1 50 25 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2f9140fdcaa80dc846247fc6d807ad76.pdf 3cf058966a489a6b16735bfdcd602df4 PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Honorary Presidents Andre w J. Ham r oc k Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Woodland Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Step he n Msgr. F. J . Dubos h, P.A. Dub iel 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio E li zabe th Andrejko President Philip A. Hrobak P. 0 . Box 160 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Middletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W . K ris p i nsky M ich ael J. Va r govic 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Ju li a Kraj covi c 1-l elen K oca n 1648 W. 18th Street Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 537 Westview Rd. Bedford, Ohio Secretary-Treasu rer M i lan V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. Stephen J . T kach National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE A nna Sot ak National President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union Pau l P. Ja m r i sk a 536 Marie Ave. Pittsburgh 2, Pa. Josept. G. Pru sa F a l lat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Jo h n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozbor i l National President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affil iated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE NS KA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. SLOV EN SKE N OVIN Y ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Pas.sale, N. J. Whitaker, Pa. SL OV A K V A ME RI KE Middletown, Pa. Chicago, m. �UBRARY WIIJ.ERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE ~fflllERSVILLE, PA 17551 � Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Honorary Presidents Andre w J. Ham r oc k Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Woodland Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Step he n Msgr. F. J . Dubos h, P.A. Dub iel 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio E li zabe th Andrejko President Philip A. Hrobak P. 0 . Box 160 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Middletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W . K ris p i nsky M ich ael J. Va r govic 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Ju li a Kraj covi c 1-l elen K oca n 1648 W. 18th Street Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 537 Westview Rd. Bedford, Ohio Secretary-Treasu rer M i lan V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. Stephen J . T kach National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE A nna Sot ak National President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union Pau l P. Ja m r i sk a 536 Marie Ave. Pittsburgh 2, Pa. Josept. G. Pru sa F a l lat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Jo h n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozbor i l National President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affil iated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE NS KA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. SLOV EN SKE N OVIN Y ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Pas.sale, N. J. Whitaker, Pa. SL OV A K V A ME RI KE Middletown, Pa. Chicago, m. �UBRARY WIIJ.ERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE ~fflllERSVILLE, PA 17551 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Honorary Presidents Andre w J. Ham r oc k Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Woodland Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Step he n Msgr. F. J . Dubos h, P.A. Dub iel 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio E li zabe th Andrejko President Philip A. Hrobak P. 0 . Box 160 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Middletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W . K ris p i nsky M ich ael J. Va r govic 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Ju li a Kraj covi c 1-l elen K oca n 1648 W. 18th Street Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Recording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 537 Westview Rd. Bedford, Ohio Secretary-Treasu rer M i lan V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chicago 38, Ill. Stephen J . T kach National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE A nna Sot ak National President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union Pau l P. Ja m r i sk a 536 Marie Ave. Pittsburgh 2, Pa. Josept. G. Pru sa F a l lat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Jo h n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozbor i l National President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affil iated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE NS KA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. SLOV EN SKE N OVIN Y ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio Chicago, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL SVORNOS T OSADNE HLASY Pas.sale, N. J. Whitaker, Pa. SL OV A K V A ME RI KE Middletown, Pa. Chicago, m. UBRARY WIIJ.ERSVILLE STATE COLLEGE ~fflllERSVILLE, PA 17551  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28) Description An account of the resource includes photo of Ždiar in Spiš County Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/8119a7e4e3d51dc0baf5fb17592a2950.pdf 1a9472da62d85fbadbb8f3a2e87784f1 PDF Text Text 69 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: P.A. HROBAK GERMAN COLONIZATION IN SLOVAKIA In Hungary there were not enough people to settle all the land. The country was sparsely populated especi ally in the wooded hills along the frontier. For that reason from the beginning of the eleventh century the Germans began to migrate into Hungary. As foreign guests they settled at first beneath the larger castles where they established market settlements. Hungarian rulers, who made family ties with the ruling class in Germany, encouraged the immigration of the Germans. The influx of Germans was also aided by the monasteries which invited foreign settlers to their extensive but unoccupied lands. Individual nobles also followed the ex:ample of their King and helped the Germans establish new settlements where the population was small. Because the territory of mountainous Slovakia was only sparsely settled, the Germans moved into these areas in large numbers. Already during the reign of Geza II (1141-1161) Germans had come to Spis where they founded many villages and towns. The successors of Geza II, especially Andrew II (1205--1235 A.D.), invited Germans into the country and granted them many privileges to establish new settlements in the hiHy regions. The national picture of the Slovak country changed even before the Turkish invasion, because numerous German settlements were added to the original Slovak popu1'ation. This flood of German colonists increased especially after the Tartar invasion, when Bela IV and his successors desired to rebuild deva,s tated and depopulated areas. This strong influx of German settlers continued throughout the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and created a great transformation in the national, economic and cultural conditions of Slovakia. 1 The dense mountainous region of central Slovakia, the primitive Zvolen forest, was a veritable hunter's paradise, and up to the 13th century the kings of Hungary used it exclusively as such. This vast uninhabited region, except �70 SLOVAKIA for small scattered settlements of forest wardens, dogtrainers, falconers and fishermen, brought the King only a very small revenue. And because the population of the fertile plains of southern Slovakia was not large enough to settle this vast region along the upper Hron river, the Germans, settled in Krupina since the twelfth century, literaliy poured into the region. In like manner the Germans settled along the borders of the Nitra and Turiec counties. in the Spis forest and also in Liptov. The privileges which the Hungarian kings granted immigrants lured the Germans to SloV1a.kia. The first of these German colonists came to Slovakia from northern Germany, where poor soil, often inundated by the sea, produced but sparsely. l.Jater they came to Slovakia from other parts of Germany. SloV'akia's mountainous regions concealed an abundance of precious minerals, including gold and silver ore. The native population, employed in tilling the soil and in animal husbandry, did not know how to exploit this natural wealth, even though the first mining settlements originated in Slovakia in the eleventh century. Names of towns like Rudno, Rudnik, Rudna (ruda=ore), Zlatno, Zlatnik, Zlatovce (zlato=gold), prove that the first miners in Slovakia were Slovaks. To exploit this wea:lth of various ore deposits efficiently, the owners of the lands-the King, nobility, and the monks - called in the Germans who had greater experience in mining and could assure large returns to the landowners. German colonists, who migrated in great numbers to Slovakia were no longer only guests, but became hereditary holders of properties which the authorities granted them. Every group of colonists was brought in by the King's representative who was called a locator (lokator). He took over the lands marked out by the authorities for the colonists, surveyed and assigned parcels of land to individual :families, organized a settlement, and became its administrator (rychtar). Of course, such a settlement did not bring any return to the authorities the first year, because the settlers first had to clear the forests, condition the soil and lay out the fields. So that a new settlement might become sound economi'cally, the authorities usually granted a period �SLOVAKIA 71 of relief (lehota) upon the expiration of which the settlers began paying taxes to the owner. This relief period usually lasted eighteen years. To this day there are forty-six villages in SloV'akia bearing the name "Lehota" : Mnichova Lehota, Janova Lehota, Bartosova Lehota, Kral'ova Lehota, Petrova Lehota, Paucina Lehota, Bzovska Lehota, Horna Lehota, Dolna Lehota, etc. The "rychtar" (administrator) was the head of every such settlement; he took the largest tract of land and paid no taxes. He was the judge and jury in all litigations and collected the fines, of which he was entitled to keep onethird. The authority put him in charge of the village tavern, let him run a mill, a workshop and granted him many other rights and privileges. The office of "rychtar" was usually heriditary. After the expiration of the relief period, the colonists began to pay the prescribed tribute. At first it was onetenth of the harvest, which the taxpayer had to bring into the court of his respective lord. Moreover, the colonist had to supply his lord with poultry, eggs, cheese and other items. Later, when the peasant could sell his produce, he paid all his taxes in money. Because this revenue was determined once and for all time, the position of these settlers was not intolerable, for they could increase their a:nnual income by industrious labor, while the tribute remained unchanged. Taxes were usually paid twice annually: in the spring on St. George's day (April 24) , and in the fall on the feast-day of St. Havel (October 16). Since the ruler, noble, or abbey, derived rich revenues from new settlements, many villages were promoted in those times. All new communities founded by the Germans were ruled by the laws which the colonists brought from their own country. In Slovakia the Saxon Law of the city of Magdenburg prevailed. Among the new settlements, organized according to German law, the cities attained greatest significance. THE BEGINNINGS OF SLOVAK CITIES Agricultural towns and villages were for the most part in Slovakia up to the thirteenth century, because the Slovaks occupied themselves in the main with agriculture. �72 SLOVAKIA In the more densely forested areas, where there was little arable soil, there were settlements of people who concerned themselves with animal husbandry, and farming was taken up only after the forests were cleared and burnt away. Tradesmen, in the employ of the king's court and the royal castles, resided in some of the villages already in this period. Beneath the significant county-seat castles market settlements were established, but usually by foreign merchants. Along the frontier regions of Slovakia, near the strategic gates, and near the important trade highways, settlements of foreign warriors, assigned to sentinel duty, were founded. And in central Slovakia at that time there already were several mining settlements. But up to the eleventh century there were no cities in Slovakia. Slovak cities did not arise until the Germans immigrated to Slovakia in large numbers. Slovak cities came into being in the 13th and 14th centuries. But not all of them sprang up in the same manner. Some developed gradually from ancient villages as, for example, Trnava, Zilina, Turciansky Svaty Martin, Prievidza, Topofcany. Others, like Bratislava, Nitra, Hlohovec, Zvolen and Trencin, developed from market settlements beneath the castles. Many cities in Slovakia developed near the important commercial highways and became centers of economic life. Hlohovec had such an origin for it is along the road which joins the Vah region with the Nitra area; Topofcany and Prievidza developed along the highway which connected Nitra to Turiec; Zilina originated at the crossroads leading to Silesia, Moravia and Poland. Ruzomberok and Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas sprouted up in the upper Vah region. In the Spis district the commercial cities of Kezmarok and Levoca attained great significance. Kosice, the largest city in the east, developed along the road which connected Budin with Cracow; along this same road arose Presov, Sabinov and Bardejov in the Saris district. Great economic importance was attained by towns which had their origin in the mining settlements of the Zvolen Forest area (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica, Kremnica, Krupina, Slovenska :r,upca, :r,ubietova, Pukanec, Brezno), those of Liptov (Nemecka :r,upca) and Spis (Gelnica, Spisska Nova V es) . �SLOVAKIA 73 The difference between the city and the village was especially in the various privileges granted to cities by the ruler, which guaranteed the city not only independence from the county administration (zupan), but also enabled its economic