University scandals and the public sphere of Imperial Austria: the Wahrmund and Zimmermann affairs

ABSTRACT

Between 1907 and 1911, Imperial Austria experienced two major controversies concerning entanglements of science and religion. In 1907, the Innsbruck specialist in church law, Ludwig Wahrmund, publicly criticized the new ‘antimodernist’ and antiscientific trends of Catholic science, causing semester-long protests, fights, university closures and heated parliamentary debates. Antagonized in Innsbruck, Wahrmund relocated to Prague. The controversy triggered by his work, however, united students from across the monarchy in Wahrmund’s defence. In 1910, an analogous conflict arose in Cracow after Kazimierz Zimmermann was appointed professor of Catholic sociology. This time the protest against his teachings, although intensive, transgressed Galician boundaries only to a limited extent, failing to mobilize progressive student groups to go on the streets outside of the province. This article analyses the difference between protests against Wahrmund and Zimmermann from a spatial perspective. The author argues that the way both conflicts were received in politics and in local university cities indicates that there was an Imperial Austrian public sphere that transgressed national boundaries and linguistic divisions. Conflicts over contested topics, like the long-heated relationship between Church, science and higher education, were charged events that brought this public sphere to the fore. This translingual, imperial public sphere remained, however, hierarchically structured. A conflict in Innsbruck had more weight than one in Cracow, both within political discussions and in local presses.

KEYWORDS:

• Habsburg Monarchy
• modernism
• imperial public sphere
• science and scandal
• science vs. religion
• universities

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this paper was presented in a ‘Science and Scandal: Scientific Controversy in the Public Space’ section at the 5^th International Conference of the European Society for the History of Science ‘Scientific Cosmopolitanism and Local Cultures: Religions, Ideologies, Societies’ (Athens, 1–3 November 2010), prepared by Katalin Stráner und Markian Prokopovych. I also thank Markian Prokopovych and anonymous referees for comments on earlier version of this paper. The article was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE) and supported within the framework of a subsidy granted to the HSE by the Government of the Russian Federation for the implementation of the Global Competitiveness Program.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Unowsky and Cole, The Limits of Loyalty; Krueger, Czech, German, and Noble; Prokopovych, Habsburg Lemberg; Vari, “The Nation in the City: Ceremonial (re)Burials and Patriotic Mythmaking in Turn-of-the-Century Budapest”; and Dović, “‘Every Monument Erected by a Nation to its Greats is Erected to the Nation Itself’: Vodnik, Prešeren, and the Nationalization of the Carniolan Capital’s Topography”; on the Russian imperial case cf. e.g. Pavlenko, “Politika i pompa v prezentacijah imperskoj vlasti v xix – nachale xx vv.: Na primere Rossii i Avstro-Vengrii”.

2. See the discussion on the effects of historians’ and literatis’ discussions on the remembrance of Habsburg Galicia, presenting a comparable case: Hüchtker, “Der ‘Mythos Galizien’. Versuch einer Historisierung”.

3. Janowski, Polish Liberal Thought, 147–8.

4. Rumpler and Urbantisch, Die Habsburgermonarchie 1848–1918, Band VIII.

5. Ehrenpreis, “Die ‘reichsweite’ Presse in der Habsburgermonarchie”.

6. Deák, Beyond Nationalism.

7. Bruckmüller, “Was There a ‘Habsburg Society’ in Austria-Hungary?”.

8. See, e.g. Kostrbová, Ifkovits, and Doubek, Die Wiener Wochenschrift “Die Zeit” (1894–1904) as well as the volumes in the series Musikkulturen europäischer Metropolen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (edited by Phillip Ther et al. 2006) in Böhlau Verlag, Vienna; and Ther, Center Stage.

9. Feichtinger and Heiss, Der Erinnerte Feind; Feichtinger and Hadler, “Feinde zu Gegnern und Gegner zu Feinden”; Surman, “Du ‘barbarisme’ et ‘civilisation’”.

10. Esp. Judson, The Habsburg Empire, see also Judson, “Where our Commonality is Necessary …”.

11. Surman, “Du ‘barbarisme’ et ‘civilisation’”.

12. Cvirn, Boj za Celje, esp., 61–79; on the so called “Badeni Crisis”, Burger and Wohnout, “Eine ‘polnische Schufterei’?”; Wingfield, Flag Wars and Stone Saints, 48–78; on the Hilsner Affair: Frankl, “Emancipace od židů”, 281–8.

13. See esp. Cohen, Education and Middle-Class Society.

14. Surman, Universities in Imperial Austria; and Kann, “Higher Education and Politics”.

15. See the only (!) pre-war post-1882 Prague rectorate inaugural speech without mentioning student clashes: von Wieser, “Bericht für das Studienjahr 1901/1902”. See in general Cohen, The Politics of Ethnic Survival.

