On 1 September 1911, the popular fortnightly magazine Svět zvířat (Animal World) printed a brief news item named Pravěká blecha (A prehistoric flea)[f], in its traditional column From Around the World. The entry translates approximately as follows:
Svět zvířat,1.9.1911
A prehistoric flea. Not long ago, the well-known geologist engineer Kún discovered a prehistoric flea preserved in a piece of amber in Königsberg. This flea reportedly belonged to the species Palaeopsylla (prehistoric flea), which is related to four genera of fleas still living today. It is difficult to ascertain what animal it lived on. Preserved in amber, it was as blind as the four species of Galaeopsylla that now live on mammals which spend most of their lives in underground burrows. It was named Palaeopsylla Kúniana after its discoverer.
Unnoticed
Engineer Kún as envisaged during the interwar years.
Pestrý týden,17.11.1928
That this obscure news item naturally passed unnoticed at first is hardly surprising. More surprising is that the discovery eventually caused a minor stir in a couple of newspapers, but nearly two years later! In August 1913, it emerged that the flea's "discovery" was a prank by none other than Jaroslav Hašek, a former editor of Svět zvířat, a notorious hoaxer and, above all, the author of The Good Soldier Švejk. Hašek's world-famous novel ultimately ensured that the miniscule creature became known well beyond the confines of specialist literature.
Hašek the prankster
Hašek's small jokes and selected curiosities had also appeared in Svět zvířat during his time as editor of the journal (1909-1910). The pranks may have contributed to his losing the job, although not in the manner that his literary alter ego Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek describes in The Good Soldier Švejk. On one occasion, he turned the painter Josef Lada into a translator of Hungarian, and on another into a poet. He also printed various accounts of dubious veracity, in which genuine curiosities are hard to distinguish from outright hoaxes. In 1911, it was Vilém Kún's turn to lend his name to an obscure item in the animal journal. Kún had absolutely nothing to do with geology, amber or fleas. He was, however, a man of other talents and a member of Hašek's mock party Strana mírného pokroku v mezích zákona.
Surprising timing
There was nothing unusual about Hašek indulging in such pranks, but the timing of the flea story is surprising. It appeared many months after Hašek had left Svět zvířat, and researchers have rightly assumed that he did not contribute to the magazine at all during 1911. Jaroslav Šerák suggests a plausible explanation: Ladislav Hájek, then editor of Svět zvířat, may have helped his friend Hašek to "plant" the hoax in the animal journal. Alternatively, Hašek may have passed the item to the editor anonymously. Before press agencies became common, this approach was widespread. A famous example is the Grubenhund hoax by Karl Kraus, which tricked Neue Freie Presse in 1908 and again in 1911. Hašek may even have conspired with someone at the book printer Edvard Leschinger who printed Svět zvířat during Hašek's tenure as editor and also in 1911.
The flea, resurrected by Lidové noviny...
Lidové noviny,12.8.1913
Čech,17.8.1913
In 1913, the flea story reappeared, somewhat curiously, in the Brno newspaper Lidové noviny[b]. The only difference from the 1911 item in Svět zvířat is that engineer Kún is demoted from a renowned geologist to merely a geologist. Even the typo Galaeopsylla (instead of Palaeopsylla) is faithfully reproduced. Why the flea resurfaced two years later in a newspaper as far away as Brno remains unclear. Again, the clue may lie in Strana mírného pokroku v mezích zákona, as one of the editors was Jiří Mahen (1882-1939), another member of Hašek's "party". Still, there is no proof that Ladislav Hájek and Mahen colluded with Hašek to plant the items in Svět zvířat and Lidové noviny, respectively, though the suspicion remains...
...picked up by Čech...
Four days after Lidové noviny's revelation, the clerical daily Čech reproduced the piece under a changed headline. The editors also appear to have checked it, as they corrected the aforementioned typo[c].
...and exposed by Právo lidu...
The note in Čech set the story's unravelling in motion: two days later (on 19 August 1913), Právo lidu exposed the hoax in an article sarcastically titled Hašek's engineer Kún's flea and Catholic Science, referring back to the Čech piece. It reported that the news about the flea had been published by the humourist Jaroslav Hašek in Svět zvířat at Lenten time four years earlier. Právo lidu drily observed a new development in Catholic science – Čech, which had previously drawn wisdom from the Holy Scriptures, now turned to Animal World for insight.
Čas,21.8.1913
Franta Sauer claims that Hašek himself wrote the piece ridiculing Čech. Although Sauer is not regarded as the most reliable of witnesses, he may have a point, since Hašek was contributing frequently to Právo lidu when the flea story was exposed. Augustin Knesl supports this hypothesis.
...leading to bickering between Čech and Čas
The article in Právo lidu was picked up by several newspapers, including Čas[d]. This seems to have alerted Čech, which promptly issued an irate response[e]. The account of Hašek's flea, as quoted in Právo lidu, appeared in several newspapers and even reached the USA, where a number of Czech-language periodicals reproduced it. One of these was Minnesotské noviny.
In The Good Soldier Švejk
Osudy dobrého vojáka Švejka.Jaroslav Hašek,1921
The tale of the flea and the ensuing polemic between Čech and Čas will be familiar to readers of The Good Soldier Švejk. The incident featured in Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek's long monologue about his time as editor of Svět zvířat. Marek claimed that he had found the flea in amber, that it was blind, and that it was named after Khún. There the similarities end: Marek omitted some details and replaced others with more imaginative inventions. Those additions are absent from the original Svět zvířat article.
In The Good Soldier Švejk, the debate between Čech and Čas contributes to Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek's downfall as editor of Svět zvířat. In reality, it took place three years after Hašek's dismissal and therefore cannot have contributed to his losing the job. Nor is it true that Čech wrote that "what God does, he does well". According to Právo lidu, the phrase appeared "at masopust four years ago"[d]. Had that been true, it would have been published in February 1909, but it first appeared in the columns of Svět zvířat much later, on 1 September 1911.
Metamorphosis: From Klebs to Kún
Natur,1.8.1911
The ensuing exchange in the columns of Čech and Čas is well known because of The Good Soldier Švejk. The background to the flea's "discovery", however, has remained obscure and is still not fully understood.
Palaeopsylla klebsiana
Georg-August-Universität Göttingen,2012
Sometime in 1910, a prehistoric flea was discovered in Königsberg, preserved in a piece of amber. The specimen was handed over to dr. Alfons Dampf for further analysis. In December 1910, Dampf published his findings in a scientific journal, giving a full account and even including drawings of the flea[a].
In January 1911, news of the discovery appeared in Westfälisches Tageblatt and Neues Wiener Journal[l], and the description of the creature bore a striking resemblance to the report in Svět zvířat. Its discoverer was dr. Richard Klebs (1850-1961), a well-known German geologist and an expert on amber. The specimen was officially named Palaeopsylla Klebsiana[a].
In August 1911, Neues Wiener Journal referred to the discovery again (with a typo, "Krebs"). Almost simultaneously, identical texts appeared in some German newspapers (e.g. Rhein- und Ruhrzeitung, Essener Volks-Zeitung), with Klebs's name correctly spelt. They all quote Natur, the bi-weekly publication of Deutsche Naturwissenschaftliche Gesellschaft, which was the text's source[h].
The account in Natur is even closer to that in Svět zvířat[f] than the January report. Apart from a few sentences being left out in the translated version, he only major difference is the discoverer's name: the well-known geologist dr. Klebs, not engineer Kún. To judge by the wording, Hašek's source was probably Neues Wiener Journal, from which he also seems to have translated on earlier occasions.
The flea is preserved to this day and is exhibited in Göttingen[g]. In the end, the creature itself is real enough; the prankster Jaroslav Hašek merely translated a short German news item and altered a few letters.
Flea folklore
SAU claimed that Hašek himself exposed the flea hoax in Právo lidu. This seems probable considering that Hašek wrote frequently for this newspaper in 1913.
Franta Habán ze Žižkova II..F. Kysela,1923
engineer Kún's flea is one of Jaroslav Hašek's best-known pranks, and many books about the author of The Good Soldier Švejk refer to it. Particularly vivid are the claims made by Hašek's friends, some of which have found their way into scholarly biographies, while the legend lives on both in print and on the internet.
From 1913 onwards, the prehistoric flea retreated into hibernation, where it remained until Jaroslav Hašek resurrected it in 1921 through Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek's tale. Then, following Hašek's death, a number of his friends published their reminiscences of the author. Some of them referred to the flea: Sauer, Zdeněk Matěj Kuděj, Emil Artur Longen, and eventually Josef Lada.
Tak napsal dlouhý článek o šťastném objevení prahorní blechy a vylíčil to tak pravděpodobně, že redaktor kteréhosi zahraničního listu, ve spěchu nebo z nedbalosti, článek přeložil a otiskl, aniž uvažoval, je-li to možné. Článek přetiskly i jiné listy s pochybovačnými a posměšnými poznámkami i bez nich a brzy se o prahorní bleše objevily ve světových přírodopisných časopisech sáhodlouhé polemiky a jejich redakce zahrnuly "Svět zvířat" hrubými výčitkami a radily, aby se šel i s redakčním personálem rovnou utopit. Hašek byl vyhozen bez oné námezdní podmínky: aby dříve za sebe přivedl náhradníka.