development. Every city had the right to have weekly and annual market days. On such days the people of the entire vicinity assembled to sell their agricultur al products and buy manufactured goods and merchandise from the city tradesmen and merchants. The "mile law" had a deep significance, for it denied a merchant the right to set up his business within a mile of the city lest he jeopardize the interests of the urban tradesmen. These cities near the frontier or impor tant commercial highways were granted the right of "stor age" (maintaining warehouses) , which gave them the assurance that merchants who brought merchandise from neighboring countries could not pass up the city and had to store their goods there. Bratislava had such a right of storage for goods from Austria; Trnava on goods from Bohemia and Moravia; Bardejov and Podolinec on goods from Poland; Sucany on Polish salt; Kosice on merchandise from Poland and Russia and on wine to be exported to Poland. Furthermore, cities were granted the privilege of brewing beer. Merchants of many cities displayed and sold their merchandise over a wide area without paying taxes or customs duty. To prevent brigands and r obbers from menacing the security of a city and its vicinity, the cities were granted the "right of the sword" by which they could condemn criminals to death and execute them. The cities also safeguarded their security further by being allowed to build strong walls; it was thus that many cities became real fortresses, places of refuge in times of peril. The most important privilege enjoyed by the cities, however, was their independence of the regional authority, whereby they could govern themselves according to the legal code brought to Slovakia from Germany. According to this 1aw, a city elected its own council, which usually consisted of twelve councilmen or advisors. Every councilman had to serve as "rychtar" (administrator or mayor) for a period �74 SLOVAKIA of one month. The city inhabitants also could elect their own parish priest. Such cities, not under the jurisdiction of a "zupan" and subject directly to the king, were called "royal free cities." Each had its own coat of arms and seal. BRATISLAVA is mentioned as the Breslauspurch castle already in 907 A.D. A market settlement, mentioned in 1151, sprang up beneath the castle. In 1290 a city was established near this settlement; later it fused with the older market settlement. Bratislava was granted many privileges in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. TRNAVA developed from an old Slovak village which was situated on the bank of the Trnava Creek and on the highway which connected Praha with Budin. Trnava was granted city privileges in 1238 and, hence, is the oldest city in Slovakia. SKALICA became a city in 1372. NITRA was the most significant Slovak castle already in the ninth century. A market settlement was established, which was granted city rights in 1248 A. D. as a reward for valiantly defending the castle during the Turkish invasion. Later, the original "Stare Mesto" (Old Town) was fused with several villages (like Parovce) and thus originated the city of Nitra of today. HLOHOVEC belongs among the most ancient castles in Slovakia. It guarded the road from the Vah region to Nitra. A settlement sprang up under its walls and ne~t to it, in the 14th century, the city of Friestadt. When these two settlements united, the present city of Hlohovec came into being. TRENCIN was mentioned as Laugaricio already in the second century. The Trencin castle was there in the 11th century and protected the Vah region road which was connected to the Vlar highway. Beneath its walls was a settlement, which became a city rubout the year 1300, after the advent of German colonists. In 1402 Trencin was granted the right of "storage." ZILINA was originally a Slovak village which grew raipidly, because of its advantageous location at the point where the Kysuca flows into the Vah and at the intersection of commercial highways. It was mentioned for the first �SLOVAKIA 75 time in 1208. It became a city about 1350 and probably one of the most significant cities of Slovakia. The people of Zilina founded several nearby settlements, among them also Kysucke N ove Mesto. TOPOr..CANY became a city some time at the beginning of the second half of the thirteenth century and attained significance largely because it was situated on the road going from Nitra to Turiec and near the road that came from the V ah region. PRIEVIDZA, as a settlement, was mentioned for the first time in 1113. It attained municipal status in 1388, when it gained its independence from Bojnice castle. Prievidza was granted city rights by the city of Krnpina. TURCIANSKY SY.A.TY MARTIN developed near the old settlement of Modla, the very name of which shows that it was founded in the Great Moravian period. As a village it was mentioned in 1284 and was granted city rights in 1340 by the city of Krupina. RUZOMBEROK was founded by German colonists, who searched for precious metals in Liptov. It became a city in 1318, when it was granted the same rights as those enjoyed by N emeclka r..upca since 1263. KEZMAROK, as its name indicates, is also of German origin. It was a village which was granted some rights in 1269. In 1380 it became a city. LEVOCA, first mentioned in 1263, was granted city rights at the opening of the fourteenth century and shortly thereafter became the leading city of the entire Spis region. PRESOV, granted city rights in 1324, became the center of economic life of the entire Saris region. SABINOV grew up from a village which had its origin in the twelfth century. It became a city about the middle of the fourteenth century. BARDEJOV was founded by the Cistercian monks who settled in the territory at the beginning of the thirteenth century. It was granted city rights in 1320 and became a free royal city in 1376. PODOL1NEC belongs among the frontier towns. The Poles founded it in 1244, because at that time this part of �76 SLOVAKIA Spis belonged to Poland. W enceslaus II, King of Bohemia and Poland, elevated it to a city in 1292, but a few years later it reverted to Slovakia. KRUPINA is one of the oldest Slovak cities. It became a city the same time as Trnava (1238). The Krupina Right (law) was extended over the whole of Slovakia. ZVOLEN was mentioned, in 1214, as a village beneath the walls of the castle bearing that name. It was granted some rights in 1244 and became a city gradually. Its inhabitants founded other settlements, especially in the upper Hron region. KOSICE was originally a village at the foot of the Hradova Castle and received its city charter the same year that Bratislava was incorporated. Since the main highway from Hungary to Poland passed this way, a city sprang up near the old village which was granted city rights the same time as Bratislava (1290). Kosice prospered not only from trade, but also from the new privileges granted to it by the Hungarian kings in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Of course, not a:ll Slovak cities enjoyed equal rights. The kings favored ,s ome cities more than others. Some cities were granted all rights outright, while others received them only gradually. This charter or document of rights had to be confirmed by successive rulers, who had the authority to enhance the rights granted by their predecessors. Some cities, because of their advantageous location, used their privileges to prosper economica;lly, while others, lacking the conditions for development, made no progress economically and declined in time. Mining cities, in regions rich in precious metals, were specially favored and enjoyed a special status. These cities were granted the right to seek out and e~loit the rich metal deposits in their vicinity. Slovaks were engaged in mining already in the eleventh century, but the Germans introduced a highly efficient method of mining. The oldest mining town in Slovakia, Banska Stiavnica, was granted city rights in 1250; it was administered by the law of the Czech mining city of Jihlava. Through Banska Stiavnica �SLOVAKIA 77 the rest of the Slovak mining towns received their charters, except Kremnica, which was governed by the Kutnohorie .furm of charter. The mines of Ban.ska Stiavnica were very profitable; about half of the silver mined in Hungary in the thirteenth century came from its mines. Kremnica, however, soon became the richest mining center. The famous Kremnica ducats, valid in the whole of central Europe, were coined here since 1335. In 1255 Bansika Bystrica be.came a city. The inhabitants of all these cities were quite prosperous, they could afford to build large and imposing homes and churches. Besides these large mining centers, there were smaller ones like Pukanec (1337), Hanska Bela (1440), Nova Bana (1345), r..ubietova (1379) , Brezno (1380), Gelnica (about 1250) and Spisska Nova Ves (1380). Nowhere in the Hugarian kingdom did so many cities arise as in Slovakia. SLOVAK CITIES IN THE MIDDLE AGES So that cities could conform with their purpose, they had to be built •p roperly. Every city was, therefore, built according to a ,p lan which fitted the terrain. Where a city developed from an older settlement, the latter became the foundation for building the city. Where a city arose as an entirely new settlement, it could be built precisely according to a predetermined plan. On level ground with sufficient free area, the ground plan of the city was regular. But many cities sprang up in hilly areas, where there was insufficient level ground and, hence, had to be built on a slope (Hanska Stiavnica), in a basin (Banska Bystrica and Kremnica), or on a bank of a river (Nitra and Trencin). The ,s tructural development of a city depended on natural conditions. The public square (namestie) was the most important part of a city; it was usua:lly centrally located. Through it passed the main highway that connected the city with the vicinity. The square had to be quite spacious, because it was there that the weekly and annual markets (trh or jarmok) were held. The homes of the wealthiest citizens encircled the square. They were narrow, usually two-story dwellings with high gables and steep roofs. The workshops �78 SLOVAKIA of the tradesmen were in the long, narrow courtyards of these homes. On the ground-floor of these stone structures there often were vaulted arcades under which merchants laid out their wares during inclement weather. Such homes still stand in Zilina and Kysucke N ove Mesto. The majority of the other homes were of wood. Architecturally, the city hall and the churches were the most imposing buildings. Streets ran in all directions in a parallel or vertical fashion. They were quite narrow, unpaved, and unlighted at night. Some streets were made blind so that in case of invasion by the enemy, he could be chased into them and captured or destroyed. On the most prominent site of a city stood the parish church, the pride and ornament of every city. It was built either on the square (Skalica, Podolinec, Spisska Nova Ves, Presov, Sabinov, Kosice, etc.), or near the city ramparts (Trnava, Krupina and Zilina). The parish church often formed a part of the city fortifications (Bw:::ka Bystrica and Kremnica) . The parish cemetery was near the church. Large imposing churches were built in Slovak cities by the Franciscans and Dominicans (Trnava, Nitra, Skalica, IIlohovec, Banska Stiavnica and Ifosice). The most significant building of each city was its City Hall (mestsky dom) which was situated either directly on the square (Levoca, Spisska Nova Ves, Bardejov), or very near it (Kosice, Brati<slava). The larger and more prosperous Slovak cities were granted the right of enclosure. At first the cities were enclosed with wooden palisades, but later with solid stone walls. Because the construction of stone walls was very expensive, the city was exempt from paying various taxes while the walls were being constructed. In some cities, which were protected by nature itself, only the castle stood high above the city (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica), or individual bastions stood near the highways which guarded the entrance to the city. The wealthiest cities, fearing invasion by an enemy, were enclosed by a solid stone wall with numerous citad~ls. Gates led through the ramparts into the city; usually two if only one road ran through the city, and four gates if there were two roads running through it; and there usually were several lesser gates. The main gates �SLOVAKIA 79 were part of a mighty bastion in which there was a permanent guard. All gates were closed and locked at night. A wide and deep moat surrounded the walls to prevent the enemy from getting directly beneath them. Above the moat was a drawbridge. In front of the main gate some cities built lesser fortifications to protect the entrance to the city (Bardejov). Some Slovak cities built their ramparts immediately after their founding. Trnava, located on an open plain had fortifications with many bastions, four main and two secondary gates; these ramparts, except the main gates, are still standing today. Bratislava fortified itself in 1311; Michael's Gate and the names of other gates have been preserved. Presov built its ramparts in 1378, Zilina in 1405, and Ska:lica in 1372. Some Slovak cities erected their fortifications later, when the Turks threatened Slovakia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Zvolen, Krurpina). Smaller, but more securely situated cities never had any fortifications around them (Turciansky Svaty Martin, Liptovsky Svaty Mi'kulas). Naturally, cities built in such a fashion could not be very extensive and have a very numerous population. Trnava was the largest city in Slovakia; it grew up in the center of a fertile valley in western Slovakia, on the crossroads of import'<lnt highways. In the Spis region, Levoca was the leading city. In central Slovakia, Kremnica grew unusually fast; in 1442 it already had about three thousand inhabitants. Later Bratislavia and Kosice outgrew these cities. Other Slovak towns had from 800 to 1000 inhabitants. The overwhelming majority of urban populations were engaged in the trades or in commerce. Slovak cities, located on important commercial highways which connected S1ovakia with neighboring countries, became the centers of a lively economic life and made vital contacts with foreign cities (Bratislava, Levoca, Bardejov, Kosice). In