No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2009
By the turn of the twentieth century the disintegrative role of the nationalities in the Habsburg empire had gained a momentum that would probably have been impossible to arrest. But whether, in the larger scheme, it was the nationalities or military debility and other factors that sealed the fate of the empire is an issue which will doubtless continue to produce dissent.
1 Sugar's, Peter F.Industrialization of Bosnia-Hercegovina, 1878–1918 (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Press, 1963)Google Scholar deals with one special aspect of the problem, but the author points the way for a number of promising investigations. On recent Yugoslav scholarship, see Tadić, Jorjo (ed.), Historiographie Yougoslave, 1955–1965 (Belgrade: Fédération des sociétés historiques de Yougoslavie, 1965), pp. 366–377.Google Scholar Yugoslav scholars have focused largely on diplomatic aspects, the uprisings, and the working class movements in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and have paid relatively little attention to other, more delicate, aspects. While this may be understandable, it is nonetheless regrettable.
2 Black, Cyril E., “Eastern Europe in Historical Perspective,” in Black, Cyril E. (ed.), Challenge in Eastern Europe (New Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1954), p. 15.Google Scholar On general concepts of modernization, see Black, Cyril E., The Dynamics of Modernization: a Study in Comparative History (New York: Harper and Row, 1966)Google Scholar; Weiner, Myron (ed.), Modernization: the Dynamics of Growth (New York, 1966)Google Scholar; Levy, Marion J. Jr., Modernization and the Structure of Societies (2 vols., Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1966)Google Scholar; and Apter, D. E., The Politics of Modernization (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1965).Google Scholar
3 See his The Idea of Nationalism (New York: Macmillan, 1961), p. 10.Google Scholar See also Doob, Leonard W., Patriotism and Nationalism: Their Psychological Foundations (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1964)Google Scholar, particularly chapters 1–2, 9–10, and 13; and the works of Karl W. Deutsch, Carleton J. H. Hayes, Frederick O. Hertz, and Boyd C. Shafer.
4 It is significant that in the past decade increasing energies have been invested in exploring the relationship of history to the content, methods, and concepts of other disciplines, and vice versa. While, perforce, conclusions about this relationship are uncertain, by now a fairly rich body of literature exists on the subject. It is far too large for extensive presentation here, but attention may be drawn to a few of the relevant works: The Social Sciences in Historical Study (New York: Social Science Research Council, 1954)Google Scholar; Hughes, H. Stuart, “The Historian and the Social Scientist,” in Riasanovsky, Alexander V. and Riznik, Barnes, Generalizations in Historical Writing (Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1963), pp. 18–59Google Scholar; Cahnman, Werner J. and Boskoff, Alvin (eds.), Sociology and History (New York: The Free Press, 1964)Google Scholar; Hsu, Francis L. K. (ed.) Psychological Anthropology: Approaches to Culture and Personality (Homewood, Ill.: The Dorsey Press, 1961)Google Scholar; and Deutsch, Karl W. and Foltz, William J. (eds.), Nation-Building (New York: Atherton Press, 1963).Google Scholar For the problem of quantitative approaches to comparative study, see especially Russett, Bruce M. et al. , World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1964)Google Scholar; and the most enlightening discussion of it in Grew, Raymond and Thrupp, Sylvia L., “Horizontal History in Search of Vertical Dimensions,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. VIII, No. 2 (01, 1966), pp. 258–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar As for the subject of national character, reassurance and enrichment may be gained by reading Potter, David M., People of Plenty—Economic Abundance and the American Character (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and much useful information on bibliography and methodology in Duijker, H. C. J. and Frijda, N. H., National Character and National Stereotypes (Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co., 1960).Google Scholar
5 Thus, for example, in looking at Nikola Pašić's formative period some years ago I found evidence of unexpectedly firm views on Catholicism and the “Croatian character.” These views doubtless influenced his policies and South Slav affairs in general. This type of material, not only on Pašić but on many leading Serbian, Croatian, and Slovene leaders, still lies fallow in archives and other repositories. Textbooks, particularly at the primary and secondary levels, are also veritable reservoirs of important information of which little use has thus far been made. Schools were meant to mold and they did. Is it not of some interest to find in a fourth grade textbook published in 1905 a brief article entitled “Croatia” in “Part II: Serbian Lands”? See Protić, Ljubomir M. and Stojanović, Vladimir D., Srpska Čitanka, treća knjiga za IV razred osnovnih škala u Kraljevini SrbijiGoogle Scholar [Serbian Reader. Third Book for the Fourth Grade, Elementary Schools of the Kingdom of Serbia] (7th rev'd. ed., Belgrade: Državna Štamparija, 1905), pp. 218–220. To be sure, examination of Croatian and Slovene materials is no less instructive than the particular example I have elected to cite.