Josef Lada, 1947. "Kronika mého života"
Josef Lada's version of the flea story: invented from A to Z.
Josef Lada,1954
What these accounts share is the assumption that the flea was Hašek's invention, and his friends and biographers do not seem to have realised that it was a simple name-swapping trick. Of particular interest is Sauer's note that Hašek himself revealed the hoax in Právo lidu. This seems plausible, given that the article's style is typical of Hašek and that he was a regular contributor to that newspaper. It is also striking that Ladislav Hájek (1925) makes no mention of the flea, although, as editor of Svět zvířat, he was on the "inside" when the item appeared.
Kuděj (1924) gave the flea more space than any other biographer, letting Hašek himself tell the story to an audience in a pub in Kammený Přivoz by the river Sázava. The account is colourful, but it is a twisted fabrication, probably mainly by Hašek but also Kuděj. He gives many details but it is hard to believe that Kuděj reproduces them correctly after 10 years. He even claims to quote Hašek's article from Svět zvířat, but the "reproduced" section only marginally corresponds to the original. The story is part of a longer sequence where Hašek entertains the pub hosts with stories about his tenure at Svět zvířat. The event described took place in 1914 during the second of Kuděj's and Hašek's two excursions in Bohemia.
Emil Artur Longen (1928) referred to the minuscule creature only in passing, while Václav Menger ignored it altogether (both were more preoccupied with Hašek's werewolves). Josef Lada provided the most detailed version, claiming that the tale caused a heated debate among foreign scientists. It is not too far-fetched to assume that Hašek himself planted the seeds of these claims.
Flea scholarship
Malá zoologická zahrada,1950.
Serious scholars have also devoted attention to Hašek's flea, but only Břetislav Hůla seems to have read the original entry in Svět zvířat. The proof lies in the typo "Galaeopsyll", printed in Malá zoologická zahrada, the first of only two books dedicated to Hašek's animal stories[i]. Unfortunately, the book has no list of references, so future researchers were left wondering when it appeared. In 1953, Zdena Ančík published the first scholarly biography of Hašek. It does not refer to the flea; instead, the author merely declares that Hašek "thought up strange animals".
The most thorough study of "Hašek and Svět zvířat" was conducted over many years by Radko Pytlík, Zdena Ančík, and Milan Jankovič, and finally published in 1973. It contains an insightful afterword by Pytlík[j] explaining their findings. The flea receives only a brief mention, and the researchers behind the book do not appear to have seen the original item. Instead, they assumed that it was inspired by another piece in Svět zvířat, published during Hašek's time as editor, about a large breed of flea that lived on moles[k]. In the afterword, Pytlík inadvertently reveals why they overlooked it: Břetislav Hůla allegedly included material that "could not have been written by Hašek because it was printed at times when he did not work for the journal".
Knesl's research
The researcher who came closest to revealing the full truth about the flea was Augustin Knesl. He found the original article in Svět zvířat and also described how the polemic between Čech and Čas evolved in 1913. He did not identify the original German version of the account and therefore concluded that the flea was Hašek's invention. Nor did he locate the item in Lidové noviny that Čech presumably copied. Given the research tools available in 1988, those omissions are hardly surprising. Knesl likewise supports the assumption that Hašek himself uncovered the hoax in Právo lidu.
Radko Pytlík referred to the flea in his early works, but, although he was one of the few experts who had actually studied Svět zvířat, he did not make much of it in, for example, Toulavé house. More surprising is that the generally sceptical and thorough scholar Cecil Parrott was careless enough to pass on a summary of Josef Lada's version without quoting him directly.
His article on 'the newly discovered fossil of an antediluvian flea' was so convincing that it was translated and published abroad. Cecil Parrott, 1978. "The Bad Bohemian"
Wiki-myths and other fables
Parrott's blunder is relatively minor compared with what others have conjured up. At the time of writing, German Wikipedia offers perhaps the clearest example of flea folklore, stating that "the spectacular discovery of a prehistoric flea, for example, caused a great stir in the scientific community - Hašek corresponded with zoologists from all over the world".
Die spektakuläre Entdeckung eines Flohs aus der Urzeit beispielsweise sorgte für großes Aufsehen in der Fachwelt - Hašek korrespondierte mit Zoologen aus aller Welt.wikipedia.de, Zugriff 1. Juni 2025. “Jaroslav Hašek -> Leben"
The following is one example of how the legend found its way into academic journals.
His hoaxes were sometimes astonishingly successful. So, for example, in 1910, when Hašek was 27 years old, we find him as editor of a Czech periodical entitled Svět zvířat, a popular publication read by keepers of pets and breeders of domestic animals. It was on the pages of this magazine that the sensational discovery of a prehistoric flea was announced to the world. The creature was depicted so vividly, with an abundance of convincing arguments and striking details, that newspapers in all countries treated the report as first-rate news. International interest in the prehistoric flea and its extraordinary discovery was reaching its zenith when, one day, an infuriated scholar, an expert in the field, branded it a gross leg pull. The author of the hoax was none other than Jaroslav Hašek, who had presented his tale to the public so skilfully and gravely that even critical readers were deceived.
Astrid Baecklund‐Ehler, 1964. “The Missing Years in the Life of Jaroslav Hašek.” Scando-Slavica 10 [1]: 94–101
Bæcklund‐Ehler (1908-1976) was more correct than she knew: Jaroslav Hašek's hoaxes were indeed successful, and even critical readers were deceived. This does not mean that the respected Swedish scholar invented the account; she surely drew it from a Czech source, probably Josef Lada. Her paper appeared in 1964, before critical studies of Hašek's writings in Svět zvířat existed.
The flea also found its way into the afterword to the latest German translation of The Good Soldier Švejk (2014), in a biographical section on Hašek written by the translator.
...der die Entdeckung eines urzeitlichen Flohs (»Palleopsyla Kuniana«) durch einen Ingenieur Kún, und führte dabei sogar eine eigene pseudowissenschaftliche Terminologie ein.
Antonín Brousek, 2014. “Die Abenteuer des guten Soldaten Švejk im Weltkrieg.” S: 960
This may appear amusing, but one should not be overly condescending towards critical readers such as Parrott, Bæcklund‐Ehler and numerous others. That scholars and laypeople alike have taken Hašek's bait does not imply that they are particularly gullible. Rather, it testifies to Jaroslav Hašek's skill as a hoaxer "ne plus ultra"...
Literature
Palaeopsylla klebsiana, Schriften der Physikalisch-Ökonomischen Gesellschaft zu KönigsbergDr. Alfons Dampf,15.12.1910[a]
This article traces a little-known episode from Hašek's tumultuous life, set in a region that the author of The Good Soldier Švejk seldom visited. In Turnov, on 27 October 1912, Hašek caused a scandal by ridiculing the Serbs, who were fighting the First Balkan War at the time. This took place before an audience with strong sympathies for Serbia, loyalties that Hašek himself no doubt shared. It remains a mystery, then, why he chose to foul his own nest so thoroughly. Was it a clumsy attempt at humour? A simple urge to provoke? Was he drunk? Or was it sheer mischief and recklessness? Any combination of these factors is possible, but together they sum up Jaroslav Hašek. Nothing was sacred to him, not even his convictions. Like a child, he rarely considered the consequences of his actions, and repeatedly ended up undermining himself.
Hůla's research
Břetislav Hůla reporting to Zdena Ančík.
LA-PNP,24.4.1951
This incident first caught my eye in 2015, when I was studying the correspondence between Břetislav Hůla and Zdena Ančík. In it, the former recorded (and handed over) the results of his impressive research, conducted between 1948 and 1951, an effort for which he has received scant credit. Alois Hatina (1886-1940), a former politician and friend of Jaroslav Hašek, told Hůla about a scandal that erupted when Hašek spoke at the Turnov branch of Sokol, describing the low cultural level and poor hygiene of the South Slavs. One Bohuslav Novotný corroborated the story, which allegedly prompted an indignant report in a local newspaper. According to Hatina, Hašek was hounded from the premises and even beaten[e].
The diligent Břetislav Hůla traced the story's origins by searching local newspapers. Hašek was invited to speak at an "evening of Czech humour" arranged by the women's section of Sokol on Sunday, 27 October 1912. Unfortunately, Hůla never found the alleged indignant report on the event.
In biographies
The Sokol building in Turnov, scene of Jaroslav Hašek's 'performance' on 27 October 1912.
In the standard biography of Hašek, Toulavé house (The Wandering Gosling), Radko Pytlík mentions this curious episode. The local chapter of Sokol invited Hašek to speak on behalf of Strana mírného pokroku v mezích zákona, but he failed to live up to expectations and left the audience unimpressed. Worse still, he provoked them by mocking the Serbs, who were then fighting the First Balkan War, and allegedly made derogatory comments about social and hygienic conditions in the Balkans. In the end, local Sokol members chased him across the garden restaurant.
Later, Pytlík provided slightly contradictory information about the incident[d], relocating it to Náchod, while other biographers seem to have overlooked it altogether (Cecil Parrott does not mention it). Radko Pytlík's account draws on Břetislav Hůla's research, but also appears to use other sources.