some towns there was an -agricultural population which tilled the fields beyond the walls of the city. In the cities which developed from ancient Slovak villages, the original Slovak population was preserved along with the German colonists. In the new cities, especially in �80 SLOVAKIA the numng cities, the inhabitants were almost exclusively German. They made it their concern to own all property, control the economy and political life and thus prevented other naJtionalities from settling in their cities. In such German towns, Slovaks could not buy property, own homes, engage in the trades, or have any part in the city government. Thus it happened that some cities in Slovakia retained their German character for a very long time. But in other cities, situated in densly populated areas, even the Slovaks settled, changed their national character, and engaged in the trades and the political life of the cities. In the second half of the fourteenth century, there were so many Slovruks in Zilina that King Louis the Great issued an order in 1381 which decreed that half of the members of the city council of Zilina had to be Slovak. In other cities Slovak churches were built along with German parish churches; this definitely attests to the fact that the Slovaks were relatively numerous in such cities. Already in the Middle Ages streets carried Slovak names in Bardejov and Presov. In the following centuries, when a part of the Germans of Slovak cities perished in the wars, in which the cities suffered most, more and more Slovaks migrated to the cities so that gradually, ibut certainly, they became predominantly Slovak in character. Jewish merchants began to settle in Slovak cities from the most ancient times. They usually occupied that part of the city which was set aside specifically for them. This Jewish section of the city was separated from the rest of the city by a wall (Zamocka Street and its vicinity in Bratislava; Jericho and Jerusalem Streets in Trnava; and Parovce in Nitra). (To be continued) WHO SAID IT? ''Today more than ever before, I cannot stop believing that a free and independent Czooho-Slovakia can exist only in Europe thait is brought to balance, where the West and Russia find a proper agreement to collaborate. Even the even1s of February 1948 could not shake me from this conviction, which remains the basis of my whole conception of national politics." - (The late Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Edward Benes, FIGARO, Paris, April 4, 1949.) � 69 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: P.A. HROBAK GERMAN COLONIZATION IN SLOVAKIA In Hungary there were not enough people to settle all the land. The country was sparsely populated especi ally in the wooded hills along the frontier. For that reason from the beginning of the eleventh century the Germans began to migrate into Hungary. As foreign guests they settled at first beneath the larger castles where they established market settlements. Hungarian rulers, who made family ties with the ruling class in Germany, encouraged the immigration of the Germans. The influx of Germans was also aided by the monasteries which invited foreign settlers to their extensive but unoccupied lands. Individual nobles also followed the ex:ample of their King and helped the Germans establish new settlements where the population was small. Because the territory of mountainous Slovakia was only sparsely settled, the Germans moved into these areas in large numbers. Already during the reign of Geza II (1141-1161) Germans had come to Spis where they founded many villages and towns. The successors of Geza II, especially Andrew II (1205--1235 A.D.), invited Germans into the country and granted them many privileges to establish new settlements in the hiHy regions. The national picture of the Slovak country changed even before the Turkish invasion, because numerous German settlements were added to the original Slovak popu1'ation. This flood of German colonists increased especially after the Tartar invasion, when Bela IV and his successors desired to rebuild deva,s tated and depopulated areas. This strong influx of German settlers continued throughout the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and created a great transformation in the national, economic and cultural conditions of Slovakia. 1 The dense mountainous region of central Slovakia, the primitive Zvolen forest, was a veritable hunter's paradise, and up to the 13th century the kings of Hungary used it exclusively as such. This vast uninhabited region, except �70 SLOVAKIA for small scattered settlements of forest wardens, dogtrainers, falconers and fishermen, brought the King only a very small revenue. And because the population of the fertile plains of southern Slovakia was not large enough to settle this vast region along the upper Hron river, the Germans, settled in Krupina since the twelfth century, literaliy poured into the region. In like manner the Germans settled along the borders of the Nitra and Turiec counties. in the Spis forest and also in Liptov. The privileges which the Hungarian kings granted immigrants lured the Germans to SloV1a.kia. The first of these German colonists came to Slovakia from northern Germany, where poor soil, often inundated by the sea, produced but sparsely. l.Jater they came to Slovakia from other parts of Germany. SloV'akia's mountainous regions concealed an abundance of precious minerals, including gold and silver ore. The native population, employed in tilling the soil and in animal husbandry, did not know how to exploit this natural wealth, even though the first mining settlements originated in Slovakia in the eleventh century. Names of towns like Rudno, Rudnik, Rudna (ruda=ore), Zlatno, Zlatnik, Zlatovce (zlato=gold), prove that the first miners in Slovakia were Slovaks. To exploit this wea:lth of various ore deposits efficiently, the owners of the lands-the King, nobility, and the monks - called in the Germans who had greater experience in mining and could assure large returns to the landowners. German colonists, who migrated in great numbers to Slovakia were no longer only guests, but became hereditary holders of properties which the authorities granted them. Every group of colonists was brought in by the King's representative who was called a locator (lokator). He took over the lands marked out by the authorities for the colonists, surveyed and assigned parcels of land to individual :families, organized a settlement, and became its administrator (rychtar). Of course, such a settlement did not bring any return to the authorities the first year, because the settlers first had to clear the forests, condition the soil and lay out the fields. So that a new settlement might become sound economi'cally, the authorities usually granted a period �SLOVAKIA 71 of relief (lehota) upon the expiration of which the settlers began paying taxes to the owner. This relief period usually lasted eighteen years. To this day there are forty-six villages in SloV'akia bearing the name "Lehota" : Mnichova Lehota, Janova Lehota, Bartosova Lehota, Kral'ova Lehota, Petrova Lehota, Paucina Lehota, Bzovska Lehota, Horna Lehota, Dolna Lehota, etc. The "rychtar" (administrator) was the head of every such settlement; he took the largest tract of land and paid no taxes. He was the judge and jury in all litigations and collected the fines, of which he was entitled to keep onethird. The authority put him in charge of the village tavern, let him run a mill, a workshop and granted him many other rights and privileges. The office of "rychtar" was usually heriditary. After the expiration of the relief period, the colonists began to pay the prescribed tribute. At first it was onetenth of the harvest, which the taxpayer had to bring into the court of his respective lord. Moreover, the colonist had to supply his lord with poultry, eggs, cheese and other items. Later, when the peasant could sell his produce, he paid all his taxes in money. Because this revenue was determined once and for all time, the position of these settlers was not intolerable, for they could increase their a:nnual income by industrious labor, while the tribute remained unchanged. Taxes were usually paid twice annually: in the spring on St. George's day (April 24) , and in the fall on the feast-day of St. Havel (October 16). Since the ruler, noble, or abbey, derived rich revenues from new settlements, many villages were promoted in those times. All new communities founded by the Germans were ruled by the laws which the colonists brought from their own country. In Slovakia the Saxon Law of the city of Magdenburg prevailed. Among the new settlements, organized according to German law, the cities attained greatest significance. THE BEGINNINGS OF SLOVAK CITIES Agricultural towns and villages were for the most part in Slovakia up to the thirteenth century, because the Slovaks occupied themselves in the main with agriculture. �72 SLOVAKIA In the more densely forested areas, where there was little arable soil, there were settlements of people who concerned themselves with animal husbandry, and farming was taken up only after the forests were cleared and burnt away. Tradesmen, in the employ of the king's court and the royal castles, resided in some of the villages already in this period. Beneath the significant county-seat castles market settlements were established, but usually by foreign merchants. Along the frontier regions of Slovakia, near the strategic gates, and near the important trade highways, settlements of foreign warriors, assigned to sentinel duty, were founded. And in central Slovakia at that time there already were several mining settlements. But up to the eleventh century there were no cities in Slovakia. Slovak cities did not arise until the Germans immigrated to Slovakia in large numbers. Slovak cities came into being in the 13th and 14th centuries. But not all of them sprang up in the same manner. Some developed gradually from ancient villages as, for example, Trnava, Zilina, Turciansky Svaty Martin, Prievidza, Topofcany. Others, like Bratislava, Nitra, Hlohovec, Zvolen and Trencin, developed from market settlements beneath the castles. Many cities in Slovakia developed near the important commercial highways and became centers of economic life. Hlohovec had such an origin for it is along the road which joins the Vah region with the Nitra area; Topofcany and Prievidza developed along the highway which connected Nitra to Turiec; Zilina originated at the crossroads leading to Silesia, Moravia and Poland. Ruzomberok and Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas sprouted up in the upper Vah region. In the Spis district the commercial cities of Kezmarok and Levoca attained great significance. Kosice, the largest city in the east, developed along the road which connected Budin with Cracow; along this same road arose Presov, Sabinov and Bardejov in the Saris district. Great economic importance was attained by towns which had their origin in the mining settlements of the Zvolen Forest area (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica, Kremnica, Krupina, Slovenska :r,upca, :r,ubietova, Pukanec, Brezno), those of Liptov (Nemecka :r,upca) and Spis (Gelnica, Spisska Nova V es) . �SLOVAKIA 73 The difference between the city and the village was especially in the various privileges granted to cities by the ruler, which guaranteed the city not only independence from the county administration (zupan), but also enabled its economic development. Every city had the right to have weekly and annual market days. On such days the people of the entire vicinity assembled to sell their agricultur al products and buy manufactured goods and merchandise from the city tradesmen and merchants. The "mile law" had a deep significance, for it denied a merchant the right to set up his business within a mile of the city lest he jeopardize the interests of the urban tradesmen. These cities near the frontier or impor tant commercial highways were granted the right of "stor age" (maintaining warehouses) , which gave them the assurance that merchants who brought merchandise from neighboring countries could not pass up the city and had to store their goods there. Bratislava had such a right of storage for goods from Austria; Trnava on goods from Bohemia and Moravia; Bardejov and Podolinec on goods from Poland; Sucany on Polish salt; Kosice on merchandise from Poland and Russia and on wine to be exported to Poland. Furthermore, cities were granted the privilege of brewing beer. Merchants of many cities displayed and sold their merchandise over a wide area without paying taxes or customs duty. To prevent brigands and r obbers from menacing the security of a city and its vicinity, the cities were granted the "right of the sword" by which they could condemn criminals to death and execute them. The cities also safeguarded their security further by being allowed to build strong walls; it was thus that many cities became real fortresses, places of refuge in times of peril. The most important privilege enjoyed by the cities, however, was their independence of the regional authority, whereby they could govern themselves according to the legal code brought to Slovakia from Germany. According to this 1aw, a city elected its own council, which usually consisted of twelve councilmen or advisors. Every councilman had to serve as "rychtar" (administrator or mayor) for a period �74 SLOVAKIA of one month. The city inhabitants also could elect their own parish priest. Such cities, not under the jurisdiction of a "zupan" and subject directly to the king, were called "royal free cities." Each had its own coat of arms and seal. BRATISLAVA is mentioned as the Breslauspurch castle already in 907 A.D. A market settlement, mentioned in 1151, sprang up beneath the castle. In 1290 a city was established near this settlement; later it fused with the older market settlement. Bratislava was granted many privileges in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. TRNAVA developed from an old Slovak village which was situated on the bank of the Trnava Creek and on the highway which connected Praha with Budin. Trnava was granted city privileges in 1238 and, hence, is the oldest city in Slovakia. SKALICA became a city in 1372. NITRA was the most significant Slovak castle already in the ninth century. A market settlement was established, which was