Seite - 58 - in Universities in Imperial Austria, 1848–1918 - A Social History of a Multilingual Space

58 ♦  Universities in Imperial Austria, 1848–1918 the state should watch over and ensure that such rights are never injured or limited for the sake of national sympathy or antipathy.46 Despite the affirmative tone on the nationality question, these words constituted a denial of the national cultural autonomy in educational matters that nationalists had demanded during the revolution. The centralist apolo- gist Thun-Hohenstein not only regarded state regulations as more beneficial than subordination to nationalist sentiments but also claimed, in a slightly paternalistic tone, that German cultural superiority should continue, rebuk- ing and contesting both the ideas of Austro-Slavism and the nationalists’ formulation of this issue. At the time of the publication of the pamphlet and his nomination to high office in the summer of 1849, Thun-Hohenstein’s ideal policy of national equalization was far from being generally successful, and he acknowledged his painful experiences during the 1848 June Uprising in Prague, when he became the object of attacks by liberals of both nation- alities, including his previous allies.47 The language of education was one of the most important topics at the Slavic Congress in 1848; the representatives demanded language equality not only in secondary education but also in tertiary education in Cisleithania and Transleithania. The final petition to the emperor, written by František Palacký, called for a number of universities to be made bilingual and also proposed the addition of new universities for some minority groups, such as the Slovaks and Serbians.48 A special appendix concerning Galicia, whose Polish and Ruthenian representatives hardly agreed, recommended the free- dom of teaching in both languages in Galicia. In another petition, aimed at the general public, science and scholarship as a whole were elevated as panaceas for cultural development, conjoined with the concept of Slavic reciprocity: “The convergence and fraternization of Slav peoples could bring only benefits to humanity and glory to us, when it occurs in a peaceful way and with defense of freedom. Therefore, to begin with, the revival of literary reciprocity and cultivation of collaboration in science and the arts are in our interest. We only follow this path, when we ask for the teaching of all Slav dialects at each Slav academic institution. The annual scientific congresses should inspire us Slavs, like the other peoples, to a higher intellectual life and should facilitate the exchange of ideas.” 49 These words of František Alexandr Zach show clearly that the value that Thun-Hohenstein attributed to science in his pamphlet50 was not far from Czech views. In fact, Thun-Hohenstein evaluated the congress as essentially