31. října 1912, v době balkánské války, účinkoval například na akademii ženského odboru Sokola v Turnově jako řečník Strany mírného pokroku. Nesplnil však očekávání, publikum nepobavil. Zesměšňoval však dočasné vítězství Srbů a mluvil o ubohých sociálních a hygienických poměrech na Balkáně. Místními Sokoly byl hnán přes celou zahradní restaurací, dokonce prý inzultován.
As historical newspapers have become more widely available through digitisation, it is now possible to recount the episode in greater detail and correct inaccuracies in Pytlík's books and Hatina's account. Let us therefore reconstruct the events from newspaper reports published around the time.
An evening of Czech humour
Advert for the evening of Czech humour.
Listy pojizerské,20.10.1912
On 20 October 1912Listy pojizerské, a local newspaper in Turnov, announced that the women's section of the Sokol would arrange an "evening of Czech humour" the following week. A group of literati were invited, with Hašek billed as the main attraction (a). He was given two timeslots under the heading Causerie dobrodružstvi ze života autorova. Among the other participants were Josef Mach and Karel Pelant, both associated with Hašek's Strana mírného pokroku v mezích zákona. The session was due to start at 7:30 PM [b].
Young Czech indignation
Krakonoš,10.11.1912
Listy pojizerské does not seem to have covered the event. The rival newspaper Krakonoš, a regional mouthpiece of Mladočeši in Jičín, did so, but only two weeks later[c].
At Sokolovna, Hašek grabbed the headlines for all the wrong reasons. According to Krakonoš, his first stage act fell completely flat; the audience did not appreciate his craving for recognition. Worse was to follow. In the second part, he told a story about a Serbian shepherd who became a colonel, mocking the South Slavs who were then fighting the First Balkan War.
This went down badly with an audience strongly sympathetic to Serbia. The story provoked an uproar, and many people left the hall in disgust. When he began another story, he was asked to stop, but responded by swearing at the audience. The disturbance continued until Hašek left the stage and the building. Only the mayor's intervention calmed the deeply offended crowd.
Lebt in Prag ein tschechischer Schriftsteller...
Bohemia,31.10.1912
Krakonoš was not the first to respond. On 31 October 1912, four days after the infamous event, Bohemia published its version of the story [f]. It was even more colourful and ironic than Krakonoš's report. The piece was unsigned, but its style bears the traces of Egon Erwin Kisch, the soon-to-be-famous "raging reporter" who worked for the newspaper at the time.
It is unknown where Bohemia obtained its information, but the content suggests that Hašek himself may have had a hand in it. Allegedly, the unfortunate speaker was pelted with food from the buffet and driven from the stage; matters might have ended badly had the organiser dr. Práčník not protected him and called the k.k. Landwehr guards. Hašek and Kisch were friends, and the story may have passed from one to the other over a beer or two... The anonymous writer in Bohemia also added an ironic anti-Czech twist, wording unlikely to have come from Hašek.
More indignation
Krakonoš,24.11.1912
Bohemia's ironic article did not go unnoticed: a Salzburg newspaper even picked it up and reproduced it word for word[g]. More significantly, Krakonoš returned to the incident, evidently prompted by the news in Bohemia. It printed a complete translation before debunking parts of the account.
Hašek had not been chased by an angry crowd. He had been asked, firmly but tactfully, to leave both the stage and the building, without any of the drama described by Bohemia. He was also berated for ridiculing the Serbs who were fighting a war at the time. Moreover, Krakonoš criticized him for making fun of Turnov. The paper thus clearly assumed that Hašek was Bohemia's source of information [h].
Other variations
In 1923 České Slovo published a note that probably refers to the same event, but gives a very different account. The organisers waited in vain for Hašek to arrive, then announced that his talk had been cancelled. A voice was then heard from the back: "but I am after all here, I have been sitting here drinking since the morning!" [i]
For most readers of The Good Soldier Švejk, Hašek's use of anabasis as a chapter heading in [II.2] seems unremarkable. After all, it is just one of the novel's many references to ancient Greek and Roman history. Some literary scholars, however, regard it as significant because they believe Hašek used the term to mock the post-war enthusiasm surrounding the Legions and their so-called Siberian anabasis. This article traces the origins of that hypothesis and argues that Hašek's choice of the word anabasis has a much simpler explanation.
Břetislav Hůla was probably the first to suggest in writing that Hašek used anabasis as a subtle dig at the Czechoslovak Legions (1951). His conclusion was published in 1953 in a collection of explanations that formed part of a new edition of Švejk.
In his notes to the 1953 edition of The Good Soldier Švejk, Zdena Ančík treated the connection as self-evident, and others have repeated this view over the years. Literary scholars Antonín Měšťan (1983)[a], Antoni Kroh (Polish translator of The Good Soldier Švejk, 2002), and Abigail Weil (2019)[b] are among those who maintain that Hašek's use of "anabasis" was a dig at the Legions, and that he had their so-called Siberian anabasis from Kiev to Vladivostok in mind when writing Švejk's Budějovice Anabasis in 1921. Until 2020, a summary of Kroh's interpretation even appeared in the endnotes to Zenny Sadlon's translation of The Good Soldier Švejk.
The hypothesis cannot be ruled out entirely, since we have no record of Hašek's intentions as he wrote. Even so, one would expect it to be supported by quotations from the author or from people close to him at the time (from 1921 onwards). However, no such source has been identified, and there is scant evidence that contemporary readers saw Švejk's anabasis as a dig at the Legions. The discussion below examines how the claim arose and developed, focusing on the only serious attempt to substantiate it, by Antoni Kroh.
Fiala
This otherwise excellent book contains far-fetched claims about Hašek and his use of the term anabasis.
In 2004, Professor Jiří Fiala (Olomouc) published a thorough analysis of "anabasis" and other motifs from The Good Soldier Švejk[e]. He notes that Zdena Ančík, in the explanatory notes to the 1953 edition of the book, concludes that anabasis "obviously is an ironic reference to the Legions and their fight against the Red Army, by nationalistic novel writers who coined the term Siberian anabasis"[1]. Fiala compares this with later explanations from Radko Pytlík[2] and Milan Hodík[3] and observes that these scholars do not draw such conclusions. Fiala ultimately leaves the question open. He then reproduces an excerpt from the book O Szwejku i o nas by Kroh[4], from a chapter entitled "Two Generals".
As translated by Fiala, Kroh's text provides the starting point for the analysis that follows. Kroh places Rudolf Medek and Jaroslav Hašek side by side in the context of the anabasis, but even the title Two Generals raises doubts. Medek eventually attained the rank of general (1931), but linking Hašek with that rank is absurd.
Kroh's conclusion is more questionable still. It gives the impression that the hostility Hašek encountered in Czechoslovakia after returning from Russia in 1920 was caused by the publication of The Good Soldier Švejk's "anabasis" chapter, which supposedly unleashed a wave of criticism, insults and harassment.
Rudolf Medek lashing out at Hašek, two years before the anabasis chapter appeared in Švejk.
Československý deník,6.4.1918
There is no denying that Hašek was subjected to vicious attacks and insults, but the worst came while he was still in Russia, more than a year before he wrote Švejk's anabasis. In an article published shortly after Jaroslav Hašek left the Legions, Medek launched a cruel character assassination[c], and worse followed. In early 1919, Jaroslav Colman-Cassius wrote an obituary titled Zrádce (Traitor)[d], apparently believing Hašek to be dead. Cassius was no less unforgiving than Medek: he described Hašek as having "small chubby hands" and called him a clown and a drunkard, a man without a spine or any character.
Extracts from Cassius' nasty obituary. Hašek read it in Irkutsk in 1920 and was deeply hurt.
Venkov,19.1.1919
In trying to connect Czech society's hostility towards Hašek with the anabasis chapter, Kroh cites the phrase drunkard with chubby hands as an example. The expression was indeed used, but it predates The Good Soldier Švejk by a year. Hašek coined it in 1920 in Irkutsk, in response to the obituary mentioned above, which he obtained while still in Russia[5]. His reply was the story Dušička Jaroslava Haška vypravuje (The Little Soul of Jaroslav Hašek Tells), where the insult is quoted. The story was printed soon after Hašek returned to Prague[f], thus many months before he wrote the "anabasis" chapter (autumn 1921).
Kroh's references to Rudolf Medek and his five "Anabase" novels are equally irrelevant chronologically: apart from the first, they appeared after Hašek's death [6]. As we have seen, Medek attacked Hašek fiercely in 1918, so those attacks cannot be connected with the publication of the "anabasis" chapter three years later. According to Zdeněk Matěj Kuděj, the two met in Prague in 1921 and were reconciled after a heated encounter. Kroh's attempt to link the spiteful attacks on Jaroslav Hašek with the publication of Švejk's 'budějovická anabasis' therefore falls apart when set against the timeline.
Weil
Výbor ze spisů Xenofontových, Anabase, Kyrupaideie, Apomnemoneumat, Hellenik a Symposia,1910
A welcome addition to haškology appeared in 2019: a generally insightful doctoral thesis by Abigail Weil[b], published by Harvard University. It devotes considerable space to the motif of anabasis and Hašek's alleged dig at the Legions.