granted city rights in 1248 A. D. as a reward for valiantly defending the castle during the Turkish invasion. Later, the original "Stare Mesto" (Old Town) was fused with several villages (like Parovce) and thus originated the city of Nitra of today. HLOHOVEC belongs among the most ancient castles in Slovakia. It guarded the road from the Vah region to Nitra. A settlement sprang up under its walls and ne~t to it, in the 14th century, the city of Friestadt. When these two settlements united, the present city of Hlohovec came into being. TRENCIN was mentioned as Laugaricio already in the second century. The Trencin castle was there in the 11th century and protected the Vah region road which was connected to the Vlar highway. Beneath its walls was a settlement, which became a city rubout the year 1300, after the advent of German colonists. In 1402 Trencin was granted the right of "storage." ZILINA was originally a Slovak village which grew raipidly, because of its advantageous location at the point where the Kysuca flows into the Vah and at the intersection of commercial highways. It was mentioned for the first �SLOVAKIA 75 time in 1208. It became a city about 1350 and probably one of the most significant cities of Slovakia. The people of Zilina founded several nearby settlements, among them also Kysucke N ove Mesto. TOPOr..CANY became a city some time at the beginning of the second half of the thirteenth century and attained significance largely because it was situated on the road going from Nitra to Turiec and near the road that came from the V ah region. PRIEVIDZA, as a settlement, was mentioned for the first time in 1113. It attained municipal status in 1388, when it gained its independence from Bojnice castle. Prievidza was granted city rights by the city of Krnpina. TURCIANSKY SY.A.TY MARTIN developed near the old settlement of Modla, the very name of which shows that it was founded in the Great Moravian period. As a village it was mentioned in 1284 and was granted city rights in 1340 by the city of Krupina. RUZOMBEROK was founded by German colonists, who searched for precious metals in Liptov. It became a city in 1318, when it was granted the same rights as those enjoyed by N emeclka r..upca since 1263. KEZMAROK, as its name indicates, is also of German origin. It was a village which was granted some rights in 1269. In 1380 it became a city. LEVOCA, first mentioned in 1263, was granted city rights at the opening of the fourteenth century and shortly thereafter became the leading city of the entire Spis region. PRESOV, granted city rights in 1324, became the center of economic life of the entire Saris region. SABINOV grew up from a village which had its origin in the twelfth century. It became a city about the middle of the fourteenth century. BARDEJOV was founded by the Cistercian monks who settled in the territory at the beginning of the thirteenth century. It was granted city rights in 1320 and became a free royal city in 1376. PODOL1NEC belongs among the frontier towns. The Poles founded it in 1244, because at that time this part of �76 SLOVAKIA Spis belonged to Poland. W enceslaus II, King of Bohemia and Poland, elevated it to a city in 1292, but a few years later it reverted to Slovakia. KRUPINA is one of the oldest Slovak cities. It became a city the same time as Trnava (1238). The Krupina Right (law) was extended over the whole of Slovakia. ZVOLEN was mentioned, in 1214, as a village beneath the walls of the castle bearing that name. It was granted some rights in 1244 and became a city gradually. Its inhabitants founded other settlements, especially in the upper Hron region. KOSICE was originally a village at the foot of the Hradova Castle and received its city charter the same year that Bratislava was incorporated. Since the main highway from Hungary to Poland passed this way, a city sprang up near the old village which was granted city rights the same time as Bratislava (1290). Kosice prospered not only from trade, but also from the new privileges granted to it by the Hungarian kings in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Of course, not a:ll Slovak cities enjoyed equal rights. The kings favored ,s ome cities more than others. Some cities were granted all rights outright, while others received them only gradually. This charter or document of rights had to be confirmed by successive rulers, who had the authority to enhance the rights granted by their predecessors. Some cities, because of their advantageous location, used their privileges to prosper economica;lly, while others, lacking the conditions for development, made no progress economically and declined in time. Mining cities, in regions rich in precious metals, were specially favored and enjoyed a special status. These cities were granted the right to seek out and e~loit the rich metal deposits in their vicinity. Slovaks were engaged in mining already in the eleventh century, but the Germans introduced a highly efficient method of mining. The oldest mining town in Slovakia, Banska Stiavnica, was granted city rights in 1250; it was administered by the law of the Czech mining city of Jihlava. Through Banska Stiavnica �SLOVAKIA 77 the rest of the Slovak mining towns received their charters, except Kremnica, which was governed by the Kutnohorie .furm of charter. The mines of Ban.ska Stiavnica were very profitable; about half of the silver mined in Hungary in the thirteenth century came from its mines. Kremnica, however, soon became the richest mining center. The famous Kremnica ducats, valid in the whole of central Europe, were coined here since 1335. In 1255 Bansika Bystrica be.came a city. The inhabitants of all these cities were quite prosperous, they could afford to build large and imposing homes and churches. Besides these large mining centers, there were smaller ones like Pukanec (1337), Hanska Bela (1440), Nova Bana (1345), r..ubietova (1379) , Brezno (1380), Gelnica (about 1250) and Spisska Nova Ves (1380). Nowhere in the Hugarian kingdom did so many cities arise as in Slovakia. SLOVAK CITIES IN THE MIDDLE AGES So that cities could conform with their purpose, they had to be built •p roperly. Every city was, therefore, built according to a ,p lan which fitted the terrain. Where a city developed from an older settlement, the latter became the foundation for building the city. Where a city arose as an entirely new settlement, it could be built precisely according to a predetermined plan. On level ground with sufficient free area, the ground plan of the city was regular. But many cities sprang up in hilly areas, where there was insufficient level ground and, hence, had to be built on a slope (Hanska Stiavnica), in a basin (Banska Bystrica and Kremnica), or on a bank of a river (Nitra and Trencin). The ,s tructural development of a city depended on natural conditions. The public square (namestie) was the most important part of a city; it was usua:lly centrally located. Through it passed the main highway that connected the city with the vicinity. The square had to be quite spacious, because it was there that the weekly and annual markets (trh or jarmok) were held. The homes of the wealthiest citizens encircled the square. They were narrow, usually two-story dwellings with high gables and steep roofs. The workshops �78 SLOVAKIA of the tradesmen were in the long, narrow courtyards of these homes. On the ground-floor of these stone structures there often were vaulted arcades under which merchants laid out their wares during inclement weather. Such homes still stand in Zilina and Kysucke N ove Mesto. The majority of the other homes were of wood. Architecturally, the city hall and the churches were the most imposing buildings. Streets ran in all directions in a parallel or vertical fashion. They were quite narrow, unpaved, and unlighted at night. Some streets were made blind so that in case of invasion by the enemy, he could be chased into them and captured or destroyed. On the most prominent site of a city stood the parish church, the pride and ornament of every city. It was built either on the square (Skalica, Podolinec, Spisska Nova Ves, Presov, Sabinov, Kosice, etc.), or near the city ramparts (Trnava, Krupina and Zilina). The parish church often formed a part of the city fortifications (Bw:::ka Bystrica and Kremnica) . The parish cemetery was near the church. Large imposing churches were built in Slovak cities by the Franciscans and Dominicans (Trnava, Nitra, Skalica, IIlohovec, Banska Stiavnica and Ifosice). The most significant building of each city was its City Hall (mestsky dom) which was situated either directly on the square (Levoca, Spisska Nova Ves, Bardejov), or very near it (Kosice, Brati<slava). The larger and more prosperous Slovak cities were granted the right of enclosure. At first the cities were enclosed with wooden palisades, but later with solid stone walls. Because the construction of stone walls was very expensive, the city was exempt from paying various taxes while the walls were being constructed. In some cities, which were protected by nature itself, only the castle stood high above the city (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica), or individual bastions stood near the highways which guarded the entrance to the city. The wealthiest cities, fearing invasion by an enemy, were enclosed by a solid stone wall with numerous citad~ls. Gates led through the ramparts into the city; usually two if only one road ran through the city, and four gates if there were two roads running through it; and there usually were several lesser gates. The main gates �SLOVAKIA 79 were part of a mighty bastion in which there was a permanent guard. All gates were closed and locked at night. A wide and deep moat surrounded the walls to prevent the enemy from getting directly beneath them. Above the moat was a drawbridge. In front of the main gate some cities built lesser fortifications to protect the entrance to the city (Bardejov). Some Slovak cities built their ramparts immediately after their founding. Trnava, located on an open plain had fortifications with many bastions, four main and two secondary gates; these ramparts, except the main gates, are still standing today. Bratislava fortified itself in 1311; Michael's Gate and the names of other gates have been preserved. Presov built its ramparts in 1378, Zilina in 1405, and Ska:lica in 1372. Some Slovak cities erected their fortifications later, when the Turks threatened Slovakia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Zvolen, Krurpina). Smaller, but more securely situated cities never had any fortifications around them (Turciansky Svaty Martin, Liptovsky Svaty Mi'kulas). Naturally, cities built in such a fashion could not be very extensive and have a very numerous population. Trnava was the largest city in Slovakia; it grew up in the center of a fertile valley in western Slovakia, on the crossroads of import'<lnt highways. In the Spis region, Levoca was the leading city. In central Slovakia, Kremnica grew unusually fast; in 1442 it already had about three thousand inhabitants. Later Bratislavia and Kosice outgrew these cities. Other Slovak towns had from 800 to 1000 inhabitants. The overwhelming majority of urban populations were engaged in the trades or in commerce. Slovak cities, located on important commercial highways which connected S1ovakia with neighboring countries, became the centers of a lively economic life and made vital contacts with foreign cities (Bratislava, Levoca, Bardejov, Kosice). In some towns there was an -agricultural population which tilled the fields beyond the walls of the city. In the cities which developed from ancient Slovak villages, the original Slovak population was preserved along with the German colonists. In the new cities, especially in �80 SLOVAKIA the numng cities, the inhabitants were almost exclusively German. They made it their concern to own all property, control the economy and political life and thus prevented other naJtionalities from settling in their cities. In such German towns, Slovaks could not buy property, own homes, engage in the trades, or have any part in the city government. Thus it happened that some cities in Slovakia retained their German character for a very long time. But in other cities, situated in densly populated areas, even the Slovaks settled, changed their national character, and engaged in the trades and the political life of the cities. In the second half of the fourteenth century, there were so many Slovruks in Zilina that King Louis the Great issued an order in 1381 which decreed that half of the members of the city council of Zilina had to be Slovak. In other cities Slovak churches were built along with German parish churches; this definitely attests to the fact that the Slovaks were relatively numerous in such cities. Already in the Middle Ages streets carried Slovak names in Bardejov and Presov. In the following centuries, when a part of the Germans of Slovak cities perished in the wars, in which the cities suffered most, more and more Slovaks migrated to the cities so that gradually, ibut certainly, they became predominantly Slovak in character. Jewish merchants began to settle in Slovak cities from the most ancient times. They usually occupied that part of the city which was set aside specifically for them. This Jewish section of the city was separated from the rest of the city by a wall (Zamocka Street and its vicinity in Bratislava; Jericho and Jerusalem Streets in Trnava; and Parovce in Nitra). (To be continued) WHO SAID IT? ''Today more than ever before, I cannot stop believing that a free and independent Czooho-Slovakia can exist only in Europe thait is brought to balance, where the West and Russia find a proper agreement to collaborate. Even the even1s of February 1948 could not shake me from this conviction, which remains the basis of my whole conception of national politics." - (The late Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Edward Benes, FIGARO, Paris, April 4, 1949.) