Sloveniji med leti 1929-1941 (Ljubljana, 2000), pp. 152-153.
77 Jožef Srebrnič, Tyrsev duh (Domžale, 1931); Compare to Josip Srebrnič, Fiat Lux (Zagreb, 1931).
78 Compare to Viktor Murnik, Ob sedemdesetletnici Ljubljanskega Sokola (Ljubljana, 1934). The
answer to this is provided in the speech of the Sokol president dr. Vladimir Ravnihar at the
general assembly of Sokol on November 20th 1925. He pointed out sociability and integration
of Slovene enthusiasts as being the main purpose of Slovene associations since the beginning of
the constitutional period. Vladimir Ravnihar, ““Narodni dom”, institution of arts and sciences”,
Slovenec, No. 266, 22. 11. 1925, p. 4.
Conclusion
Since 1848 a gradual strengthening of scientific cognitions and neo-humanist
ethos is noticeable in Slovene journalism. Successfulness and notably acceptance
dynamics depended on the compatibility with Christian tradition. The key
argument against the novelties or modernization is the thesis on denouncing
the fundamental characteristics of Slovenehood (Christian religion). Accelerated
modernization of Slovene mentality was influenced by a successful establishment
of Slovene secondary schools, strengthening the scientific and class societies, and
later by foundation of a university. The aforementioned institutional achievements
resulted in a greatly enlarged circle of users. At the beginning of 1870s, there were
only 73 potential Slovene scientific newspaper subscribers.
This paper presents the acceptance of modern scientific achievements in
Slovene language after the March Revolution in 1848. The acceptance is presented
by the problem of technical invention and evolution theory. The intellectuals
from Slovene area were thus included in common, complex cultural exchanges.
Problem with inventions was creating Slovene terminology. The natural science
terminology obtained more defined and systematic contours when first Slovene
learning books for Slovene secondary schools were published in the 1870’s,
1880’s and 1890’s. An important step toward a comprehensive terminology was a
dictionary “Znanstvena terminologija”, which was published by Slovenska matica
in 1880. Slovenes had to “wait” for 82 years to get the first general technical
dictionary. The dictionary was published by collaboration of researchers and
engineers. This was the end of an era of testing and creating of a coherent scientific
and technical terminology. The process of acceptance of the evolution theory was
something completely different. Slovene intellectuals were acquainted with the
theory. Because of the strong opposition from the Church, broader acceptance
was limited. We should emphasize that the evolution theory was an object of
cultural and national struggle. Broader acceptance started in the 20th century with
a series of public lectures. The evolution theory was incorporated in other levels
of formal education after the Second World War in a changed social-economic
system.

Notes on Contributors
Notes on Contributors
Ernst Bruckmüller, between 1977-2009 Professor in Economic and Social
History at the Institute of Social and Economic History at the University of
Vienna. Since 1991 President of the Institut für Österreichkunde, since 2002
Director of the Ludwig-Boltzmann-Institute for Agrarian History. Since 2003
Corresponding Member and since 2006 Real Member of the Austrian Academy
of Sciences. Since 2009 Director of the Institute Österreichisches Biographisches
Lexikon und biographische Dokumentation of the Austrian Academy of
Sciences. Main research interests: agrarian history, biographies, social history,
history of the Habsburg Monarchy and of the Republic of Austria. Recent
publications: The Austrian Nation, Cultural Consciousness and Socio-Political
Processes (Riverside, Calif. 2003); Histoire sociale de V Autriche (Paris 2003); Was
There a „Habsburg Society“ in Austria-Hungary?, in Austrian History Yearbook
(37, 2006, 1-16); Patriotic and National Myths: National Consciousness and
Elementary School Education in Imperial Austria, in The Limits o f Loyalty:
Imperial Symbolism, Popular Allegiances, and State Patriotism in the late Habsburg
Monarchy (New-York-Oxford 2007, 11-35); Landwirtschaftliche Arbeitswelten
und ländliche Sozialstrukturen, in Helmut Rumpler - Peter Urbanitsch (eds.),
Die Habsburger monarchie 1848 - 1918, Tom IX/1 (Wien 2010, 251-322); Der
Bauernstand. Organisationsbildung und Standeskonsolidierung, in: Helmut
Rumpler - Peter Urbanitsch (eds.), Die Habsburgermonarchie 1848 - 1918, Tom.
IX/1 (Wien 2010, 783-811).