Whereas Kroh at least tries to explain, albeit unconvincingly, the connection with the Legions' anabasis, Weil simply assumes it. She mentions neither Antonín Měšťan nor Kroh's book nor Fiala's discussion of it, so we must assume that she was unaware of these works when she wrote her thesis.
Her belief in the hypothesis may have been inspired or reinforced by Zdena Ančík (in reality Břetislav Hůla) and his comment in the 1953 edition of The Good Soldier Švejk. Weil explicitly refers to this as "the standard edition".
Ančík
What, then, of Břetislav Hůla's explanation from 1951, published by Zdena Ančík in 1953 (17th edition, Státní nakladatelství)? It was written at a time when anything that might cast the pre-war "bourgeois" republic and the Legions in a bad light was frowned upon. It is also striking that by 1955 (22nd edition, Práce), the same Ančík had removed the reference to the Legions and their anabasis. Nor does a completely different set of notes by Milan Jakovič (26th edition, Odeon, 1968) allude to "anabasis and the Legions".
Xenophon on the curriculum
Xenophon was on the Greek language curriculum when Hašek was a student at the gymnasium in Žitná ulice.
Devátá výroční zpráva cís. král. vyššího gymnasia v Žitné ulici v Praze za školní rok 1896
The term "anabasis" was by no means unfamiliar in Czech literature, even before the wave of legionnaire writing reached Czechoslovakia in the 1920s. One of the teachers at the gymnasium in Žitná ulice, where Hašek studied from 1893 to 1898, was the celebrated author Alois Jirásek. He taught geography and history there, and in 1886 wrote a book on the subject of "anabasis". Xenophon's magnum opus had been translated into Czech some time before.
Classical Greek was taught at the gymnasium, and Xenophon was on the syllabus. However, the subject was introduced in the fifth form, which Hašek never reached, as he was forced to leave in the fourth. Jirásek did not teach the young Jaroslav's classes (Ia, IIa, IIIa, and IVa), despite Václav Menger and others claiming otherwise [7]. Even so, Xenophon's place on the syllabus suggests that he was well known among educated Czechs. Greek was also taught in the third form, so Xenophon's name may have been introduced already at that stage. Anabasis was widely used around the world as a textbook for classical Greek.
Hašek and Xenophon
Xenophon and his Anabasis were well known to Hašek five years before he wrote Švejk.
Čechoslovan,25.9.1916
Although Hašek may not have studied Xenophon as a subject at school, there is no doubt that he possessed a sound general knowledge of, and interest in, the history of ancient Greece. This is already apparent in the introduction to The Good Soldier Švejk and evident through his entire literary output, not only in his famous novel.
More importantly, we have direct evidence that Jaroslav Hašek's awareness of Xenophon was unrelated to the Legions' anabasis. In Dopis z fronty (Letter from the Front)[h], published in 1916, both Xenophon and his Anabasis are mentioned. Hašek could hardly have been mocking a Siberian anabasis that was still two years in the future.
This leaves the suspicion that the mentioned scholars didn't notice that Hašek's use of the term anabasis and his knowledge of Xenophon predated The Good Soldier Švejk. Even before the war, he mentioned Xenophon (but not the Anabasis) in one of his stories [g]. Moreover, the Greek author is referred to at least three times in Svět zvířat while Hašek was its editor (1909-1910).
Conclusion
Hašek's pre-war story in Svět, the entries in Svět zvířat and the Letter from the Front mentioned above do not, of course, prove that he didn't intend to make fun of the Legions. They do show, however, that he easily could have written about Xenophon and his Anabasis without any ironic intent, just like he did in 1916.
We searched digitised newspapers from 1921 and 1922 for signs that writers or critics connected Švejk's anabasis with the Legions. Extending the search to 1950 and including the substantial inter-war legionnaire literature proved fruitless as well. As noted earlier, the 1953 endnotes to The Good Soldier Švejk claimed that Hašek wrote the anabasis chapter as a slur on the Legions. That explanation disappeared from the 1955 edition. The likely reason is that the publishers had ceased to accept the hypothesis. Perhaps by then they had discovered Letter from the Front from 1916? Had the theory possessed any substance, the communist publishers would surely have exploited Švejk's 'budějovicke anabasis' to the full.
Sergey Soloukh's notes
1. At the time, "anabasis" was a standard term for any long and arduous journey by armed men. It was widely used, for example, in Russian literature about the Great War and the Civil War (by generals Denikin and Krasnov and by the writer and literary critic Shklovsky), without any connection to the Cz.Legion. The word was therefore common in war-torn Russia and did not refer specifically to any particular Legion undertaking. Indeed, the Cz.Legion used it as a conventional term for "the journey of armed men", rather than as a term originating in, and uniquely associated with, its own movement.
2. Had the chapter been understood at the time as an insult to the Cz.Legion or an attempted joke at its expense, this would certainly have been noted and discussed in the Czech press. We know that it was not. This supports my first point: "anabasis" was not then regarded as a term specific to the depiction of the Cz.Legion's adventure. It was a commonly used expression for any "journey of armed men". Only 30 years later was it recast as a unique term for the Legion adventure, for the purposes of communist propaganda.
Dva generálové (extr.). Antoni Kroh, transl. Jiří Fiala
Slovo „anabáze" mělo tehdy v češtině jediný, a to samozřejmý význam: znamenalo prodírání se česko- slovenských legií z Ukrajiny přes Sibiř do Vladivostoku. Kapesní slovník cizích slov (vydaný v Praze roku 1971) již objasňuje toto slovo subtilním a diskrétním způsobem: „Anabáze — probíjení se velkých vojenských oddílů do vlasti." Legenda „anabáze", zvláště živá ve dvacátých letech, byla živena a pěstována po celé období meziválečného Československa. Rudolf Medek je současně jeden z jejích tvůrců i její i hrdina. A nyní si připomeňme kapitolu Švejkova budějovická anabáze (II, 2). Švejk jel spolu s nadporučíkem Lukášem vlakem z Prahy do Budějovic. Po incidentu se záchrannou brzdou byl vysazen v Táboře a uvězněn. Když se ukázalo, že nemá peníze ani dokumenty, podporučík sloužící na nádraží mu přikázal, aby šel do Budějovic pěšky. „A čert ví, jak se to stalo, že dobrý voják Švejk místo na jih k Budějovicím šel pořád" rovně na západ. Není známo, jak se to stalo, ale je známo, že se to stalo nevědomky, poněvadž Švejk byl přece na západ." Není známo, jak se to stalo, ale je známo, že se to stalo nevědomky, poněvadž Švejk byl přece dobrý voják, žádný dezertér; on vskutku chtěl dorazit do Budějovic! Proč tam tedy nešel přímo, jen pořád kroužil a kroužil dokola? Protože byl idiot? Mnoho polských milovníků Švejka, jichž jsem se dotazoval, to právě tak vysvětluje. Ale kapitole Švejkova budějovická anabáze je možné porozumět teprve tehdy, když si uvědomíme, kdy a za jakých okolností byla napsána. Je to jedna z nejskvostnějších pasáží románu. Jako každé velké umělecké dílo se vymyká jednoznačným výkladům. Můžeme ji označit za panorama českého venkova, zvěčněním lidových typů a tehdejších nálad. Je to rovněž radostný hymnus ke cti životu, nespoutaný smích jakoby z Rabelaise. Rovněž groteska. Lze tam najít reminiscence na autorova dobrodružství. Ale to vše je málo. Švejkova budějovická anabáze je současně politický pamflet, bravurní publicistika na aktuální téma. Hašek jako první propíchl balon, který Medek se svými věrnými tak zdatně nafukoval. Přirovnání k balonu není trefné, problém vězel mnohem hlouběji; ve dvacátých letech nebyla legenda „anabáze" nafukovaným balonem, ale velikou radostí znovuzrozeného státu, důvodem hrdosti, léčbou několikasetletého komplexu zotročence, reakcí na nedávná pokořování. A tu do samého středu národní slavnosti vchází Švejk, který velice touží dorazit do Budějovic, ale dostává se kamsi úpině jinam a čert ví, proč se tak děje... Vybuchl skandál — zvlášť když autora obklopovala aura bolševického komisaře, a co horšího, kapitola byla znamenitě napsána... Na Haška se sesypaly přívlastky jako nihilista, dekadent, pijan s opuchlýma rukama; velké obžaloby ze zrady národa i drobné šikany. A současně — první entuziastické recenze.
Although Zdena Ančík is credited with the explanations, they were almost entirely Břetislav Hůla's work. He passed his typewritten notes to Ančík in 1951, and Ančík made only minor edits before publishing them in 1953 and, in a slightly amended form, again in 1955. The 1955 edition omits the claim that Hašek intended the "anabasis" chapter as a dig at the Legions.
The story was first printed in Večerní Právo lidu on 31 December 1920, but was dated 25 August, so it must have been written in Irkutsk. Hašek must therefore already have read his own obituary. It was the first story he published after returning to Prague.
Jaroslav Hašek had to repeat the fourth year and finally left the gymnasium in February 1898. Jirásek taught class IVa during that school year, so Václav Menger may still be correct.