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 69 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: P.A. HROBAK GERMAN COLONIZATION IN SLOVAKIA In Hungary there were not enough people to settle all the land. The country was sparsely populated especi ally in the wooded hills along the frontier. For that reason from the beginning of the eleventh century the Germans began to migrate into Hungary. As foreign guests they settled at first beneath the larger castles where they established market settlements. Hungarian rulers, who made family ties with the ruling class in Germany, encouraged the immigration of the Germans. The influx of Germans was also aided by the monasteries which invited foreign settlers to their extensive but unoccupied lands. Individual nobles also followed the ex:ample of their King and helped the Germans establish new settlements where the population was small. Because the territory of mountainous Slovakia was only sparsely settled, the Germans moved into these areas in large numbers. Already during the reign of Geza II (1141-1161) Germans had come to Spis where they founded many villages and towns. The successors of Geza II, especially Andrew II (1205--1235 A.D.), invited Germans into the country and granted them many privileges to establish new settlements in the hiHy regions. The national picture of the Slovak country changed even before the Turkish invasion, because numerous German settlements were added to the original Slovak popu1'ation. This flood of German colonists increased especially after the Tartar invasion, when Bela IV and his successors desired to rebuild deva,s tated and depopulated areas. This strong influx of German settlers continued throughout the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and created a great transformation in the national, economic and cultural conditions of Slovakia. 1 The dense mountainous region of central Slovakia, the primitive Zvolen forest, was a veritable hunter's paradise, and up to the 13th century the kings of Hungary used it exclusively as such. This vast uninhabited region, except 70 SLOVAKIA for small scattered settlements of forest wardens, dogtrainers, falconers and fishermen, brought the King only a very small revenue. And because the population of the fertile plains of southern Slovakia was not large enough to settle this vast region along the upper Hron river, the Germans, settled in Krupina since the twelfth century, literaliy poured into the region. In like manner the Germans settled along the borders of the Nitra and Turiec counties. in the Spis forest and also in Liptov. The privileges which the Hungarian kings granted immigrants lured the Germans to SloV1a.kia. The first of these German colonists came to Slovakia from northern Germany, where poor soil, often inundated by the sea, produced but sparsely. l.Jater they came to Slovakia from other parts of Germany. SloV'akia's mountainous regions concealed an abundance of precious minerals, including gold and silver ore. The native population, employed in tilling the soil and in animal husbandry, did not know how to exploit this natural wealth, even though the first mining settlements originated in Slovakia in the eleventh century. Names of towns like Rudno, Rudnik, Rudna (ruda=ore), Zlatno, Zlatnik, Zlatovce (zlato=gold), prove that the first miners in Slovakia were Slovaks. To exploit this wea:lth of various ore deposits efficiently, the owners of the lands-the King, nobility, and the monks - called in the Germans who had greater experience in mining and could assure large returns to the landowners. German colonists, who migrated in great numbers to Slovakia were no longer only guests, but became hereditary holders of properties which the authorities granted them. Every group of colonists was brought in by the King's representative who was called a locator (lokator). He took over the lands marked out by the authorities for the colonists, surveyed and assigned parcels of land to individual :families, organized a settlement, and became its administrator (rychtar). Of course, such a settlement did not bring any return to the authorities the first year, because the settlers first had to clear the forests, condition the soil and lay out the fields. So that a new settlement might become sound economi'cally, the authorities usually granted a period SLOVAKIA 71 of relief (lehota) upon the expiration of which the settlers began paying taxes to the owner. This relief period usually lasted eighteen years. To this day there are forty-six villages in SloV'akia bearing the name "Lehota" : Mnichova Lehota, Janova Lehota, Bartosova Lehota, Kral'ova Lehota, Petrova Lehota, Paucina Lehota, Bzovska Lehota, Horna Lehota, Dolna Lehota, etc. The "rychtar" (administrator) was the head of every such settlement; he took the largest tract of land and paid no taxes. He was the judge and jury in all litigations and collected the fines, of which he was entitled to keep onethird. The authority put him in charge of the village tavern, let him run a mill, a workshop and granted him many other rights and privileges. The office of "rychtar" was usually heriditary. After the expiration of the relief period, the colonists began to pay the prescribed tribute. At first it was onetenth of the harvest, which the taxpayer had to bring into the court of his respective lord. Moreover, the colonist had to supply his lord with poultry, eggs, cheese and other items. Later, when the peasant could sell his produce, he paid all his taxes in money. Because this revenue was determined once and for all time, the position of these settlers was not intolerable, for they could increase their a:nnual income by industrious labor, while the tribute remained unchanged. Taxes were usually paid twice annually: in the spring on St. George's day (April 24) , and in the fall on the feast-day of St. Havel (October 16). Since the ruler, noble, or abbey, derived rich revenues from new settlements, many villages were promoted in those times. All new communities founded by the Germans were ruled by the laws which the colonists brought from their own country. In Slovakia the Saxon Law of the city of Magdenburg prevailed. Among the new settlements, organized according to German law, the cities attained greatest significance. THE BEGINNINGS OF SLOVAK CITIES Agricultural towns and villages were for the most part in Slovakia up to the thirteenth century, because the Slovaks occupied themselves in the main with agriculture. 72 SLOVAKIA In the more densely forested areas, where there was little arable soil, there were settlements of people who concerned themselves with animal husbandry, and farming was taken up only after the forests were cleared and burnt away. Tradesmen, in the employ of the king's court and the royal castles, resided in some of the villages already in this period. Beneath the significant county-seat castles market settlements were established, but usually by foreign merchants. Along the frontier regions of Slovakia, near the strategic gates, and near the important trade highways, settlements of foreign warriors, assigned to sentinel duty, were founded. And in central Slovakia at that time there already were several mining settlements. But up to the eleventh century there were no cities in Slovakia. Slovak cities did not arise until the Germans immigrated to Slovakia in large numbers. Slovak cities came into being in the 13th and 14th centuries. But not all of them sprang up in the same manner. Some developed gradually from ancient villages as, for example, Trnava, Zilina, Turciansky Svaty Martin, Prievidza, Topofcany. Others, like Bratislava, Nitra, Hlohovec, Zvolen and Trencin, developed from market settlements beneath the castles. Many cities in Slovakia developed near the important commercial highways and became centers of economic life. Hlohovec had such an origin for it is along the road which joins the Vah region with the Nitra area; Topofcany and Prievidza developed along the highway which connected Nitra to Turiec; Zilina originated at the crossroads leading to Silesia, Moravia and Poland. Ruzomberok and Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas sprouted up in the upper Vah region. In the Spis district the commercial cities of Kezmarok and Levoca attained great significance. Kosice, the largest city in the east, developed along the road which connected Budin with Cracow; along this same road arose Presov, Sabinov and Bardejov in the Saris district. Great economic importance was attained by towns which had their origin in the mining settlements of the Zvolen Forest area (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica, Kremnica, Krupina, Slovenska :r,upca, :r,ubietova, Pukanec, Brezno), those of Liptov (Nemecka :r,upca) and Spis (Gelnica, Spisska Nova V es) . SLOVAKIA 73 The difference between the city and the village was especially in the various privileges granted to cities by the ruler, which guaranteed the city not only independence from the county administration (zupan), but also enabled its economic development. Every city had the right to have weekly and annual market days. On such days the people of the entire vicinity assembled to sell their agricultur al products and buy manufactured goods and merchandise from the city tradesmen and merchants. The "mile law" had a deep significance, for it denied a merchant the right to set up his business within a mile of the city lest he jeopardize the interests of the urban tradesmen. These cities near the frontier or impor tant commercial highways were granted the right of "stor age" (maintaining warehouses) , which gave them the assurance that merchants who brought merchandise from neighboring countries could not pass up the city and had to store their goods there. Bratislava had such a right of storage for goods from Austria; Trnava on goods from Bohemia and Moravia; Bardejov and Podolinec on goods from Poland; Sucany on Polish salt; Kosice on merchandise from Poland and Russia and on wine to be exported to Poland. Furthermore, cities were granted the privilege of brewing beer. Merchants of many cities displayed and sold their merchandise over a wide area without paying taxes or customs duty. To prevent brigands and r obbers from menacing the security of a city and its vicinity, the cities were granted the "right of the sword" by which they could condemn criminals to death and execute them. The cities also safeguarded their security further by being allowed to build strong walls; it was thus that many cities became real fortresses, places of refuge in times of peril. The most important privilege enjoyed by the cities, however, was their independence of the regional authority, whereby they could govern themselves according to the legal code brought to Slovakia from Germany. According to this 1aw, a city elected its own council, which usually consisted of twelve councilmen or advisors. Every councilman had to serve as "rychtar" (administrator or mayor) for a period 74 SLOVAKIA of one month. The city inhabitants also could elect their own parish priest. Such cities, not under the jurisdiction of a "zupan" and subject directly to the king, were called "royal free cities." Each had its own coat of arms and seal. BRATISLAVA is mentioned as the Breslauspurch castle already in 907 A.D. A market settlement, mentioned in 1151, sprang up beneath the castle. In 1290 a city was established near this settlement; later it fused with the older market settlement. Bratislava was granted many privileges in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. TRNAVA developed from an old Slovak village which was situated on the bank of the Trnava Creek and on the highway which connected Praha with Budin. Trnava was granted city privileges in 1238 and, hence, is the oldest city in Slovakia. SKALICA became a city in 1372. NITRA was the most significant Slovak castle already in the ninth century. A market settlement was established, which was granted city rights in 1248 A. D. as a reward for valiantly defending the castle during the Turkish invasion. Later, the original "Stare Mesto" (Old Town) was fused with several villages (like Parovce) and thus originated the city of Nitra of today. HLOHOVEC belongs among the most ancient castles in Slovakia. It guarded the road from the Vah region to Nitra. A settlement sprang up under its walls and ne~t to it, in the 14th century, the city of Friestadt. When these two settlements united, the present city of Hlohovec came into being. TRENCIN was mentioned as Laugaricio already in the second century. The Trencin castle was there in the 11th century and protected the Vah region road which was connected to the Vlar highway. Beneath its walls was a settlement, which became a city rubout the year 1300, after the advent of German colonists. In 1402 Trencin was granted the right of "storage." ZILINA was originally a Slovak village which grew raipidly, because of its advantageous location at the point where the Kysuca flows into the Vah and at the intersection of commercial highways. It was mentioned for the first SLOVAKIA 75 time in 1208. It became a city about 1350 and probably one of the most significant cities of Slovakia. The people of Zilina founded several nearby settlements, among them also Kysucke N ove Mesto. TOPOr..CANY became a city some time at the beginning of the second half of the thirteenth century and attained significance largely because it was situated on the road going from Nitra to Turiec and near the road that came from the V ah region. PRIEVIDZA, as a settlement, was mentioned for the first time in 1113. It attained municipal status in 1388, when it gained its independence from Bojnice castle. Prievidza was granted city rights by the city of Krnpina. TURCIANSKY SY.A.TY MARTIN developed near the old settlement of Modla, the very name of which shows that it was founded in the Great Moravian period. As a village it was mentioned in 1284 and was granted city rights in 1340 by the city of Krupina. RUZOMBEROK was founded by German colonists, who searched for precious metals in Liptov. It became a city in 1318, when it was granted the same rights as those enjoyed by N emeclka r..upca since 1263. KEZMAROK, as its name indicates, is also of German origin. It was a village which was granted some rights in 1269. In 1380 it became a city. LEVOCA, first mentioned in 1263, was granted city rights at the opening of the fourteenth century and shortly thereafter became the leading city of the entire Spis region. PRESOV, granted city rights in 1324, became the center of economic life of the entire Saris region. SABINOV grew up from a village which had its origin in the twelfth century. It became a city about the middle of the fourteenth century. BARDEJOV was founded by the Cistercian monks who settled in the territory