Aleš Gabrič, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Contemporary History
in Ljubljana, Assistant Professor at Faculty for Social Studies of University of
Ljubljana. Fields of interest: Slovene political history, cultural history, history
of censorship, history of education. Recent publications: Prešernovo gledališče v
Kranju 1945-1957 (Prešeren Theatre in Kranj, 1945-1957) (Ljubljana 2001), Šolska
reforma 1953-1963 (The School Reform 1953-1963) (Ljubljana 2006) and Sledi
šolskega razvoja na Slovenskem (Traces o f the Evolution o f School development in
Slovenian) (Ljubljana, 2009). Editor of: Zgodovinopisje v zrcalu zgodovine : 50 let
Inštituta za novejšo zgodovino (Historiography in the Mirror o f History : 50 Years o f
the Institute o f Contemporary History) (Ljubljana 2009); Prežihov Voranc - Lovro
Kuhar : pisatelj, politik, patriot (Prežihov Voranc - Lovro Kuhar: Writer, Politician,
Patriot) (Ljubljana-Wien 2010).
Iskra Iveljić, Professor of History at the Department of History, Philosophical
Faculty, University of Zagreb. Main research interests: 19th century Croatian
history, history of the modernization processes and the formation of the
middle-class elites, history of every-day life at the end of the 19th and at the
beginning of the 20th century. Recent publications: Očevi i sinovi. Privredna elita
Zagreba u drugoj polovici 19. stoljeća (Fathers and Sons. The Economic Elite in
Zagreb in the Second Half o f the 19th Century), Zagreb 2007; Banska Hrvatska
i Vojna krajina od prosvećena apsolutizma do 1848. godine (Croatia Proper and
Military Frontier from the Enlightened Absolutism until 1848), Zagreb 2010;
Die bürgerliche Elite Kroatiens in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts, in:
Internationales Kulturhistorischessymposion Mogersdorf Bd. 35 (Graz 2007,
175-194); Modernisierung Kroatiens in der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts.
Europäische Vorbilder und kroatische Besonderheiten, in: Vorbild „Europa“ und
die Modernisierung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, Hsg. Von C. Zach, F. Solomon
et al. (München 2009); Prosvjeta Banske Hrvatske (The Education in Croatia
Proper), in: Zbornik Nikše Stančića, Ed. by I. Iveljić (Zagreb 2011, 125-138).
Žarko Lazarevič, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Contemporary
History in Ljubljana and a Assistant Professor of economic history at the
Department of History, University of Nova Gorica. The subjects of his research
work: general economic history, development of agriculture, industrialisation
processes, cooperative movement, entrepreneurism, the role of nationalism in
economy, representation and perceptions of national interest, consumerism and
advertising, development of financial sector in Slovenia within the European
context. Recent publications: Plasti prostora in časa : iz gospodarske zgodovine
Slovenije prve polovice 20. Stoletja (Chapters from the economic history o f
Slovenia in the first h alf o f 20th Century) (Ljubljana 2009); Von der Besatzung zur
Liquiderung - : das slowenische Bankwesen in den 1940er Jahren, in: Ralf Ahrens
(ed.), Umbrüche und Kontinuitäten in der mitteleuropäischen Kreditwirtschaft
nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, (Geld und Kapital, 2005/06, Stutgart, 2008,
47-62); Kontinuitäten und Brüche: der lange Weg zu einer slowenischen
Wirtschaftsgeschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts, in: Klaus Tenfelde, Sabine
Rutar and Rolf Wörsdörfer (eds.), Sozialgeschichte und soziale Bewegungen in
Slowenien, (Mitteilungsblatt des Instituts fü r soziale Bewegungen, Nr. 41) (Essen,
2009, 51-69); The replacement of economic elftes in Slovenia after world war
Notes on Contributors
II., in: Jahrbuch fü r Wirtschaftsgeschichte (2010, Nr. 2, 147-162); Slovenian Banks
during the Great Depression, in: Economic and Financial Stability in SE Europe in
a Historical and Comparative Perspective : Fourth Conference o f Southeast Europe
Monetary History Network (Beograd 2010, 1-16).