Many admirers of The Good Soldier Švejk may be unaware that the good soldier first appeared on the literary stage several years before the First World War. Švejk made his debut in 1911, in five short stories published in the magazines Karikatury and Dobrá kopa. The first appeared in Josef Lada's magazine Karikatury on 22 May 1911; this date is often treated as Švejk's official birthday. The five pieces were later collected in Dobrý voják Švejk a jiné podivné historky (The Good Soldier Švejk and other strange stories), part of Hejda & Tuček's series Nová knihovna humoru a satiry. The book was published in the autumn of 1911, soon confiscated, and finally reissued in 1912.
An early predecessor
Národní listy,28.2.1902
Even before The Good Soldier Švejk entered the world, Jaroslav Hašek had written stories with an army setting. The first appeared as early as 28 February 1902 in Národní listy, under the name Jan Hašek. The budding author was then only nineteen and still a student at the Czechoslavonic Commercial Academy (see Obchodní akademie) in Prague. A few more pieces on the same theme followed over the next five years.
Then, on 30 January 1907, the anarchist paper Nová Omladina published a tale that would have struck a chord with future readers of The Good Soldier Švejk. It was called Povídka o hodném švědském vojákovi (The story of a kind Swedish soldier). In this grotesque episode, a Swedish soldier on guard duty at 25 degrees below zero mutilates himself to avoid falling asleep and freezing to death. Yet death holds no fear for him: after all, he will perish honourably for the sake of King Oscar and the dear fatherland. He values army property more highly than his own miserable life and remains loyally devoted to his officer. Although this nameless soldier says nothing before he dies, he is clearly recognisable to readers of Švejk: he meets death with a joyful heart for his king. There is one important distinction, however: the Swedish soldier dies forlorn and miserable, whereas Švejk survives by his wits…
Five short stories
Hašek's concept for the company idiot.
According to Jarmila Haškova, her husband conceived the idea of a literary figure described as Pitomec v kumpanii (The Idiot in the Company) sometime in the spring of 1911. Hašek had scribbled a few lines on a scrap of paper when he arrived home in a sorry state; the text was barely legible. Jarmila threw it in the bin, but Hašek searched for it frantically and managed to retrieve it.
On 22 May 1911, the first of the five stories appeared in Karikatury, so the idea for the character—jotted down on that piece of paper—probably took shape shortly beforehand. The name Švejk also appeared in a couple of plays that Hašek co-wrote later that year. In one of them, Švejk plays the servant of the Holy Roman Emperor (and Czech King) Charles I.
In this 1911 incarnation, Švejk is a simple, good-natured figure, just as eager to serve his sovereign as his Swedish counterpart had been four years earlier. Although he shares certain traits with the famous character from the novel, he lacks the latter's sting and subtlety (any intended sting would presumably have been snuffed out by the censors). The style differs too: there are, for instance, no anecdotes. All five tales are set in Trento (Trient), in South Tyrol, where the Dual Monarchy built a huge fortress complex to forestall a potential Italian attack up the Adigevalley. As in the novel, Švejk creates havoc by following orders to the letter. Hašek may already have intended him to be subversive, but this is much less explicit than in the later novel.
The five 1911 stories can be summarised briefly:
I. The Good Soldier Švejk
The first story about Švejk, reprinted in Chicago!
Šípy,8.7.1911
In the first story[a], Švejk crosses the border into Italy, where he captures a donkey and a machine-gun. Before this, he is imprisoned several times. His standard phrase ‘Poslušně hlásím’ (I dutifully report) is already in place, as is the use of colloquial Czech in dialogue. The story was reprinted in a couple of Czech-American newspapers that summer.
II. The Good Soldier Švejk provides wine for the mass
The second story[b] opens with the author's musings on military chaplains. Then, as in the novel, a field chaplain—in this case Augustinus Kleinschrodt—‘recruits’ Švejk. He receives his marching orders from his feldkurát and sets out from the camp in Castel-Nuovo to buy wine from ‘Vöslava’ (present-day Bad Vöslau) in Austria. Švejk obeys to the letter, travelling by train up the Adigevalley and through numerous tunnels to fulfil his duty. What follows is an epic rail journey all the way to Bad Vöslau and back via Graz, Zagreb, Trieste and Trento. On the way, he is arrested and taken to the garrison in Korneuburg.
III. The Good Soldier Švejk and the superarbitration procedure
Švejk capturing an Italian donkey.
In the third story[c], Švejk doggedly resists attempts to superarbitrate him, a theme carried over into the opening passages of the novel.
IV. The Good Soldier Švejk learns how to handle gun cotton
In the fourth story[d], Švejk blows up a powder magazine while smoking his familiar pipe. He is the sole survivor.
V. The Good Soldier Švejk operates in aeroplanes
Finally, in the fifth story[e], Švejk joins the fledgling k.u.k Air Force and accidentally flies off to Libya, with his officer on board. Before reaching this point, he has crashed his plane into the Danube. According to the tale, the entire Austrian air force consists of 18 airships (which are impossible to operate) and five aeroplanes.
The name
Deputy Josef Švejk re-elected from district 58, Kutná Hora
Prager Tagblatt,14.6.1911
Why Jaroslav Hašek chose the name Švejk remains unknown, but the most likely inspiration was the agrarian deputy Josef Švejk. According to Radko Pytlík, the claim goes back to Václav Menger. Elections to the Reichsrat took place in June 1911, and his name featured frequently in the newspapers.
Another frequently suggested inspiration is Josef SVEJK, who actually lived next to U kalicha. This was not until June 1912, however, so it is highly unlikely that Hašek knew him in 1911. It is also worth noting that the five stories never mention the first name Josef, nor associate the character with U kalicha.
Hašek and the army, pre-war
Kniha o Švejkovi, s. 133
Radko Pytlík, 1982
Hašek never served in the army before World War I, and this is reflected in the five stories. His details rarely fit reality, in stark contrast to the wealth of military fact in Dobrý voják Švejk v zajetí (1917) and The Good Soldier Švejk (1921). Few, if any, of the officers' names appear in the Schematismus; geographically, he sets every story in Trento, a city he probably visited, though hardly as a soldier. In one of the tales, he even mentions Infanterieregiment Nr. 104, a unit that did not yet exist.
Radko Pytlík concludes that the stories were most likely inspired by the experiences of Hašek's friends, notably Josef Mach, who served in Trento as a one-year volunteer. Trento also regularly hosted military units recruited from Bohemia, so many people may have passed their experiences on to the future author of The Good Soldier Švejk. Units from Infanterieregiment Nr. 91, the regiment Hašek eventually joined, were never garrisoned in Trento.
Given his age group, Hašek should have been called up on 1 October 1904, but by the 9th he had already published a story about visiting Ladislav Hájek in Domažlice on his way back from Switzerland and Bavaria. He had most probably been deemed unfit for service in April, when the military examining boards convened. The likely cause was a heart condition. Hašek was not finally passed fit for service until after the outbreak of war in 1914.
Hašek's seal of confession in Reichsrat
Český svět,13.10.1911
On 29 November 1911, one of Jaroslav Hašek's stories from Dobrý voják Švejk a jiné podivné historky became the subject of an interpellation in the Chamber of Deputies of the Reichsrat. On 18 November 1911, K.k. Landesgericht als Preßgericht in Prague had ordered the book to be confiscated.
The issue was not the five stories about Švejk, but Zpovědní tajemství (The Seal of Confession), which had been deemed blasphemous. A group of deputies led by Fresl protested to the Minister of Justice, pointing out that it had already appeared in České Slovo in 1908 without being censored.
The eighteen signatories were: eleven from Česká strana národně sociální (Fresl, Vojna, Formánek, Klofáč, Choc, Stříbrný, Lisy, Konečný, Slavíček, Baxa, Šviha); three Czech independent progressives (Masaryk, Kalina, Prunar); two Czech agrarians (Masata, Bradač); and two Ukrainians (Breiter, Трильовський (Trylowskyj)). The agrarian deputy Josef Švejk, notably, did not sign it …
The complaint appears to have been heeded: the book was reprinted in 1912. The censored passages were marked with a note about the petition, but nothing seems to have been removed. The interpellation did not explicitly mention Hašek or the book's title.
Hašek's legendary Cynological Institute was a short-lived dog-trading firm founded by Hašek and his wife shortly after he left his post as editor of Svět zvířat. It matters in the context of The Good Soldier Švejk because Švejk's occupation as a dog dealer was largely inspired by his creator's brief career as proprietor of the “institute”.
Prager Tagblatt,16.11.1910
Světozor,21.4.1914
After his dismissal from Svět zvířat in 1910, Hašek established his dog-trading business under the imaginative name Kynologický ústav (Cynological Institute). From 16 November 1910 onwards, adverts appeared in Prager Tagblatt, Národní listy and Čech, offering purebred dogs at prices “half those” charged by the Hundeparks and breeding institutions — an obvious dig at his former employer on the hill above Klamovka (see Fuchsův psinec). One notice proclaimed the firm the only one of its kind in Central Europe and warned against “mix-ups”, no doubt another swipe at Fuchs.