at the beginning of the thirteenth century. It was granted city rights in 1320 and became a free royal city in 1376. PODOL1NEC belongs among the frontier towns. The Poles founded it in 1244, because at that time this part of 76 SLOVAKIA Spis belonged to Poland. W enceslaus II, King of Bohemia and Poland, elevated it to a city in 1292, but a few years later it reverted to Slovakia. KRUPINA is one of the oldest Slovak cities. It became a city the same time as Trnava (1238). The Krupina Right (law) was extended over the whole of Slovakia. ZVOLEN was mentioned, in 1214, as a village beneath the walls of the castle bearing that name. It was granted some rights in 1244 and became a city gradually. Its inhabitants founded other settlements, especially in the upper Hron region. KOSICE was originally a village at the foot of the Hradova Castle and received its city charter the same year that Bratislava was incorporated. Since the main highway from Hungary to Poland passed this way, a city sprang up near the old village which was granted city rights the same time as Bratislava (1290). Kosice prospered not only from trade, but also from the new privileges granted to it by the Hungarian kings in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Of course, not a:ll Slovak cities enjoyed equal rights. The kings favored ,s ome cities more than others. Some cities were granted all rights outright, while others received them only gradually. This charter or document of rights had to be confirmed by successive rulers, who had the authority to enhance the rights granted by their predecessors. Some cities, because of their advantageous location, used their privileges to prosper economica;lly, while others, lacking the conditions for development, made no progress economically and declined in time. Mining cities, in regions rich in precious metals, were specially favored and enjoyed a special status. These cities were granted the right to seek out and e~loit the rich metal deposits in their vicinity. Slovaks were engaged in mining already in the eleventh century, but the Germans introduced a highly efficient method of mining. The oldest mining town in Slovakia, Banska Stiavnica, was granted city rights in 1250; it was administered by the law of the Czech mining city of Jihlava. Through Banska Stiavnica SLOVAKIA 77 the rest of the Slovak mining towns received their charters, except Kremnica, which was governed by the Kutnohorie .furm of charter. The mines of Ban.ska Stiavnica were very profitable; about half of the silver mined in Hungary in the thirteenth century came from its mines. Kremnica, however, soon became the richest mining center. The famous Kremnica ducats, valid in the whole of central Europe, were coined here since 1335. In 1255 Bansika Bystrica be.came a city. The inhabitants of all these cities were quite prosperous, they could afford to build large and imposing homes and churches. Besides these large mining centers, there were smaller ones like Pukanec (1337), Hanska Bela (1440), Nova Bana (1345), r..ubietova (1379) , Brezno (1380), Gelnica (about 1250) and Spisska Nova Ves (1380). Nowhere in the Hugarian kingdom did so many cities arise as in Slovakia. SLOVAK CITIES IN THE MIDDLE AGES So that cities could conform with their purpose, they had to be built •p roperly. Every city was, therefore, built according to a ,p lan which fitted the terrain. Where a city developed from an older settlement, the latter became the foundation for building the city. Where a city arose as an entirely new settlement, it could be built precisely according to a predetermined plan. On level ground with sufficient free area, the ground plan of the city was regular. But many cities sprang up in hilly areas, where there was insufficient level ground and, hence, had to be built on a slope (Hanska Stiavnica), in a basin (Banska Bystrica and Kremnica), or on a bank of a river (Nitra and Trencin). The ,s tructural development of a city depended on natural conditions. The public square (namestie) was the most important part of a city; it was usua:lly centrally located. Through it passed the main highway that connected the city with the vicinity. The square had to be quite spacious, because it was there that the weekly and annual markets (trh or jarmok) were held. The homes of the wealthiest citizens encircled the square. They were narrow, usually two-story dwellings with high gables and steep roofs. The workshops 78 SLOVAKIA of the tradesmen were in the long, narrow courtyards of these homes. On the ground-floor of these stone structures there often were vaulted arcades under which merchants laid out their wares during inclement weather. Such homes still stand in Zilina and Kysucke N ove Mesto. The majority of the other homes were of wood. Architecturally, the city hall and the churches were the most imposing buildings. Streets ran in all directions in a parallel or vertical fashion. They were quite narrow, unpaved, and unlighted at night. Some streets were made blind so that in case of invasion by the enemy, he could be chased into them and captured or destroyed. On the most prominent site of a city stood the parish church, the pride and ornament of every city. It was built either on the square (Skalica, Podolinec, Spisska Nova Ves, Presov, Sabinov, Kosice, etc.), or near the city ramparts (Trnava, Krupina and Zilina). The parish church often formed a part of the city fortifications (Bw:::ka Bystrica and Kremnica) . The parish cemetery was near the church. Large imposing churches were built in Slovak cities by the Franciscans and Dominicans (Trnava, Nitra, Skalica, IIlohovec, Banska Stiavnica and Ifosice). The most significant building of each city was its City Hall (mestsky dom) which was situated either directly on the square (Levoca, Spisska Nova Ves, Bardejov), or very near it (Kosice, Brati<slava). The larger and more prosperous Slovak cities were granted the right of enclosure. At first the cities were enclosed with wooden palisades, but later with solid stone walls. Because the construction of stone walls was very expensive, the city was exempt from paying various taxes while the walls were being constructed. In some cities, which were protected by nature itself, only the castle stood high above the city (Banska Stiavnica, Banska Bystrica), or individual bastions stood near the highways which guarded the entrance to the city. The wealthiest cities, fearing invasion by an enemy, were enclosed by a solid stone wall with numerous citad~ls. Gates led through the ramparts into the city; usually two if only one road ran through the city, and four gates if there were two roads running through it; and there usually were several lesser gates. The main gates SLOVAKIA 79 were part of a mighty bastion in which there was a permanent guard. All gates were closed and locked at night. A wide and deep moat surrounded the walls to prevent the enemy from getting directly beneath them. Above the moat was a drawbridge. In front of the main gate some cities built lesser fortifications to protect the entrance to the city (Bardejov). Some Slovak cities built their ramparts immediately after their founding. Trnava, located on an open plain had fortifications with many bastions, four main and two secondary gates; these ramparts, except the main gates, are still standing today. Bratislava fortified itself in 1311; Michael's Gate and the names of other gates have been preserved. Presov built its ramparts in 1378, Zilina in 1405, and Ska:lica in 1372. Some Slovak cities erected their fortifications later, when the Turks threatened Slovakia in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Zvolen, Krurpina). Smaller, but more securely situated cities never had any fortifications around them (Turciansky Svaty Martin, Liptovsky Svaty Mi'kulas). Naturally, cities built in such a fashion could not be very extensive and have a very numerous population. Trnava was the largest city in Slovakia; it grew up in the center of a fertile valley in western Slovakia, on the crossroads of import'<lnt highways. In the Spis region, Levoca was the leading city. In central Slovakia, Kremnica grew unusually fast; in 1442 it already had about three thousand inhabitants. Later Bratislavia and Kosice outgrew these cities. Other Slovak towns had from 800 to 1000 inhabitants. The overwhelming majority of urban populations were engaged in the trades or in commerce. Slovak cities, located on important commercial highways which connected S1ovakia with neighboring countries, became the centers of a lively economic life and made vital contacts with foreign cities (Bratislava, Levoca, Bardejov, Kosice). In some towns there was an -agricultural population which tilled the fields beyond the walls of the city. In the cities which developed from ancient Slovak villages, the original Slovak population was preserved along with the German colonists. In the new cities, especially in 80 SLOVAKIA the numng cities, the inhabitants were almost exclusively German. They made it their concern to own all property, control the economy and political life and thus prevented other naJtionalities from settling in their cities. In such German towns, Slovaks could not buy property, own homes, engage in the trades, or have any part in the city government. Thus it happened that some cities in Slovakia retained their German character for a very long time. But in other cities, situated in densly populated areas, even the Slovaks settled, changed their national character, and engaged in the trades and the political life of the cities. In the second half of the fourteenth century, there were so many Slovruks in Zilina that King Louis the Great issued an order in 1381 which decreed that half of the members of the city council of Zilina had to be Slovak. In other cities Slovak churches were built along with German parish churches; this definitely attests to the fact that the Slovaks were relatively numerous in such cities. Already in the Middle Ages streets carried Slovak names in Bardejov and Presov. In the following centuries, when a part of the Germans of Slovak cities perished in the wars, in which the cities suffered most, more and more Slovaks migrated to the cities so that gradually, ibut certainly, they became predominantly Slovak in character. Jewish merchants began to settle in Slovak cities from the most ancient times. They usually occupied that part of the city which was set aside specifically for them. This Jewish section of the city was separated from the rest of the city by a wall (Zamocka Street and its vicinity in Bratislava; Jericho and Jerusalem Streets in Trnava; and Parovce in Nitra). (To be continued) WHO SAID IT? ''Today more than ever before, I cannot stop believing that a free and independent Czooho-Slovakia can exist only in Europe thait is brought to balance, where the West and Russia find a proper agreement to collaborate. Even the even1s of February 1948 could not shake me from this conviction, which remains the basis of my whole conception of national politics." - (The late Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Edward Benes, FIGARO, Paris, April 4, 1949.)  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The History of Slovakia (7/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 69-80 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/271">Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), pp. 56-64</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/299">Vol. 9, No. 1 (29), pp. 72-80</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/98ef07010f1a1cd98244cc4998b659fe.pdf af405f39714999cc5424511c38773a93 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 57 - - - - - - -- -- ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE By CONSTANTINE tULEN After the Czecho-Slovak Republic was born, two significant Slovak personalities became "problems" for the governing group in Prague, the men handpicked by T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes to run the infant state. The first was General Milan R. Stefanik. When the first World War was just about over, and T. G. Masaryk, at that time in Japan, had named the first Czecho-Slovak Government, Stefanik was named War Minister, while the department of Foreign Affairs was entrusted to Dr. Edward Benes. Stefanik expressed no desire for the office given him by Masaryk; he did not expect to be appointed War Minister, but Minister of Foreign Affairs of the new state, since he had opened the door for Masaryk to diplomatic circles which were most responsible for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was a political unknown at that time, a politician without any practical political experience. As a result there was a conflict between Benes and Stefanik. The latter, however, was far away from Prague and not very close to Masaryk, while Benes, regarded as Masaryk's intimate and understudy, was right in Prague. Among the very first orders issued by Benes in Prague to his subordinates and lieutenants was the order to inform Slovak factors "in a proper manner" about Stefanik. In the secret documents of Benes's archive there were several accounts about reporting on Stefanik in such a "proper manner." From the tone of the accounts, it is evident that the information given Slovak factors in regard to Stefanik was anything but favorable to him even before he decided to return home. The documents frequently mentioned the "Stefanik problem." And those who regarded Stefanik as the most important problem of the new republic gave out with a sigh of relief when Stefanik's plane was shot up and crashed, killing its occupants, as it neared Bratislava on that fateful day of May 4, 1919. The same men went to Bradlo, made a few nice speeches, and had a gigantic mound built over the dead Stefanik, "one of the �58 SLOVAKIA founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic." But even this the Benes Czechs would prefer to forget today. Thereafter, the "Stefanik problem" ceased to be a problem! The second Slovak personality that entered the life of the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a "problem" was Andrew Hlinka. In a way, Hlinka was given the same treatment as Stefanik. Before he had come to Prague, the same people in the service of Benes made it their business to inform the Czechs about the "Andrew Hlinka problem." In the life of Andrew Hlinka, between the end of October, 1918, and