Page - 202 - in Universities in Imperial Austria, 1848–1918 - A Social History of a Multilingual Space

202 ♦  Universities in Imperial Austria, 1848–1918 Polish-Ruthenian Schisms With the Polish nationalists claiming the university in L’viv as the stronghold of Polish interests in Eastern Galicia, the political tensions with Ruthenians were a key issue for university policy there. Unsurprisingly, the main point of confrontation between the university and the government (both the ministry and the provincial government) was the presence and number of Ruthenian scholars and chairs at the University of L’viv. One could definitely say that it was easier for an Austrian German or even a socialist to obtain a posi- tion in L’viv than for a Ruthenian, with Jewish scholars having similarly low chances. The structure of the arguments and the proceedings related to ap- pointments at the university were very similar to when Polish was in the subordinate role and German the hegemonic language. The majority of the scholars at the university (and, if such cases were discussed in Parliament, of Polish nationalists as well) argued consistently that Ruthenian scholars had the possibility of habilitating and that if they conformed to the academic requirements, their advance in academic life would not be obstructed.122 The idea of equality remained limited to rhetoric, and the practical situation at the university showed how conservative the decision-making was. In the face of a Polish majority in the faculties, Ruthenian professors could only be a minority. When the university pleaded for Polish as the administrative language, only the professor of Ruthenian language and literature, Omelyan Ohonovs’kyj, opposed this.123 At the University of L’viv—whose self-image as a Polish stronghold intensified after the 1890s, when nationalists started to dominate both the city and the faculties—only political solutions assured a Ruthenian presence at the university. In many cases, Ruthenian scholars formed a united front against the Polish majority. One such example was their opposition to the Polish na- tionalist historian Ludwik Finkel. His habilitation in general history in 1884 had already led to controversies in the faculty because it directly challenged the professor of Austrian history, the Ruthenian Isidor Šaranevyč, who had opposed it.124 The rivalry between Finkel and Šaranevyč over the division of lectures escalated several times thereafter, as the latter complained that the Polish Privatdozent Finkel actually taught Austrian history but, to cover this, added the annotation “against the background of universal history” in the title printed in the lecture catalog.125 The provincial government ele- gantly solved this conflict during the subsequent very heated appointment