From 24 November 1910, the rival responded with unusually verbose adverts, once again claiming to be world-famous and warning against mix-ups. On 27 November and throughout the following week, notices from the competing dog-sellers even appeared side by side in Prager Tagblatt. The advertising battle seems to have been short-lived, at least in the paper's pages: Hašek's last known entry was on 7 December, while his competitor continued placing adverts for the rest of the year before returning to the usual briefer notices.
The business was officially registered on 24 November in his wife Jarmila Hašková's name, at Košíře no. 1125, below Klamovka. It is unlikely, however, that the dogs could have been kept there, since the recently married couple lived in a flat.
By February 1911 the firm had gone bankrupt, and several accounts describe what happened. Josef Mach wrote that Hašek imported two hyenas from Hamburg for a circus that ultimately refused them; the loss on that deal was one reason the business collapsed. There are also reports of pedigrees being tampered with and of his agent Čížek stealing dogs — themes with obvious parallels in The Good Soldier Švejk. Mach confirms that Čížek was put on trial for dog theft.
The couple were also taken to court, but on 9 March 1912 their lawyer František Papoušek wrote to inform them that the proceedings had been discontinued.
In literature
Hašek himself immortalised the business in two near-identical stories, Můj obchod se psy and Kynologický ústav. The former was included in the 1915 book Můj obchod se psy a jiné humoresky. The volume has been reprinted several times, and the title story was even filmed. The narrative is vague about where the dogs were kept, but suggests that the kennel was “in the countryside”, a motif that also appears in The Good Soldier Švejk.
A study of The Good Soldier Švejk’s manuscript suggests that at least one person came close to having his name included in the famous novel, only to be left out at the last moment.
Study of the novel’s manuscript shows that the admiral came remarkably close to securing a place in it. In Hašek’s handwriting, the letters “a kon” appear after “Dževad paša”, but they have been crossed out, suggesting that the author changed his mind at the last moment. The “kon” is almost certainly the beginning of “kontredmirál”, the exact wording used in Kronika světové války.
It should also be noted that “Mertens” is a misspelling, and that in 1915 his rank was Vizeadmiral, not Konteradmiral (rear admiral). This German naval officer in Ottoman service was actually Johannes Merten (1857-1926). He retired in 1910, but after the outbreak of war took up a command in the Turkish army at the Dardanelles. He was also a well-known pilot; in 1912, newspapers referred to him as President of the German Airmen's Association.
Kaisermanövern were annual large-scale military exercises usually attended by the emperor, often alongside other members of the upper echelons of society. Foreign heads of state were sometimes invited too. The manoeuvres involved several branches of the armed forces and took place almost invariably in September. They generally lasted four days.
The Good Soldier Švejk mentions at least three manoeuvres, and Švejk takes part in all of them. They are, in order of appearance: Písek in 1910, Veszprém (undated) and Velké Meziříčí (undated).
The author also refers to a large exercise near Sopron in 1908, but the historical circumstances suggest that this was the same event as the one at Veszprém. The Velké Meziříčí manoeuvres took place in 1909 and were even reported in Svět zvířat.
Despite what Švejk told Wachtmeister Flanderka, no imperial exercises were held at Písek in 1910. That year, the Imperial Manoeuvres were scheduled for Upper Hungary (Slovakia), but were cancelled because of a regional outbreak of equine disease. South Bohemia hosted Kaisermanövern twice, partly in the Písek region: in 1905 and 1913.
In 1910, however, South Bohemia hosted the manoeuvres of 8. Korps, centred on Týn nad Vltavou, with activities also taking place around Písek. The 4th battalion of Infanterieregiment Nr. 91 took part in these exercises, so Švejk could theoretically have been involved.
Švejk participated in other manoeuvres too, including one near Mníšek, Hořovice and Drahenice (undated).
This play, entitled Z Karlína do Bratislavy za 365 dní in the original, was written in 1921, presumably towards the end of the year. It is a farce about a circuitous journey from Prague to Bratislava aboard the steamer Lanna, travelling via Europe's waterways. The work was first advertised in Tribuna[b], Prager Presse and Rudé právo on 30 December 1921, with the credited authors listed, literally, as follows: E.E. Kisch, Rossenvelt pres. U.S.A., J. Hašek, Jules Werenes, E.A. Longen. It was staged at Adria, the same theatre that had hosted Emil Artur Longen's theatrical version of The Good Soldier Švejk on 1 November 1921, the first production of its kind. In later adverts, “Werenes” and “Rossenvelt” were omitted, for obvious reasons.
The manuscript shows that the script was approved by the police on 29 December 1921 and that the censors raised some objections. Nevertheless, it underwent no major changes. Emil Artur Longen, Jaroslav Hašek and Egon Erwin Kisch are listed as the authors[a].
Two familiar names from The Good Soldier Švejk feature prominently: Offiziersdiener Mikulášek and pubkeeper Rampa. They appear in the novel at roughly the same time as the play was written. Here, Mikulášek is a stoker and the central character, while Rampa is portrayed much as he is in the novel. In one scene, Mikulášek gets drunk in Rampa's pub.
The term Einjährig-Freiwilliger (one-year volunteer) has caused some confusion in haškology. Jaroslav Hašek held the status and privileges of a one-year volunteer, leading some to conclude that he must have volunteered for army service[1]. As far as we know, this was not the case: had he volunteered for wartime service, he would have been described as Kriegs-Freiwilliger, not simply Einjährig-Freiwilliger.
Heerwesen, Selbstverlag Hugo Schmid, 1916
One-year volunteer status was an entitlement granted to young men who had completed middle or higher education. It allowed them to serve in the army for one year instead of the compulsory three (from 1912, two years).
The system was created in 1868, modelled on Prussia, and remained in operation until 1918. Its aim was to save the state money while limiting the disruption to recruits’ careers. The “volunteer” element was that soldiers could, though they did not have to, attend a course during their term of service in order to become reserve officers. Until 1912, anyone who failed the reserve-officer examination had to serve a second year; this requirement was abolished that year. A one-year volunteer could also apply to serve outside his home unit, but such requests were granted only if manpower levels allowed.
Eligibility required the recruit to have completed an eight-year middle school (gymnasium, “Realschule”, teachers’ academy, commercial academy or similar). Candidates had to apply for one-year volunteer status and pass an examination. Anyone convicted of property crimes or immorality automatically forfeited the right to one-year service.
Thus Reserveoffizier-Schulen were institutions where one-year volunteers trained to become reserve officers. Jaroslav Hašek may therefore seem mistaken in using the terms “one-year volunteer school” or “school for one-year volunteers”, but he was not. Until the army reforms of 1912, these establishments were officially called Einjährig-Freiwilligenschule. Obsolete terms often persist for years after a change (see, for instance, Salmova ulice).
The first scholar to study Hašek's work at Svět zvířat seriously was Břetislav Hůla. The result was the book Malá zoologická zahrada[a] (The Small Zoological Garden). Published in 1950, it listed Zdena Ančík as the sole editor, although Hůla had undoubtedly done the groundwork. Unfortunately, the volume says nothing about the origins of the stories. This article addresses that omission with a comprehensive bibliography and a critical examination of Hůla's "discoveries".
The Small Zoological Garden,1950
Most of the book consists of Jaroslav Hašek's animal-related stories from various publications. It contains 29 signed stories (nine from Svět zvířat) and 17 short, unsigned notices (all from Svět zvířat). Eleven appeared in the series Sebrané spisy Jaroslava Haška during the interwar years, while Břetislav Hůla identified the remainder after World War II.
The book is illustrated by Josef Lada and includes an introduction by Zdena Ančík whose main purpose is to extol the virtues of "Hašek the Communist".
Haškologists barking up the wrong tree by claiming that Hašek discovered new species.
Ančík does, however, devote a few lines to matters relevant to the book's content. Unfortunately, he goes badly astray by claiming that it mentions seven supposedly unknown species, presented as Hašek's zoological inventions... In fact, all seven were known to science by the turn of the century. Presenting the blue whale and the tyrannosaurus as Jaroslav Hašek's "discoveries" displays an astounding degree of zoological illiteracy on the part of the editor(s). Of the seven creatures, only Hašek's flea can, in a limited sense, be said to have been "discovered" by Hašek.
The main stories
Hltoun strašlivý (the terrible guzzler) was a creature that was first brought to life in Karikatury in July 1911, nine months after Hašek left Svět zvířat. In the magazine there is no trace of such a creature.
Karikatury,31.7.1911
The twenty-nine main stories are mostly works of fiction by Hašek. Identifying them required little effort, since they appear in Jaroslav Hašek's official bibliography[d]. There is little doubt that he wrote all of them, although some bear pseudonyms and others are unsigned. In those cases, scholars established authorship by analysing the texts, chiefly through Břetislav Hůla's efforts. A complete list appears in the links section at the end of this article.
Among these twenty-nine are two stories about Hašek's time as editor of Svět zvířat, written relatively soon after he left the magazine[ka1][ko1]. They are significant because they helped launch several legends about Hašek and Svět zvířat, myths that survive to this day (2025). Even then, Hašek embroidered his experiences at the magazine, writing about "discoveries" never seen in Svět zvířat and distorting other details.