the end of January, 1919, there is a colossal abyss. In 1918, Hlinka was the only one in Slovakia who spoke out clearly and forcefully for secession from the Magyars and for union with the Czechs to form a common political state on the basis of "equals with equals." At the meeting in Martin, in May 1918, he prevented the flight of Slovak leaders from politics, shouting down Dula who wanted to resign the chairmanship of the group. At that time Hlinka said: "Let us not circumvent the issue, but let us say outright that we are for a Czech-Slovak orientation!" In 1918, at two secret meetings and one public meeting, when uncertainty and fear dominated all present, Andrew Hlinka stood up fearlessly and proclaimed: "Our marriage with the Magyars was not successful, we must part." But he went further and said what should be done: "Let us unite with the Czechs in one state." Official Prague had the opportunity to make Hlinka the greatest friend of the Czechs. All it had to do was tell the truth about Hlinka, what Hlinka had done to gain the Slovaks for the new republic. If it had done that, Hlinka would have been greeted in Prague with demonstrations which would have undoubtedly surpassed those in his honor in 1907 after the Cernova massacre. But official Prague had willed it otherwise. Masaryk and Benes and their political servants - were well aware of the fact that Hlinka was a Catholic priest, the leader of the Slovak Catholic People's Party, and a great Slovak patriot and champion of freedom and independence of the Slovak people. A small group of Slovak politicians, handpicked by Masa- �SLOVAKIA 59 ryk and Benes to serve in Prague, saw to it that the "proper" information about Hlinka was propagated. Official Prague could then quote and spread it. It was obvious that the Masaryk-Benes political clique did not want Andrew Hlinka for a friend, so they did what they could to embarrass him and present him in a false light to the people of Czecho-Slovakia to ruin him politically and otherwise. When the Czecho-Slovak State was established, the Slovaks, including Hlinka, had no clear conception of what the new state would be like. That the new state would be run in the spirit of equality of both nations - on that, it seems, all were agreed. The Slovaks would run their country, while the Czechs would be masters of their own household; if the Slovaks needed help, the Czechs would help, but the quantity and quality of such help would be decided by the Slovaks, not the Czechs. The Czechs agreed with this in principle. After Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, some of the men who were afraid to open their mouths before October, 1918, suddenly acquired sufficient courage to run to Prague and tell what they had done for the creation of the state in order to secure political offices for themselves. Hlinka was not one of them. And thereby Hlinka became "dangerous" to the Prague clique of Masaryk and Benes. When Hlinka arrived in Prague as the last of the Slovak deputies, no one told him: "Hlinka, you behaved valiantly, thank you!" No, the Prague politicians, influenced by Masaryk and Benes, could not do that. When Hlinka arrived in Prague he was welcomed not as the greatest friend of the Czechs, but as the worst enemy of the new State. Long debates in parliament revolved around the personality of Andrew Hlinka. Appraising this behavior of the Benes Czechs years later, we can say that it was the first Czech defeat. The history of the advent of Hlinka to Prague and the history of the beginnings of the struggle, which is not finished to date, is very interesting. Andrew Hlinka did not run to Prague as soon as Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, because he realized that Slovakia needed to be consolidated first. Hlinka did not yearn for a ministerial or cabinet position as some Slovak �60 SLOVAKIA politicians did, making it appear as if this were the last station of happiness, or the main prize in the lottery of their life's career. Hlinka came to Prague on January 10, 1919. Hlinka had not been in Prague for a long time - the last time when he lectured in Prague, the city of Prague welcomed him as it had never welcomed any Slovak before or since. It was a welcome fit for a king. But all that seemed to be forgotten now. The majority of Slovak deputies, selected and named by Srobar and approved by Masaryk and Benes, had already taken the oath at previous sessions. The 15th session began with the announcement by chairman Tomasek that Andrew Hlinka, a member of the National Assembly, had presented himself and was ready to take the oath of office. Anton Stefanek read the form of the oath and Hlinka replied: "I do so promise!" At that instant the parliament r esponded with applause. This was the first and, at the same time, the last spontaneous applause that Hlinka received in the Prague parliament from the Czechs and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") . After taking the oath, Hlinka immediately returned home. In less than two weeks, while he was absent, Hlinka became the target of the most vicious and malicious attacks from members of the same parliament. It is strange, when we think of it now, that the attacks wer e initiated by the otherwise keen Czech Social Democrat, Mr. Rudolph Bechyne, who said on January 21, 1919: "I have here the organ of the Czecho-Slovak People's Party, the CZECH. In it is a report of a non-political meeting of Czecho-Slovak Catholics. I read here that the delegate from Slovakia, Andrew Hlinka, spoke at that meeting and this is what he said about the Czechs: ' They are ousting us from our churches!' Allow me to mark this by its right name : it is not dignified for a Catholic priest to lie." "Excellent," exclaimed the parliament, wildly applauding Bechyne. Bechyne: "Hlinka further stated that a hundred Czech teachers are going to Slovakia and what such a teacher knows, that we know." �SLOVAKIA 61 Cuprik: "We got to know that from Moravia!" Bechyiie: "Gentlemen, in such a manner, according to Hlinka's opinion, will be welcomed in Slovakia the Czech teachers, who are going there with real idealism, the kind of idealism we recommend to many of those for whom Hlinka speaks! Furthermore, it says that they are taking religion away from 90 percent of the Catholics. But where is the proof for this? Who is taking religion away from whom? Gentlemen, if anyone took religion away from the people in this war, then it was the army chaplains, about whose activities all soldiers, the faithful and unfaithful believers, are properly informed." As Bechyne continued to speak, he mentioned also that the separation of Church from State is just about ready and closed with this warning : "It is my wish that our public should not be prepared for this act in the manner that it was brought to us in royal Prague by Andrew Blinka, about whose head the aureola is very false." Blinka did have the martyr's aureola: a three-year prison term. And this was something that no other Slovak had. Bechyne's attack was the beginning of a bitter struggle - a struggle which in the end meant the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia, the end of Slovak-Czech collaboration for any sort of common political state. The signal for the attack on Hlinka was given. Even members of the Slovak Club of the Prague parliament caught on quickly; they sensed it would be to their advantage to attack Hlinka in Prague. To ingratiate themselves to the "progressive" Masaryk-Benes Czechs, they willingly and gladly did what they wanted them to do: smear Hlinka. They readily forgot that there were a thousand and one problems in Slovakia. These did not interest them primarily; the big problem was Hlinka. On January 23, 1919, the Prague parliament was the scene of the wildest conversations. The first attack against Blinka was made by Deputy Devecka, who said: "Mr. Hlinka was and is a puzzle for the Slovaks!" The "progressive" Czechs liked that remark, rewarding Devecka's "wisdom" with wild applause, as if he had �62 SLOVAKIA just set another column for the foundations of the newlyborn republic. What Illinka happened to be in 1919, and what the Slovaks thought of him, is not difficult to ascertain at all, but who was Devecka, who was the first Slovak in the Prague parliament to draw a sword against Hlinka? Public sources, literary handbooks, and encyclopediae have nothing to give about Devecka. But it is said by those who are informed that Devecka was a Lutheran preacher, one of the pre-war collaborators of the periodical "Prudy." In short, from time to time, Devecka contributed several lines to a periodical which had some 238 subscribers just before the war began. This was the man, then, who spoke in the name of the Slovak Club of Deputies, of which Hlinka, too, was a member, saying that he and the Club do not identify themselves with Illinka ! Of course, this pleased the Masaryk-Benes politicians exceedingly. Srobar, in his book "Oslobodene Slovensko" (Liberated Slovakia), recalls that there was much distrust of Slovak leaders in Prague for their separatistic stand. Devecka lost no time in assuring Prague that they were good and reliable Slovaks, with the exception of Hlinka, who was, in his estimation, no good. Devecka's speech was complemented by the "Slovensky dennik" (Slovak Daily) with this remark: "Hlinka fears that he will lose power; he does not want Czech enlightenment to shine into the dark corners of the pulpits and that is why he is instigating against progressive teachers.'' The Czechs use the term "devecka" for a maid. In politics that is exactly what Devecka was: an obedient .servant-maid of the Czech socialistic clique, which was determined to neutralize the political activity of Slovak Catholic leaders. During one of his last speeches, on March 5, 1937, Devecka again rehashed the question why Slovak Lutherans had to be employed to help the Czechs in the .administration of government in Slovakia. After nineteen years of Czecho-Slovakia, qualified Slovaks of the Catholic faith still found it difficult to find government employment, because, according to Devecka, it would not be pro- �SLOVAKIA 6'3 per now to replace the non-Catholics in Slovakia after they had performed so faithfully for Czecho-Slovakia. Devecka did not speak the truth. No one in Slovakia said that Slovak Lutherans should be thrown out of offices, but the majority of Slovaks were agreed that Slovak Catholics, too, should be placed in government jobs. Furthermore, few people said throw ALL the Czechs out of Slovakia, but many did speak out against sending more Czechs into Slovakia after the Slovaks did have qualified sons and daughters to fill the various positions which required education and training. Devecka, however, was in the service of the Czech regime in Prague and had to do its bidding for his own sake. Hlinka practically stood alone in the defense of the interests of his Slovak people in 1919. Outside of Juriga, no others were experienced politicians. He was not defended by his own people so much as by Czech Catholics under the leadership of Msgr. Sramek. They backed Hlinka not so much out of love for him, but rather for the practical political considerations which could be exacted with the aid of Hlinka's support. Sramek in fact could more easily and effectively defend Hlinka's clean shield than his own. Later on, of course, we know that Sramek turned against Hlinka and his party, but in 1919 he was Hlinka's "lone defender" so to speak. After Devecka's senseless attack against the absent Hlinka on January 23, 1919, Sramek asked for the floor to reply to Devecka's smear-statements. He had just begun to speak, addressing the members of parliament "most esteemed gentlemen," when a voice boomed out: "And what about ladies?" Sramek answered cooly: "I'm sorry, but I see none here." Thereupon Deputy Zemina (Zeminova) jumped up and shouted: "I am an enemy; I am no lady!" She was right and so was Sramek: Madame Zemina was no lady! Sramek then spoke how necessary it was to cultivate and preserve national unity, particularly at this time (1919) when the borders of the State were not yet defined. Even to this day it is difficult to explain why Sra.mek's words evoked such a storm of protest and opposition. He had attacked no one and had spoken clearly and without malice �64 SLOVAKIA on what he thought was one of the major problems of the new State. In those days, however, it made little difference what Hlinka or Sramek said about anything: all they had to do was ask for the floor and the Czech "progressives" would start barking. I quote from the record for the edification of our readers so they might get an idea of what the "progressive" Deputies in the Prague Parliament were like in the first years of the Republic. Bufival: That means that you must quit inciting against us in the churches! Aust: But it will happen one time that we shall reply to you in the churches. The lights in the heavens are already extinguished! When Sramek asked for a sense of justice and questioned whether the representation in parliament justly represented the people who sent their deputies, Deputy Aust barked: That is FATA MORGANA! Kubicek: Only according to the merits one has gained in the nation. Here every party is represented according to merits which it gained in the nation. "Gentlemen," asked Sramek, "do you really want me to cause a riot in this parliament?" Thereupon the entire parliament resounded with bitter invectives and outcries. When the clamor died down, various members asked and were given the privilege of the floor: Zemina: Well, go ahead and riot! Stransky: Just don't jingle your spurs! Johanis: You're capable of it, Mr. Professor. You used to send people drunk with alcohol against us. Zemina: In Vienna you had no courage. Bufival: In Vienna you made the politics of sneaks. Zemina: Hlinka is inciting against the teachers. Oufik: (one of Sramek's men): Hlinka incites no one; he is a martyr. If Hlinka did not exist, you would have no Slovakia! Markovic: Hlinka did not make Slovakia; he betrayed her. This man is one day a priest and something else the next. I am a Slovak! (Applause). "Allow me," Sramek tried again, "since the day be- �SLOVAKIA 65 fore yesterday the absent Hlinka was attacked in .such a manner ... " - but a booming voice bellowed: This is ingratitude! And then ... Zemina: He attacked Czech teachers. Cufik: Without Hlinka there