16. Exceptions were the short-lived Mittelpartei Anton Gindely’s in Bohemia (1862) and the Galician Social-Democratic Party (Galicyjska Partia Socjaldemokratyczna, 1892–1899) in Galicia.

17. See, for example, Boyer, Culture and Political Crisis in Vienna, esp. 25–30; Kwan, Liberalism and the Habsburg Monarchy, 143–57; and Buchen, “Learning from Vienna Means Learning to Win”.

18. Boyer, Karl Lueger, (1844–1910); Whiteside, The Socialism of Fools; and Krzywiec, Chauvinism, Polish Style.

19. Perricelli, “‘O Trieste o nulla!’”, 179.

20. Boyer, Karl Lueger (1844–1910).

21. For a contemporary Catholic opinion see Ein Stich in’s Wespennest; for critical opinion see most recently Rathkolb, Der lange Schatten des Antisemitismus, esp. commentary to Anhang 1, 253–5.

22. See the speech of Gustav Marchet from 3 December 1907 in Stenographische Protokolle 1907, 2881–3.

23. After Coppa, The Papacy.

24. The Syllabus of Errors. See section 2, “Moderate Rationalism”, esp. §12.

25. Aeterni Patris.

26. Militantis ecclesiae.

27. Quae ad nos.

28. See note 26.

29. Quod Votis; for the text of the petition see “Hirtenschreiben, betreffend Errichtung einer katholischen Universität in Österreich”.

30. In an imperial manner, this veto that was executed by Cracow cardinal, Jan Puzyna. See esp. Trincia, “The Central Government of the Church in the System of European Powers”.

31. Pascendi dominici gregis.

32. Lamentabili Sane, 65.

33. See here e.g. Donat, The Freedom of Science; Müller, “Die Verurteilung des Modernismus durch Pius X”; and Hofmann, “Leo XIII und die Wissenschaft”.

34. See here the commentary of Lamentabili Sane of Cracow episcopacy in Notificationes e Curia Principis Episcopi Cracoviensis, 117–22.

35. Cf. Bayertz and Jaeschke, Weltanschauung; and Hyrtl, “Die Materialistische Weltanschauung unserer Zeit”.

36. Lechicki, Krakowski “Kraj”, 125–8.

37. For direct reactions, see the proceedings of Political Association for Enlightenment (Politisches Auklärungsverein), in Neue Freie Presse, 19 December 1901, 8; and Neue Freie Presse, 20 December 1901, 1–2.

38. Ultramontanism is a concept within the Catholic Church which strengthens the power of the Pope over the local churches. During the First Vatican Council ultramontanism got especially powerful, strengthened by the pronunciation of papal infallibility and papal supremacy. For opponents, ultramontanism meant that the Church and thus priests are responsible more to the Vatican than to the state they live in.

39. See Gleixner, “Der Intellektuelle als religiöse Projektion – der Fall Masaryk”, esp. 148–9.

40. Wahrmund, Religion und Klerikalismus.

41. Speech of Wilhelm Hartel in: Stenographische Protokolle über die Sitzungen des Hauses der Abgeordneten, 109. Sitzung am 13. März 1902, 110. Sitzung am 14. März 1902, 10407–12, esp. 10408‐9.

42. Wahrmund, Universität und Kirche, 24.

43. Pernter, Voraussetzungslose Forschung.

44. Ehrhard, Der Katholizismus und das zwanzigste Jahrhundert, 361–82.

45. Fonck, Katholische Weltanschauung, 1908; Donat, The Freedom of Science; on Gabryl see Krasnodębski, “Franciszka Gabryla antropologia i teoria poznania”.

46. Rebenich, Theodor Mommsen und Adolf Harnack, 414–85; and Smith, German Nationalism and Religious Conflict, esp. 206–31.

47. See Intelligence a náboženství. Bartošek, Intelligence a Náboženství, Masaryk’s contribution on, 61–151; and Masaryk, Freie wissenschaftliche und kirchlich gebundene Weltanschauung.

48. Stenographische Protokolle 1907 (meeting from December 3, 1907), 2876–81. Characteristically, leading Slovak-language journal Národné noviny criticized Masaryk and meant Czechs have other problems to deal with, see Národné noviny, December 5, 1907, 2–3; leading Czech liberal journal, Národní Listy, has on the other hand positively accentuated that Czech speakers have shown that Prague University is “through and through filled with progressive spirit”, Národní Listy, December 6, 1907, 1.

49. Generally, see Rinnerthaler, “Der Fall Wahrmund”; and Kuprian, “Machen Sie diesem Skandal ein Ende. Ihre Rektoren sind eine nette Gesellschaft”.

50. See the reprint of one of his letters, Wahrmund, “Ein offener Brief Prof. Wahrmunds an Prof. Mayr”.

51. Innsbrucker Nachrichten, January 20, 1908, 3.

52. Salzburger Chronik, January 21, 1908, 5.

53. Czas, March 16, 1908, 1.

54. Kuprian, “Machen Sie diesem Skandal ein Ende. Ihre Rektoren sind eine nette Gesellschaft”, here 120–2.

55. See for instance the reports in Czas, March 25, 1908, 1 or Neue Freie Presse, 27 March 1908, 6–8, Neue Freie Presse, March 28, 1908, 6–9.

