The common soldiers speak Czech amongst themselves, German to the commanding officers, and a drunken old Polish colonel butchers both languages while giving them a pep talk.
There are also miscommunications with Hungarians and Tatars.
Central Europe is heavily multicultural and multilingual, even in 1914, but there are still strong national identities; because of, not despite.
Bratislava was 36% German, 33% Slovak and 29% Hungarian in the 1919 census. Now it's ~90% Slovak.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Czechoslovak_Republic
As an aside, hopefully the relative lack of support for Ukraine does not have similar outcomes. There are some significant similarities between the two.
The "support" Czechoslovakia received from the western allies was an order to capitulate to German demands.
As a reminder, this was the situation in 1938: https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/u314/erding/Cz_map_15...
The situation was much more hopeless than e.g. Ukraine was/is in. The Czech part was almost completely surrounded by Germany (controlling Austria and Silesia). Slovak part had a long border with Nazi-allied Hungary. Poland was not friendly at the time (taking part in the partition). The only kinda friendly neighbor was the tiny sliver of border in the east with Romania.
If the Czechoslovakia decided to fight, it would be accused of aggression by the western powers (who basically declared Germany is in the right in Munich).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Czechoslovak_bo...
I agree that the Czechoslovakian situation was less hopeful than that of Ukraine, at least for the moment.
Despite this, they still resisted at great personal cost. Heydrich was assassinated in Prague by Czech resistance fighters. The reprisals were brutal, with thousands killed in response. My grandmother who is still alive lived through this time. Every day at school they announced the names of those executed by the Natzis in order to intimidate the populace.
The whole Central European story is complicated. The countries were hashed and rehashed on fairly regular bases. Allegiances changed a lot. Leaders made serious mistakes. People were multidimensional.
Here's another quote restating the same info followed by a citation to Haslam, Jonathan (1983). Soviet Foreign Policy, 1930–33. The Impact of the Depression. New York: St. Martin's Press.:
"A new Czechoslovak cabinet, under General Jan Syrový, was installed and on 23 September a decree of general mobilization was issued which was accepted by the public with a strong enthusiasm – within 24 hours, one million men joined the army to defend the country. The Czechoslovak Army, modern, experienced and possessing an excellent system of frontier fortifications, was prepared to fight. The Soviet Union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia's assistance"
Oh, and it was Czechoslovakia not Czechia. I'm curious why you're revising history yourself while questioning my sources.
> having an singular language
What's that?
Second, languages had nothing to do with it. There was an idea that sacrificing a part of Czechoslovakia will be enough to keep Hitler at bay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement).
Languages had everything to do with it. "Bohemia became a part of Czechoslovakia, defying claims of the German-speaking inhabitants that regions with German-speaking majority should be included in the Republic of German-Austria."
The German-speaking inhabitants, that is a whole different story.
English is spoken pretty much everywhere. What's your point?
One of my favorite examples of a multi-ethnic state in Europe (kind of biased since I have some ancestry from there) is the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. That lasted a good long while with a mix of Balts, West Slavs, and East Slavs.
But the most ridiculous thing is that multiculturalism killed it. It was partitioned by foreign imperial powers, eg. split between Russia and Germanic powers.
And that, arguably, was one of the causes of its eventual demise - e.g. would Ukraine have rebelled if they didn't perceive themselves as second-class citizens in Rzeczpospolita? And if it didn't, would Russia be able to eventually take over half of Poland?
It might shape your view a bit
Czechs and Slovaks tend to underestimate the differences, because they largely understand each other. But that's to a large degree thanks to a large amount of interchange and exposure. These days, many young Czechs without exposure to Slovak often understand only very little Slovak.
When Hašek wrote Švejk the Czechs were surrounded and influenced by vastly different nations—the crumbling remnants of the Austro-Hungarian Empire—which they were part of—the Russian Empire and Germany—both of which were in chaos after WWI. Even today they're still surrounded but at least now they're an independent nation with their own language so perhaps it's not surprising what comes out of them is quite unique.
It's quite some years since I saw Closely Watched Trains with English subtitles and it had a huge impact on me. It's one of those films that one cannot get out of one's mind for days. In its own understated way it's a great film and it's not surprising that it was a Czech production. Its ending upset me greatly because whilst its story was fiction, it reminded me of similar tragic scenarios that were played out for real many times during WWII (it seems to me one of the purposes of the film was to remind us of the fact).
BTW, when I first went to Czechoslovakia it was still under communist rule and the only practical (easiest) way to get from Vienna to Prague was by train from Franz-Josefs-Bahnhof and Emperor Franz Joseph Railway line. For some reason seeming known to the communists we had to use this single track line instead of the more modern dual track line via Brüno. I mention it because the Franz Joseph Railway was a once-in-a-lifetime experience to travel on, the track was in such terrible condition that one thought the train would derail any moment and the train only did about 30km/h max. After Communism fell the track via Brüno was opened up and although a much longer route the trip only took half as long.
