EN
This study presents an argument developing from the thesis that Czech syntheses of the long 19th century suffer from excessive ethnocentrism, i.e. the belief in one’s nation as the focal point of everything, somewhat automatically, so that an interpretation of the so-called national movement and nationalist conflicts in the Bohemian Lands rather descends into clichés and dogmas. This study points out the pitfalls in using the terms “nation” or “national identity” in analytical concept formation. It also notes that foreign historiography appears to appreciate more the contribution of the Cisleithanian system for the development of the Bohemian Lands than Czech historiography itself.