56. Neue Freie Presse, March 27, 1908, 10–12.

57. See Reichspost, June 5, 1908, 2.

58. Kuprian, “‘Machen Sie diesem Skandal ein Ende. Ihre Rektoren sind eine nette Gesellschaft’”, here 125–7.

59. So at least the German-language Budapest journal Pester Lloyd, which reported on the strike in Austria without even once mentioning the Hungarian Kingdom.

60. Neue Freie Presse, May 15, 1908, 3; and Národni Listy, May 15, 1908, 4.

61. Bukowiner Post, June 7, 1908, 5.

62. Czernowitzer Allgemeine Zeitung, June 5, 1908, 3; Czernowitzer Allgemeine Zeitung, June 6, 1908, 3.

63. Lidové Noviny, June 9, 1908, 1; Národni Listy, June 14, 1908, 2.

64. Nowa Reforma (numer poranny), June 5, 1908, 1.

65. Nowa Reforma (numer popołudniowy), June 13, 1908, 3; Kurjer Lwowski, June 16, 1908, 4.

66. Nowa Reforma (numer popołudniowy), June 14, 1908, 1.

67. Nowa Reforma (numer popołudniowy), June 16, 1908, 1, June 17, 1908, 1.

68. See especially Ruthenian journals Dïlo and Ruslan from June 1908.

69. Kurjer Lwowski, June 18 1908, 4.

70. If not quoted otherwise this paragraph bases on Konarski, ‘“Zimmermanniada”’.

71. Tektander, Moja pani. Although he published the book anonymously, Zimmermann was recognized as the author in the journals. In a parliamentary debate, even Minister of Religion and Education Stürgkh mentioned that this book had a character of belles lettres and “should better not have been written”. Speech of Karl Stürgkh, repr. in Stenographische Protokolle über die Sitzungen des Hauses der Abgeordneten im Jahre 1911, 5240–3, here 5240.

72. See especially Czas, February 13, 1911, 1.

73. For example Nowa Reforma (numer popołudniowy), February 3, 1911, 1, see also Neue Freie Presse, January 30, 1911, 1–2.

74. Neue Freie Presse, January 31, 1908, 7.

75. Dïlo, March 3(25), 1911, 1.

76. Neue Freie Presse, February 2, 1911, 11; Neue Freie Presse, February 3, 1911, 4.

77. Neue Freie Presse, February 3, 1911, 4.

78. Grazer Tagblatt, February 6, 1911, 1–2.

79. Neue Freie Presse, February 6, 1911, 7.

80. Neue Freie Presse, February 5, 1911, 15; Neue Freie Presse, February 7, 1911, 11.

81. Stenographische Protokolle über die Sitzungen des Hauses der Abgeordneten im Jahre 1911, 11387–8.

82. Ibid., 11560.

83. Ibid., 5243.

84. Ibid.

85. Der katholische Universitäts-Verein zu Salzburg, Dem hochwürdigsten Episkopate.

86. Staudigl-Ciechowicz, “Zwischen Aufbegehren und Unterwerfung”, 429–60 (442).

87. See for instance Michael Mayr from December 4, 1907 in Stenographische Protokolle 1907, 2908–18, here 2911, and die Diskussion von Josef Redlich, in Stenographische Protokolle des 1907, 2938–48. See also Thon, “Anteil der Juden am Hochschulstudium in Oesterreich seit dem Jahre 1851”; and further issues of the Zeitschrift für Demographie und Statistik der Juden with statistics for following years.

88. See similar for Galicia in Surman, “Du ‘barbarisme’ et ‘civilisation’”.

89. Rinnerthaler, “Der Fall Wahrmund. Politische, rechtliche und diplomatische Turbulenzen im Umfeld von Modernismus und Antimodernismus in Österreich”, 199; Pawelski, “Po anarchii uniwersyteckiej”, esp. 13–15.

90. Some caricatures used sexist stereotypes to describe female students’ involvement in Wahrmund Affair though. See for instance Wiener Caricaturen, June 7, 1908, 8.

91. Konarski, “Zimmermanniada’ w Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim (1910–1911)”.

92. See note 7.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jan Surman

Jan Surman is a historian of science and scholarship, focusing on Central and Eastern Europe in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Surman holds a Ph.D. in history from the University of Vienna and has most recently been working at the Herder Institut, Marburg and IFK, Vienna. Currently he is working at the Poletayev Institute for Theoretical and Historical Studies in the Humanities at the National Research University Higher School of Economics in Moscow. His research focuses on scientific transfer, academic mobility and scientific internationalism, and he is currently preparing a book on the history of Ukrainian science in the interwar period.