Readers of The Good Soldier Švejk will notice parallels with Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek's tales on the train to Bruck, such as his claim that the animal world needed enriching with new species. In these pieces, Hašek asserted that he had written about imaginary animals in Svět zvířat, including creatures such as the werewolf and the terrible guzzler. He even had the cheek to claim existing animals such as the sulphur-bellied whale as his own invention, another parallel with Marek.
Brief unsigned reports
Drunkenness amongst animals. This entry may be the work of Hašek (or he translated it) but is probable not mystification. Many stories about animals and alcohol circulated, then as now. In the bibliography the entry is classed as debatable authorship.
Svět zvířat,1.8.1909
The unsigned items from Svět zvířat were much harder to identify, particularly those not printed during Hašek's periods as editor. The reports invariably appeared in the feature column "From around the world". Seven of the seventeen were published by Svět zvířat during his two spells as editor. The 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912 and 1913 volumes are available in searchable digital form, making these seven reports straightforward to locate and date.
The remaining ten items had to be sought in paper volumes, making the search time-consuming. The 1900, 1901, 1904, 1905, 1906 and 1907 volumes were browsed manually, while dr. Martin Dvořák supplied scanned (non-searchable) copies of those for 1908 and 1911.
The article Moderní lov velryb (Modern whale hunting) was taken from the German magazine Über land und Meer and was probably translated by Hašek. The photos were also cut from the original article. Thus, the sulphur-bellied whale was not discovered by Hašek.
Svět zvířat,1.6.1909
The table makes clear that very little can be attributed to Hašek, and that the seven species Ančík says he discovered were all known to science when the reports appeared in Svět zvířat.
Furthermore, it is reasonable to conclude that four[z10][z11][z12][z14] of the seven stories from Hašek's period as editor are not his work, since they had appeared elsewhere before being printed in Svět zvířat[s04][s05][s06][s07].
Nor were the six items from 1905 written by Hašek: as far as we know, he had nothing to do with the journal until November 1908. At least three [z04][z07][z15] of those six reports also originated in other publications, further excluding him as their author.
After examining the issue of 1 September 1911, the editors of Malá zoologická zahrada attributed two stories to Jaroslav Hašek [z01][z06], even though he was not associated with the magazine at that time. Hašek undoubtedly contributed to one of them, the famous Hašek's flea. The other snippet had already appeared elsewhere [s09]. Thus, twelve of the seventeen items are ultimately "false positives"; one remains unidentified [z09], and one was slightly "adapted" by Hašek [s08]. Another is definitely his: it appeared in the "Merry Corner" column while he edited Svět zvířat and was even signed J.H.[z03]. The remaining two reports, [z05][z13], are unverified and were probably written by Hašek (or at least selected and translated by him).
Sensationalism
Several volumes of Svět zvířat show that the magazine regularly published curious and sensational material, regardless of who was editing it. This was Svět zvířat's policy and surely contributed to its popularity. That is hardly surprising, since the journal belonged to the "popular science" category. Even quality dailies such as Prager Tagblatt carried such reports, and Svět zvířat contains several stories that had appeared in "Tagblatt" a week or two earlier, including the account of a newly discovered species in the Himalayas[s06][z12].
Hůla ignoring the time-line
The asvail bear (sloth bear) was not invented by Hašek and Svět zvířat wrote about this animal four years before he became the editor.
Svět zvířat,15.8.1905
In an unpublished note from 1950, Břetislav Hůla stated that there were reasons to believe Hašek had contributed to Svět zvířat at least four years before officially becoming an editor[c], in other words, from 1905. The basis for this conclusion is unknown, but he reinforces it by including six items from 1905, four of them printed in the issue of 15 August 1905.
Another problem with Hůla's selection is that some items had already appeared in Austro-German newspapers and could not have been written by Hašek or anyone else at Svět zvířat. They must have been selected and translated either by Fuchs or his co-editor Karel Ladislav Kukla.
Pytlík critical
In Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslav Haška (1973), Radko Pytlík noted that Břetislav Hůla had included reports and notes that Hašek did not write and could not have written, since they appeared before he became Svět zvířat's editor [b]. He and the other editors therefore omitted the stories from 1905, 1911 and early 1912. Nevertheless, some uncertainty remains, as the case of Hašek's flea demonstrates.
Jediným badatelem, který se touto oblastí Haškovy činnosti zabýval, byl
Břetislav Hůla. Hůla nebyl kritický k Haškovu humornému vyprávění a k
bohémské legendě; zaměřil se proto na výběr zpráv s tematikou „objevů“
nových zvířat a na anekdotické prvky, obsažené v lokálkách. Dospěl k
ničím neohraničenému celku, který zahrnoval i zprávy a noticky, jež Hašek
evidentně nepsal a psát nemohl, neboť byly otištěny v době, kdy ještě nebyl
redaktorem Světa zvířat. Radko Pytlík, 1973, "Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslav Haška"
Legends allowed to live on
By 1950, Hůla had gathered enough information to dispel some of the myths about Hašek and Svět zvířat created over the years by Jaroslav Hašek himself, Emil Artur Longen, Václav Menger and many others. He (or rather Zdena Ančík) chose not to do so, ensuring that scholars and ordinary readers continued, and still continue, to believe that Hašek once introduced fantasy creatures such as the vlkodlak (werewolf) and the hltoun strašlivý (the terrible gobbler) to the pages of Svět zvířat...
Ančík's seven wonders
In the introduction to Malá zoologická zahrada, Zdena Ančík claimed that Hašek "discovered" no less than seven species that could not be found in any natural science publications or encyclopedia. Let us therefore scrutinise the fantasy creatures of Hašek, Hůla, and Ančík one by one...
The article "Modern whale hunting" is translated from German, probably by Hašek. The sulphur-bellied whale is indeed mentioned (and even pictured) but there is nothing novel about this species as it is simply another term for the blue whale. The article was originally published in Über Land und Meer and written by Franz Winter[s04].
Asval is the native Marathi name of the sloth bear (Melursus ursinus), a small bear that lives on the Indian subcontinent. The terms asval or asvail are (and were) rarely used in European languages but appear in Brehm's Tierleben. The entry in Svět zvířat also supplies a picture of a bear that has been caught in a trap. This cannot, however, be Hašek's work as the article was written four years before he became an editor of Svět zvířat. Nor is there any indication that he ever published anything in the magazine before 1909.
That the tyrannosaurus is classified as a novelty is mildly surprising. A skeleton of this extinct giant was found already in 1900 and the article in Svět zvířat is about an exhibition of the skeleton in New York. The article is a direct translation[s07] from Arbeiter-Zeitung on 6 February 1910 and the article also appeared in other publications.
The prehistoric flea was not Hašek's invention[s08] but the renaming of it from Palaeopsylla Klebsiana to Palaeopsylla Kuniana was definitely his work.
This story is connected to the earthquake tragedy that hit Sicily and Calabria at the end of 1908. Remnants of humans and animals were later found in the stomach of a shark. Presumably, the victims had been washed into the sea and then devoured by the animal. News about the grotesque discovery was published worldwide and in at least one Prague newspaper[s05]. The entry in Svět zvířat seems to be a shortened version of what other periodicals wrote at the beginning of July 1909. That Hašek selected, translated and adapted the story is likely, but that he "invented" the Carcharodon carcharias species is nonsense.
About parrots on Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) that become drunk. This was not printed during Hašek's time at Svět zvířat and was also reported[s01] by Deutsches Volksblatt on 10 April 1904. Wrongly given the Latin name coryllis indicus, the correct term is loriculus.
Conclusion
Unfortunately, Malá zoologická zahrada contains many "false positives": stories and reports that Jaroslav Hašek did not write, although he may have translated some. This led the editor(s) to conclude that Hašek had "discovered" new animals, a dubious claim in light of the evidence that prompted me to write this article.
That said, the book deserves attention because it includes many stories and reports that had never appeared in book form before 1950 and were consequently largely unknown to the reading public. It also testifies to Břetislav Hůla's meticulous work identifying stories by Hašek in various publications, an effort for which he is rarely given credit (his name is not even mentioned in the book).
Legacy
Malá zoologická zahrada has had a lasting impact on perceptions of Hašek's work at Svět zvířat. Although Radko Pytlík partly debunked its myths in Fun and Education (1973), the book is still cited by scholars and enthusiasts alike, as of 2025. German Wikipedia perpetuates some of these stories, including the myth of the drunken parrots from 1905. Angelo Maria Rippelino is, however, the most prominent "victim". In his epic Praga magica (1973), the distinguished poet, scholar and translator quotes several of the "findings" from Malá zoologická zahrada, including Hašek's flea and several of the wilder stories from 1905.
In 1973, The Entertaining and Educational Corner of Jaroslav Hašek[b] was published. It contains a selection of stories and unsigned items thought to have been written by Hašek. The volume was the product of twenty years of research and includes a valuable afterword by Radko Pytlík, one of its three editors. This afterword implicitly dispels most of the myths surrounding Hašek and his work at Svět zvířat (Animal World), chiefly the claims that he deceived readers by describing imaginary animals and that this led to his dismissal.
Hašek's zoological garden
Haškologists Ančík and Hůla barking up the wrong tree by claiming that Hašek discovered new species.