Predrag J. Markovič, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Contemporary
History, Beograd, visiting professor at several universities. Main research interests
in social and cultural history. He is the author of Ethnic Stereotypes: ubiquitous,
local, or migrating phenomena? The Serbian-Albanian Case (Bonn 2003, 2004);
co-author of Moderna srpska država 1804-2004: hronologija (The Modern Serbian
State: A Chronology) (Beograd 2004); Trajnost i promena : društvena istorije
svakodnevice socijalizma i postsocijalizma u Jugoslaviji i Srbiji (Continuity and
Change: Social History o f Everyday Life o f Socialism and Postsocialism in Yugoslavia
and Serbia) (Beograd 2007, 2011)
Diana Mishkova, Professor of History, Director and Academic Associate
of the Centre for Advanced Study Sofia. Main fields of interest and research:
modern and contemporary history of Southeastern Europe, history of European
nationalism, comparative modernization of Southeast-European societies and
the European peripheries 19th-2 0 th centuries, history of modern political ideas,
European intellectual history, historiography and theory of history, methodology
of comparative (historical) research. Recent books and edited volumes: We, the
People. Politics o f National Peculiarity in Southeastern Europe (ed.) (Budapest and
New York 2009); Anti-Modernism: Radical Revisions o f Collective Identity (ed.
with Marius Turda) vol. 4 of the series Discourses o f Collective Identity in Central
and Southeast Europe (1789-1945) (forthcoming, 2012). Chapters and articles:
Towards a Framework for Studying the Politics of National Peculiarity in the 19th
Century, in Diana Mishkova (ed.), We, the People. Politics o f National Peculiarity
in Southeastern Europe (Budapest and New York 2009, 1-43); What is in Balkan
History? Spaces and Scales in the Tradition of Southeast-European Studies, in
Southeastern Europe (Brill) (34,2010,1, 55-86); Scale and Cognition in Historical
Constructions of Space, in Historein (10, 2010, 94-105).
Željko Oset, Assistant-Young Researcher at the Institute of Contemporary
History in Ljubljana, PhD Candidate at Faculty of Arts in Ljubljana. Fields of
interest: history of Slovene science, cultural history, intellectual and social history.
Recent work: Nostrifikacija premoženja po prvi svetovni vojni s poudarkom na
območju sodnega okraja Maribor (Nostrificationof Wealth after World War I with
an emphasis on the area of district court Maribor), in Željko Oset, Aleksandra
Berberih Slana, Žarko Lazarevič (eds.), Mesto in gospodarstvo : mariborsko
gospodarstvo v 20. stoletju (City and Economy: Economy of Maribor in 20th
Century) (Ljubljana-Maribor 2010, 77-137).
Roumiana Preshlenova, Associate Professor at the Institute for Balkan
Studies & Center of Thracology of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences in Sofia.
Main themes of interest and research: social strategies and transformations
in Southeastern Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries. Recent monographs: On
the Roads o f Europeism. University and Higher Education in Austria-Hungary
and the Bulgarians, 1879-1918 (Sofia 2008, in Bulgarian) and Frontiers Revisited.
Identities and Economy in the Balkans in Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries
(Saarbrücken 2011). She also edited the volumes Publicity Without Tradition.
Bulgaria’s Inceptive Modernity (Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, etc. 2003, with
H. Heppner, in German) and It Was Time fo r Changes. Education and Tutelage
in Bulgaria during the 19th and 20th Centuries (Sofia 2008, with A. Rostov and D.
Parousheva, in Bulgarian).
Svetlana Slapšak, Professor of Anthropology of Ancient Worlds and
Anthropology of Gender Program Coordinator, Dean of ISH (Institutum
Studiorum Humanitatis), Graduate School of Humanities, Ljubljana. Fields of
interest: anthropology of Ancient World, anthropology of gender, historical
anthropology, historical linguistics/semantics, balkanology. Recent publications:
Franc Kavčič and Antiquity: A View from the Anthropology o f Ancient Worlds
(Ljubljana 2011, in Slovene); Hronospore II, Essays and Studies (Beograd 2010, in
Serbo-Croat); Aphtonius’ Progymnasmata, Introduction, translation, mythological
dictionary, notes&indexes (Ljubljana 2008).
Mitja Sunčič, between 2006 to 2011 Young Researcher at the Institute of
Contemporary History in Ljubljana. Main research interests: social and economic
history, history of entrepreneurship in Slovenia in 19th and 20th century. He has
recently received a PhD in history from the University of Ljubljana. Recent
work: Značilnosti mariborskega podjetništva v tridesetih letih 20. stoletja
(Characteristics of Maribor business in thirties of the 20th century), in Željko
Oset, Aleksandra Berberih Slana, Žarko Lazarevič (eds.), Mesto in gospodarstvo :
mariborsko gospodarstvo v 20. stoletju (City and Economy: Economy o f Maribor in
20th Century) (Ljubljana-Maribor 2010, 327-366).