I was not yet 13 when the no-longer-Communist Czechoslovak government liberalized the prices. Back then, I was profoundly unsettled by the idea that the same loaf of bread could cost a different amount of money in two different stores.
It felt as unnatural as having multiple birthdays.
Ha, right. That brings back memories from when I was living and working in Vienna. When walking by building or construction sites around the city one would often come across bricks that were several centuries old and one could tell this because the molds from which the bricks were made had the coat of arms of whomever Hapsburg/Archduchy ruler of Austria was in power at the time embossed into them, thus bricks produced from them are time capsules time-stamped with the era from which they came.
It was commonplace to see bricks made, say, in the time of Archduchess Maria Theresa who—as we're talking about Czechoslovakia—was also Queen of Bohemia around the time of the Silesian Wars/Battle for Prague. (It seems to me the many wars in and around Bohemia over the centuries only adds to the point about why the Czechs are the way they are; essentially wars and politics likely framed Hašek's worldview and thus Švejk.)
Anyway, it had been my intension to souvenir one of these bricks in pristine condition and bring it back home to display on my mantelpiece but unfortunately I never quite got around to it. :-)
For me, one thing that truly stood out in Czechoslovakia under Communism which was in stark contrast with noncommunist countries was the lack advertising and billboards on streets and roadways and that was especially evident in big cities such as Prague.
Moreover, when I first went to Prague it seemed to me that I was stepping back in time as communist Prague had been preserved as a beautiful 18th Century city because the communists had done very little modernization during their time in power; that was also the situation for much of the country, witness my comment about the woefull state of the Emperor Franz Joseph Railway.
I recall reading somewhere the reason for why the 1984 movie Amadeus, which was about Mozart and his rival Salieri, was filmed in Prague, and it was because its center remained so much like it was in the 1780s as that was the period in which the film was set. The film's producers specifically made the point that the lack of visible advertising and billboards was one† of the primary reasons for choosing the city. That's not the situation now, not long after Communism fell Prague began to look like other Western cities, which to me seems like a shame.
That lack of modernization and not keeping up with best practice under Communism wasn't all positive. The crawling, almost walking speed of train trips on the Franz Joseph Railway line and various trips by car allowed me to spend much time looking out of windows at the countryside. On the train at some short distance south of Prague I recall seeing pollution from what seemed to be a cement factory. For miles around tree leaves were covered with a dirty cement-colored dust which gave the nearby countryside a horrible yellow-grayish appearance.
I may be wrong but after viewing both cities and countryside and talking with those who lived there I formed the opinion that back then this sort 'malaise' was reasonably widespread over much of the country. Nowadays, that's changed much for the better.
_
† Others were that Prague holds relevance for the story in that its present architecture is similar to Vienna of the 18th C. which made for an authentic backdrop, and that in the 1780s Mozart's Don Giovanni was deemed too salacious and sleazy for conservative Viennese society and had to have its premiere performance in more liberal Prague.
Surely the director of Amedeus – Miloš Forman – being Czech played a role too.
It is much easier to cooperate with the local crew in their native language, relative to Hungarian / German (IIRC Budapest / Vienna were the other two options on the table for that film).
> It was commonplace to see bricks made, say, in the time of Archduchess Maria Theresa
If you visit the cellar of an old house in Old Town / Lesser Town, chances are you'll find bricks much older than Maria Theresa. These cellars routinely date back to the original construction, 11-14th century (unlike the house on top, which has typically been rebuilt several times to match the latest fashion – gothic, baroque, rococo, etc).
Whether or not they let you take a brick home is a different matter :)
It's almost certain he played a key role.
As background, I'll preface my comment by saying that I was once employed on the engineering side of the television industry, and the place where I worked was closely connected to film production, the complex included film labs that processed Eastman color stock for theater release and allied to it were film studios, so it's inevitable that I picked up some knowhow about what goes on during a film production.
Other than having seen Amadeus, (which I rather enjoyed but still hold several strong criticisms about despite its many Oscars), and the few snippets I've read about the film, I've no direct knowledge of its production per se, but I'd say that as its director Miloš Forman almost certainly would have had full oversight and a controlling say in all aspects of its production (as do most directors of any film).
Despite my background, I'm not really a strong film buff so I've no deep interest in the production minutiae of films but I took somewhat more interest in Amadeus than with most because of its story. I'm a long time enjoyer of classical music and I'm familiar with much of Mozart's and some of Salieri's music. I accept the modern view that their relationship was often more collaborative and there was little animosity or rivalry between them. In the relationship Mozart, if anyone, was likely the bigger problem, as he had a penchant thinking people were against him. There's some evidence that Salieri kept a watchful eye on Mozart, and as a fellow composer why wouldn't he do so as did Hayden and others? There's essentially no solid evidence that Salieri poisoned Mozart—only ill-founded rumors. In fact, evidence suggests he died of a combination one of the winter illnesses doing the rounds of Vienna at the time and a concoction of dangerous medicines (if Mozart was poisoned then the most likely culprit was his local apothecary).
