Lawyers of Polish Origin in Cieszyn Silesia: Identity-Related Dilemmas within a Multiethnic Monarchy

Abstract

Common denominators for the community of lawyers of Polish origin practising in Cieszyn Silesia in the nineteenth century included the same legislation of the Habsburg Monarchy, the organisational structure of its judiciary, the legal framework governing their professions and the qualifications required for legal practice. However, the group was marked by disparities concerning social background, economic circumstances, career trajectories, immediate community, the desire to embrace a specific culture, and national affiliation. Lawyers resided and practised within a region incorporated into a larger spatial unit, i.e. Austria-Hungary, and, therefore, were shaped by geographical, political, social and economic interdependencies. The overlapping ties between regional, national and state levels might compel lawyers to show a relative preference for dual identity, considering that their ethnic affiliation did not rule out a sense of emotional and political loyalty to the state. Lawyers’ complex identities enabled simultaneous relationality and development across the levels of nation, region, country, and empire. The hypothesis that they experienced a dilemma over their identity, ambiguity regarding their national affiliation, or inner tension between their Polish patriotism and their Habsburg loyalty has not been substantiated. An analysis of available sources concerning a segment of lawyers from Polish-speaking family backgrounds suggests their tendency towards clearly defined national affiliation. However, this identification did not necessarily represent a continuation of their ethnic heritage. The available ego-documents indicate that this awareness typically crystallised during their school (gymnasium) and university years – a period in which communal influences and cultural or political factors shaped their choices in favour of pro-Polish, pro-Slavic, pro-Silesian, or pro-German options. This crystallisation of national affiliation did not compromise lawyers’ access to protection by state authorities, their right to equal treatment under the law, and their cooperation across social classes, institutional frameworks, professional spheres and religious denominations. Conflicts and potential interethnic barriers emerged when nationalisms gained prominence. Therefore, what is noticeable is the assimilation into the empire and integration with an intentionally chosen nation, including a deep self-declared commitment to their ‘own’ community.