PALACKÝ’S HISTORY OF THE CZECH NATION
rather from two facts: 1) The personality of Hus and the entire Hussite period were deemed especially problematic if not directly dangerous to the Austrian Empire and its religion. Moreover, during this period the censorship was shifting its attention toward any ideas and literary works dealing with this period.18 2) An account of this period was given by a Protestant historian, therefore a person whose ideas and views would inevitably be antagonistic to the officially admissible state doctrines.
The first portion of the third part of the German edition of the History, containing the first two chapters of the sixth book, was returned to Prague without comment. The second portion, however, became an object of countless contentions and bargains. It dealt with the history of the period which saw the beginning of the formation of ideas which later kindled the Hussite conflagration. As a result, the history of these periods suggested to the Austrian censorship much hostility toward the church as well as toward the political power of the Austrian state. An expert theologian was asked to assist a historian in censoring this portion of the manuscript. (The theologian, Palacký mentions, was a professor of theology and a canon at St. Stephen’s in Vienna, Scheiner.19) This censor rejected the entire first portion of the third chapter, “K. Wenzels dritte Regierungsperiode, Beginn kirchlicher Bewegungen in Böhmen.” Two basic thoughts of this section, i.e. Palacký’s understanding of the controversy between Catholicism and Protestantism in the sense of historical progress in the development of the European spirit and education, and his claim that the system of faith was not accurately stabilized until the Council of Trent, were in the view of the censorship erroneous and unacceptable to the Catholic church. Palacký was compelled to cross out this entire passage in his text. However, Palacký reintroduced this section into the Czech edition of the History.20
The third and fourth books of the first part presented Palacký and the censorship with the greatest difficulties. Included in these parts were descriptions of the Council of Constance, Hus’s trial and condemnation, and the first repercussions of his death in Bohemia. The censor took a defiant position against the historical concepts of this section, declaring the material anti-Catholic and dangerous. It was said that Palacký willfully glorified Hus and chose only those sources supporting this glorification, but did not notice material which showed Hus’s inflexibility and obstinacy. Moreover, from his Protestant point of reference, Palacký purposely used expressions which show an obliquely slanderous attitude toward the Catholic church or demean its authority. Furthermore, in connection with Hus and his company, Palacký chose formulations which