Even before the idea of the film was born, it's almost certain that as a Czech Forman would have had a priori understandings about Prague that would have come to the fore when he learned he'd be directing the film. It's reasonable to assume he'd have immediately recognized that Prague would make an ideal readymade backdrop for the film. Its historical center was ideal from a production standpoint, it was of historical significance for the film and its old unaltered architecture could easily substitute for scenes in Vienna and Salzburg.
Moreover, I'd reckon it's highly likely (probably almost certain) that Forman was well aware of Mozart's close connection with Prague long before he'd read Peter Shaffer' stage play. It'd be difficult for him not to know, as Prague takes considerable pride that Don Giovanni, which is widely accepted as one of the greatest operas ever written and still a very popular† and still widely performed, had its premiere in the city in 1787 in the Bohemian National Theater (now the Estates Theatre). (I couldn't miss that fact when I first visited Prague as there was mention of it everywhere.)
"If you visit the cellar of an old house in Old Town / Lesser Town, chances are you'll find bricks much older than Maria Theresa."
Right. I've spent many an hour in such 'establishments' getting somewhat lightheaded (to put it politely) and I've made a practice of looking at their construction and becoming acquainted with their history and age. Where I come from (Australia) indigenous stuff is ancient but nothing of European influence is more than a bit over 200 years old so by comparison just about everywhere in Europe seems very old; in many places I've visited there's a surfeit of ancient buildings, they seem to be everywhere, we have nothing like that here. No doubt, to native inhabitants it's just the norm and they take it in their stride. However, for me the age and historical nature of these old buildings remains a novelty and they always pique my interest even though I've been to Europe many times and lived and worked there for periods.
"Whether or not they let you take a brick home is a different matter :)"
Ha, I doubt it. As an arch conservationist, it was never my thought to remove anything that was fixed in place, I recall once sitting on 2000-year-old bricks in the Colosseum and the thought never crossed my mind, what did however was that I was actually sitting on them and that no one else except me was the least bit interested in the matter.
Why would I remember that? Well, down here, we have social phenomenon—or at least we used to called the cultural cringe: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_cringe. It's not as common these days as large sections of the community have come from Europe and elsewhere, and nowadays travel to Europe is commonplace, but it was alive and well when I was a kid and it rubbed off onto many of my generation (but it affected our parents and earlier generations to a much greater degree because few had the opportunity and means to travel). Like many of us, when I first went to Europe decades ago I thought I'd finally made it, my education was on its way to competition. Incidentally, sometimes it's still a sore point with older people who've never traveled.
The phenomenon is understandable in that before WWII the local culture here was profoundly British and the population was acutely aware that it was living in an outpost 12,000 miles from its cultural home of Mother England even though the vast majority had never been there. After the War that changed somewhat after several waves of European migration and later migration from Asia but native born Australians still knew they were missing out on experiencing the real thing—that of gaining actual hands-on knowledge of their cultural heritage and that it was important for them to make the pilgrimage.
Re: 'Maria Theresa' bricks, they had a particular resonance for me as I've long had an interest in the Enlightenment era and that I was living in one of the cultural capitals of the world. Also they weren't rare, there were many loose ones just lying about at various building and construction sites around Vienna. Moreover, I wasn't alone, a colleague, one of my fellow countrymen, would also hunt them down with gusto.
Clearly familiarity breeds indifference, such mundane historical artifacts like bricks seem to hold little interest for the locals but for us renegades from the cultural cringe they're considered prised finds. ;-)
On a similar theme I recall an occasion where I saw a nice old 18th Century single storey brick building in Kleine Neugasse near Wiedner Hauptstraße not far from where I was living at the time being torn down to make way for a modern structure. I was rather horrified at what I considered vandalism, which, to me, was all the more poignant due to the fact that nearby significant numbers of old buildings had been bomb-damaged during the War and out of necessity they'd been rapidly replaced with new ones of little architectural merit. I remember whingeing about it to my landlady over lunch at a nearby café. She wasn't the least concerned and couldn't understand why I was upset about it.
__
† Don Giovanni is also a favorite of mine, why wouldn't it be? It has appeal even for those who aren't opera buffs; it's salacious in parts and righteous in others, it's full of sex, promiscuity, seduction, rape, murder, revenge, arrogance, hubris, rejection of salvation and damnation—even a ghostly appearance from the murdered Commendatore! What else is there? The opera captures much of the human condition to a tee!
No wonder the conservative Viennese establishment banished it to Prague! Also, Don Giovanni tells us a lot about the liberal-minded rebellious attitudes of both Mozart and his librettist, Da Ponte. (BTW, Whenever we discuss Mozart's operas we usually leave Da Ponte out of the discussion. We shouldn't however, for without the Mozart-Da Ponte collaboration Don Giovanni would never have been the true and continuing success that it's been over the past few centuries).