Ljubinka Trgovčevič Mitrovič, Professor of History at the Faculty of Political
Sciences, University of Belgrade and Chair of PhD Studies of History of Sciences
at the University of Belgrade. Main research interests: Serbian, Yugoslav and
Balkan social, political and cultural history in 19th and early 20th Century. Main
publications: Naučnici Srbije i stvaranje jugoslovenske države 1914-1920 (Serbian
Scholars and the Creation o f the Yugoslav State) (Beograd 1986); Istorija Srpske
književne zadruge (History o f the Serbian Literary Society 1892-1992) (Beograd
1992); Planirana elita. O studentima iz Srbije na evropskim univerzitetima u 19.
veku (The Planned Elite. Students from Serbia in European Universities in the 19th
Century) (Beograd 2003) etc.
Peter Urbanitsch, Research Fellow in the Zentrum für Neuzeit und
Zeitgeschichtsforschung, Komission für die Geschichte der Habsburgermonarchie,
Austrian Academy of Sciencies until 2007, since then a free »Mitarbeiter«. Main
research interests: history ofthe HabsburgMonarchy 1848-1918, social andpolitical
history of the period particularly the history of middle-classes, societies, elections,
political representative corporations, education and cultural history. Editor of: Die
Habsburgermonarchie 1848-1918, Bd. IX/1/1, IX/1/2, IX/1/2: Soziale Strukturen,
hrg. von Helmut Rumpler und Peter Urbanitsch (Wien 2010); Social Change in
the Habsburg Monarchy / Les transformations de la société dans la monarchie des
Habsbourg: l’époque des Lumières, hrg. von Harald Heppner, Peter Urbanitsch,
Renate Zedinger (Bochum 2011). Recent publications: Musikmäzenatentum
in Wien im letzten Drittel des 19. Jahrhunderts; in: Collective and Individual
Patronage and the Culture o f Public Donation in Civil Society in the 19th and 20th
Centuries in Central Europe, in Milan Hlavačka, Magdaléna Pokorna, Tomas W.
Pavliček et al. (eds.) (Prague 2010, 64-89); Galizische Wahlen in Dalmatien? Zu
den Gemeindevertretungswahlen in Traù/Trogir und Spalato/Split am Beginn
der achtziger Jahre des 19. Jahrhunderts an Hand von Dokumenten aus Wiener
Archiven; in: Mitteilungen des Österreichischen Staatsarchivs (55, 2011, II, 999-
1026); Der Ausgleich zwischen den Nationen untereinander und zwischen den
Nationen und dem Staat in Cisleithanien; in Pierre Béhar-Eva Philippoff (eds.),
Von der Doppelmonarchie zur Europäischen Union. Österreichs Vermächtnis und
Erbe (Hildesheim-Zürich-New York 2011, 63-92).
Peter Vodopivec, since 1980 Lecturer and between 1985-1999 Professor of
Modern European History at the Department of History, University of Ljubljana,
since 1999 Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Contemporary History
in Ljubljana. Main research interests: 18th, 19th and 20th century Habsburg,
Central European and Slovene social, economic, cultural and political history,
history of middle classes and their ideologies, history of nationalism and nation
building, history of historiography. Recent publications: Od Pohlinove slovnice
do samostojne države (From Pohlins Grammar to the Independent State, Slovene
history from the end o fth e 18th until the end o fth e 20th century) (Ljubljana 2006,
2010); O socialnih in gospodarskih nazorih na Slovenskem v 19. stoletju (About the
Social and Economic Ideas in Slovene Regions in 19th century) (Ljubljana 2006);
Slowenische Geschichte, Politik - Gesellschaft - Kultur (together with Peter Štih
and Vaško Simoniti) (Graz 2008).

Zbirka VPOGLEDI
- 1945 - A Break with the Past
- Slovenija - Jugoslavija, krize in reforme 1968/1988
- The Role of Education and Universities in Modernization
Processes in Central and South - Eastern European
Countries in 19th and 20th Century
111111 □ I ■
Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino
I
!
)
^MOJJUBLJANA
V ' AUSTRIAN SCIENCE AND RESEARCH LIAISON OFFICE LJUBLJANA
Z S I www.aso.zsi.at
Cena: 20 EUR
9 789616 386319