Before 1950, no one had seriously investigated Hašek's activities at Svět zvířat. Information on the subject was limited to Hašek's own writing and brief passages in memoirs by his friends (Franta Sauer, Ladislav Hájek, Emil Artur Longen, Václav Menger).
Břetislav Hůla undertook the first scholarly investigation of this subject in the years following World War II. The result was The Small Zoological Garden[a], published in 1950 with Zdena Ančík, rather than Hůla, listed as editor. Unfortunately, it provides no bibliographic information about the stories and includes many items that the editors mistakenly attributed to Hašek. In the introduction, Ančík claimed that Hašek had invented no fewer than seven new species, thereby reinforcing the myths about his animal hoaxes; he even asserted that Hašek was responsible for the discovery of the blue whale and the tyrannosaurus.
The volume also contains several stories published in Svět zvířat years before Hašek became editor. That alone does not prove that he did not write them, but closer examination reveals that they were simply translated from German.
Hašek, entertainer and educator
The second investigation of Hašek's work at Svět zvířat goes a long way towards correcting the shortcomings of its 1950 predecessor. It contains a detailed bibliography of the stories and articles, endnotes and a substantial afterword. Published in 1973, it formed part of the series The Writings of Jaroslav Hašek[c] and was entitled Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslava Haška (hereafter Koutek).
It was the twelfth of sixteen volumes of stories, plays, articles and other pieces by Jaroslav Hašek. The series, entitled Spisy Jaroslava Haška (The Writings of Jaroslav Hašek), was published between 1955 and 1973. With very few exceptions, Spisy contains everything Hašek is known to have written. This volume was edited by Zdena Ančík, Milan Jankovič and Radko Pytlík, who were then generally regarded as the foremost experts on Hašek's work.
Volume twelve of "Spisy" is devoted to Hašek's journalism rather than his satirical and humorous stories. It contains selected material from Svět zvířat (Animal World) and, to a lesser extent, from České Slovo (The Czech Word) and Svět (The World).
Fun and Education covers the years 1909 to 1913, during which Hašek worked for Svět zvířat in two separate spells. He moved into the editorial offices in November 1908 and may have begun contributing to the magazine as early as December. He was editor from February 1909 to October 1910, then took on a similar role from December 1912 until May 1913. In effect, he spent longer working for Svět zvířat than for any other employer, including the Red Army and the Legions.
Particularly revealing is Radko Pytlík's afterword, based on the researchers' reading and investigation of every issue of Svět zvířat published during Hašek's tenure, as well as České Slovo and Svět. It is essential reading for anyone interested in Hašek's journalistic work and the myths surrounding it.
Undermining the myths
Hltoun strašlivý (the terrible guzzler) never appeared in the columns of Svět zvířat.
Over the years, much has been written about Jaroslav Hašek and Svět zvířat. Biographies, memoirs and articles, both in print and online, often claim that Hašek invented animals much as Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek did in The Good Soldier Švejk, that he was sacked because of his "discoveries" and other pranks, that he advertised werewolves for sale, that he wrote about an animal called the terrible guzzler, and that he dreamed up all manner of animal stories.
In the afterword, Radko Pytlík challenges these myths, not by refuting them directly, but by describing what the researchers de facto discovered while reading and investigating Svět zvířat.
After twenty years of research, he and his colleagues (Zdena Ančík and Milan Jankovič) concluded that Hašek's later accounts of his time at Svět zvířat, whether in short stories, Strana mírného pokroku v mezích zákona or through Einjährigfreiwilliger Marek in The Good Soldier Švejk, were largely exaggerated and distorted.
The researchers did, however, find many references in the three magazines that resurfaced in Hašek's later writing, including The Good Soldier Švejk. Examples include Flanderka, Xenophon, Bretschneider, Gyula Kakonyi, the sulphur-bellied whale, the jay and the Merry Corner. The robber from the Bakony forest also appears, as do the motif of Herostrates, who set fire to the temple in Ephesus, the cat eating a canary in [I.41,1], the wrecked marble table in [I.4], and more.
O Haškových pověstných mystifikacích jsme doposud věděli jen z jeho pozdějšího humorného vyprávění, zejména z příslušných kapitol Dějin strany mírného pokroku, z črty V přírodovědeckém časopise a z vyprávění jednoročního dobrovolníka Marka ve Švejkovi. Podle shod, jež se nám nyní po podrobném průzkumu časopisu podařilo objevit, zjišťujeme, že jsou v pozdějším vyprávění vesměs přehnány a přetvořeny. Radko Pytlík, Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslava Haška, 1973
Hájek describing how Fuchs lost patience with Hašek, initially due to his irregular appearances in the office.
Ladislav Hájek,1925
Nor could the literary experts identify any particular item in the journal that might have given its owner, Václav Fuchs, sufficient grounds to dismiss his editor. Referring to Ladislav Hájek, they suggest that Hašek left because of his careless management of the magazine.
Hájek did note that Hašek appeared at the office increasingly rarely and indicated that he had returned to an irresponsible way of life [e].
Interestingly, Hájek too claims that Hašek invented animals, including a fly with sixteen wings. Yet this creature also fails to appear in Svět zvířat, suggesting that Ladislav Hájek relied on hearsay rather than on anything he had actually read in the magazine.
Hned v úvodní stati je zmínka o starověkém Efialtovi, jenž prý zapálil chrám bohyně v Efesu, aby se dostal do dějin. Totéž řecké jméno se vyskytuje za několik týdnů poté v Haškově humoresce Baluškova zrada, tentokráte ve správném významu: Efialtes byl starořecký zrádce, jenž zavedl perské vojsko do zad svých krajanů u Thermopyl. Snad někdo Haška na omyl upozornil, snad přišel na svou chybu sám. V poválečném Švejkovi se objevuje motiv hérostratovský, jenž patří k základním složkám výstavby tohoto díla a slouží k odhalení protikladných zájmů malého člověka a ctižádostivých vojevůdců; vyskytuje se již se správným označením historickým. Radko Pytlík, Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslava Haška, 1973
Not only Svět zvířat
Hašek describes how he was forced to leave the National Social Party, thus ending his brief career as a local reporter for České slovo.
Kopřivy,14.3.1912
Although most of Koutek comes from Svět zvířat, it also covers Hašek's brief career as a local reporter for České Slovo. This lasted from December 1911 until February 1912 and, according to his own account, ended when he was expelled from Česká strana národně sociální[f].
In addition, Koutek includes some pieces from Svět, a weekly closely tied to Svět zvířat. It began as an Svět zvířat supplement but became an independent magazine in 1913. Both journals belonged to Ladislav Hájek, who had inherited Svět zvířat from his father-in-law, the late Václav Fuchs. The Svět pieces all date from the first half of 1913.
The afterword also analyses similarities between Hašek's journalism and his humorous stories. Both, it observes, often have an encyclopaedic character, combining a range of facts. Radko Pytlík concluded that there are countless factual and situational allusions and similarities in Hašek's journalism and humorous work.
Shortcomings
The sulphur-bellied whale was not Hašek's invention, but he probably translated an article about it.
Svět zvířat,1.6.1909
The analysis does, however, have some flaws. The researchers devoted little attention to issues of Svět zvířat published before, between and after Hašek's spells as editor. Radko Pytlík indirectly acknowledges this by stating that Břetislav Hůla (meaning The Small Zoological Garden) included material that "could not have been written by Hašek because it was printed before he was appointed editor". This is correct, but a broader review would have prevented several erroneous conclusions.
The Merry Corner predated Hašek's time at Svět zvířat with at least five years.
Svět zvířat,15.1.1904
The editors of Fun and Education claim that Hašek introduced the column Veselý koutek. Had they browsed the older volumes, they would have seen that it already existed and dates back at least to 1 January 1904. This narrow focus also led them to omit Hašek's flea, an unsigned notice printed in 1911. They therefore overlooked one of Hašek's few confirmed animal hoaxes, and arguably his most successful.
The researchers also wrongly attributed to Hašek some stories and unsigned articles that he did not write, though he may have translated them. One example is "Modern Whalehunting" by Franz Winter, translated from Über Land und Meer (1909) and published in Svět zvířat on 1 June 1909 with photographs from the German original. They consequently concluded that Frant. Winter was one of Hašek's pseudonyms. Another supposed "pseudonym" was in fact a real person: Svobodný pán z Kapherrů (Egon von Kapherr).
Findings going unnoticed, legends living on
The researchers' conclusions appeared as a postscript in one of the volumes of Spisy, which may explain why they received little attention. Very few scholars seem to have taken note of them. As a result, myths about Hašek and Svět zvířat have persisted to this day (2025), even among scholars and other experts.
Radko Pytlík himself must bear some responsibility for this. After 1973, he published many books about Jaroslav Hašek but never again referred to the findings presented in the afterword to Zábavný a poučný koutek Jaroslava Haška, 1973.
Bibliography
The bibliography in Koutek is incomplete, so this webpage supplements it wherever possible. The articles are listed chronologically, from the earliest known item of 1 February 1909 to the last known article from 1913. They are divided into two sections: Main stories (Stati a fejetony) and Unsigned articles. Entries mistakenly attributed to Hašek are struck through.
Norsk
English