would have been no Slovakia. To Hlinka belongs the credit that the Slovaks joined the Czechs. He was jailed for two years for the .Slovak cause. Thereupon shouts of ridicule broke out, and a voice ,c ried out: Tell us more, what else did Hlinka do? Markovic: If there were no Masaryk, there would be no Slovaks. Sramek: Permit me, esteemed gentlemen, to state that I felt embarrassed when a member of the presidium of the Czecho-Slovak Social Democratic Party, in such a crude manner, if I must say it, attacked the honor of an absent member of this parliament without ascertaining beforehand exactly what this man had said not in parliament, but at a meeting. Voices: But we read about it in the "Czech." "Esteemed gentlemen, coutinued Sramek, I recall for you what you already know very well, that we are here concerned with every word, every qualifying word, when such a great reproach is made against Andrew Hlinka with falsehoods." Jaros: He does not deserve anything else when he spits at Czech teachers! Zemina: He used to kiss the hand of a Magyar bishop! Sramek: Allow me to state further that there is no proof for what has been said here against Hlinka and no one of us knows exactly what Hlinka said. Jaros: Then he should have retracted it in the newspapers. Sramek: But he is in Slovakia and does not know what is going on here. Stransky: Wen, even one Slovak deputy condemned him. Cufik: From what party? Voice: He, too, was a clerical. Sramek at that time, however, stood his ground, de- �66 SLOVAKIA fending Hlinka against all "progressive" Czechs who wanted to discredit him. Hlinka had a great following in Slovakia, Sramek told the parliament, and by ridiculing and smearing him Hlinka's opponents were not rendering a noble service to the Slovaks and the Czechs and certainly not to the newly-born Czecho-Slovak Republic. When Deputy Bechyne claimed that he heard Hlinka speak against Masaryk in Prostejov and in Brno, Sramek asked him when that happened. When Bechyne replied that it happened b8fore the war, Deputy Sedlacek asked Bechyne what he himself happened to be before the war and what he had said about certain people and matters at that time. Bechyne, of course, would rather not talk about that! Sramek admired Hlinka for standing up for the rights of his people and for his fight in the defense of the individuality of the Slovak people. Promises had been made the Slovaks before they decided to join the Czechs to form a joint political State and those) promises should be kept. And Hlinka had the right to demand that they be kept. Hlinka was and is, Sramek said, for the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but he also is the Slovak nation's symbol of freedom and independence; he should be heard and everything should be done to make the Slovaks feel at home in the new Republic. But Sramek was yelled down by the Czech "progressive" anti-clericals who were egged on by Masaryk's "away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and condemned !" The Czech press of that time enthusiastically indulged in attacks against Andrew Hlinka. The "Lidove noviny" (People's News) said in an editorial that the regeneration of Slovakia is possible only on the foundation of modern Czech currents. "It will take only a few years and things will be the same in Slovakia as they are in the. Czech lands',' concluded the editorial (Feb. 27, 1919). Stenographic reports of the minutes of the Prague parliament from the beginning of 1919 make particularly interesting reading. They describe some very lively scenes, during which a speaker had to wait quite some time before he could resume speaking. Every mention of Hlinka's name, it seems, caused disturbances, insulting outcries, and �SLOVAKIA 67 bitter attacks. With the exception of the temperamental Bechyne, none of the foremost Czech politicians of the old Vienna school indulged in frivolous, senseless, and unsparing attacks against Hlinka. It is interesting that Markovic was of the opm10n that without Masaryk there would have been no Slovak nation, because it was Masaryk himself who had said that the Slovak nation is the invention of Magyar propaganda and that there was no Slovak nation! Imagine if you will, how much poorer the world would be without T. G. Masaryk: it would have to do without the Slovak nation and without "Czechoslovak" democracy! Masaryk represented the smallest Czech political party, but the world, including the Slovaks and Czechs who knew better, was supposed to believe that "Masaryk's teaching became the national Credo of Czecho-Slovakia." Masaryk, the great "progressive," was put in the saddle by the Allies and his disciples lost no time in building altars in his honor to replace those of the "outmoded, reactionary" saints. Two months after that "glorious October Day" (Oct. 28, 1918) - after Hlinka had come out resolutely against the Magyars and for joining the Czechs - the "progressive" Czechs of Masaryk and Benes proclaimed Hlinka a Magyarone, a coward who had surrendered to the Magyars. Scotus Viator replied at that time: "Hlinka never did submit to the Magyars. He lies who would make a Magyarone of him and makes himself stupid." Hlinka and his people wanted to serve the best interests of their new Republic; they proved this over and over again. But the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") in their service, welcomed Hlinka in Prague as an enemy of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The consequences of this folly were far-reachring. On January 30, 1919, Hlinka returned to Prague and read the records of the parliamentary sessions to learn what was said about him in his absence. When Hlinka did rise in his own defense, it is interesting to note that the Czech voices, so loud and disturbing when Sramek spoke, were now silent. Since the accusations and allegations made �68 SLOVAKIA against him were of a very serious nature, Hlinka openly demanded an investigation of each and every charge and all accusers. But the Czechs clammed up on that occasion. Markovic, descendant of one of Hlinka's very good friends, stood alone against Hlinka. Hlinka stressed the fact that no one can honestly accuse him of hating the Czechs or of working against the welfare and security of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He and his followers recognize and respect the right of the Czech people to certain inalienable rights, but by the same token, the Slovaks expect the Czechs and their leaders to recognize and respect the right of the Slovak people to the same inalienable rights. After what had happened in the Prague Parliament, Hlinka quit visiting the Slovak Club of which he was a member, but he did visit the Deputy's Club of Sramek's Czech People's Party. Hlinka later said: "That I appreciate good Czechs is proven by the fact that in Prague I do not visit the Slovak Club, but the Club of the Czech Peoples' Party." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are deeply convinced that this alliance (with the USSR) is to the benefit of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union and that it also is a contribution to international understanding. Whosoever among us does not want to acknowledge this supra-partisan and national character of the Czechoslovak-Soviet alliance, he is undermining this alliance and working against his very own aims." - (Dr. Peter Zenkl, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47) . • • • "In Ozech .p olitics, in Ozei:::h national life, it is urgent that we cOlffie to am understanding with the Communist Party . . . the Comnmnist party shahl remain the greatest force in oiur political scheme even after the elections are over, and socialism shall remain the foundation o.f our national life . . . . Coming to tern1s with the Communists is the golden theme of our political philo,so,p hy." - (Ferdinand Perouit:Jka, a Benei:\ Ctzech, DNESEIK, 2-.9-48). � SLOVAKIA 57 - - - - - - -- -- ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE By CONSTANTINE tULEN After the Czecho-Slovak Republic was born, two significant Slovak personalities became "problems" for the governing group in Prague, the men handpicked by T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes to run the infant state. The first was General Milan R. Stefanik. When the first World War was just about over, and T. G. Masaryk, at that time in Japan, had named the first Czecho-Slovak Government, Stefanik was named War Minister, while the department of Foreign Affairs was entrusted to Dr. Edward Benes. Stefanik expressed no desire for the office given him by Masaryk; he did not expect to be appointed War Minister, but Minister of Foreign Affairs of the new state, since he had opened the door for Masaryk to diplomatic circles which were most responsible for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was a political unknown at that time, a politician without any practical political experience. As a result there was a conflict between Benes and Stefanik. The latter, however, was far away from Prague and not very close to Masaryk, while Benes, regarded as Masaryk's intimate and understudy, was right in Prague. Among the very first orders issued by Benes in Prague to his subordinates and lieutenants was the order to inform Slovak factors "in a proper manner" about Stefanik. In the secret documents of Benes's archive there were several accounts about reporting on Stefanik in such a "proper manner." From the tone of the accounts, it is evident that the information given Slovak factors in regard to Stefanik was anything but favorable to him even before he decided to return home. The documents frequently mentioned the "Stefanik problem." And those who regarded Stefanik as the most important problem of the new republic gave out with a sigh of relief when Stefanik's plane was shot up and crashed, killing its occupants, as it neared Bratislava on that fateful day of May 4, 1919. The same men went to Bradlo, made a few nice speeches, and had a gigantic mound built over the dead Stefanik, "one of the �58 SLOVAKIA founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic." But even this the Benes Czechs would prefer to forget today. Thereafter, the "Stefanik problem" ceased to be a problem! The second Slovak personality that entered the life of the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a "problem" was Andrew Hlinka. In a way, Hlinka was given the same treatment as Stefanik. Before he had come to Prague, the same people in the service of Benes made it their business to inform the Czechs about the "Andrew Hlinka problem." In the life of Andrew Hlinka, between the end of October, 1918, and the end of January, 1919, there is a colossal abyss. In 1918, Hlinka was the only one in Slovakia who spoke out clearly and forcefully for secession from the Magyars and for union with the Czechs to form a common political state on the basis of "equals with equals." At the meeting in Martin, in May 1918, he prevented the flight of Slovak leaders from politics, shouting down Dula who wanted to resign the chairmanship of the group. At that time Hlinka said: "Let us not circumvent the issue, but let us say outright that we are for a Czech-Slovak orientation!" In 1918, at two secret meetings and one public meeting, when uncertainty and fear dominated all present, Andrew Hlinka stood up fearlessly and proclaimed: "Our marriage with the Magyars was not successful, we must part." But he went further and said what should be done: "Let us unite with the Czechs in one state." Official Prague had the opportunity to make Hlinka the greatest friend of the Czechs. All it had to do was tell the truth about Hlinka, what Hlinka had done to gain the Slovaks for the new republic. If it had done that, Hlinka would have been greeted in Prague with demonstrations which would have undoubtedly surpassed those in his honor in 1907 after the Cernova massacre. But official Prague had willed it otherwise. Masaryk and Benes and their political servants - were well aware of the fact that Hlinka was a Catholic priest, the leader of the Slovak Catholic People's Party, and a great Slovak patriot and champion of freedom and independence of the Slovak people. A small group of Slovak politicians, handpicked by Masa- �SLOVAKIA 59 ryk and Benes to serve in Prague, saw to it that the "proper" information about Hlinka was propagated. Official Prague could then quote and spread it. It was obvious that the Masaryk-Benes political clique did not want Andrew Hlinka for a friend, so they did what they could to embarrass him and present him in a false light to the people of Czecho-Slovakia to ruin him politically and otherwise. When the Czecho-Slovak State was established, the Slovaks, including Hlinka, had no clear conception of what the new state would be like. That the new state would be run in the spirit of equality of both nations - on that, it seems, all were agreed. The Slovaks would run their country, while the Czechs would be masters of their own household; if the Slovaks needed help, the Czechs would help, but the quantity and quality of such help would be decided by the Slovaks, not the Czechs. The Czechs agreed with this in principle. After Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, some of the men who were afraid to open their mouths before October, 1918, suddenly acquired sufficient courage to run to Prague and tell what they had done for the creation of the state in order to secure political offices for themselves. Hlinka was not one of them. And thereby Hlinka became "dangerous" to the Prague clique of Masaryk and Benes. When Hlinka arrived in Prague as the last of the Slovak deputies, no one told him: "Hlinka, you behaved valiantly, thank you!" No, the Prague politicians, influenced by Masaryk and Benes, could not do that. When Hlinka arrived in Prague he was welcomed not as the greatest friend of the Czechs, but as the worst enemy of the new State. Long debates in parliament revolved around the personality of Andrew Hlinka. Appraising this behavior of the Benes Czechs years later, we can say that it was the first Czech defeat. The history of the advent of Hlinka to Prague and the history of the beginnings of the struggle, which is not finished to date, is very interesting. Andrew Hlinka did not run to Prague as soon as Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, because he realized that Slovakia needed to be consolidated first. Hlinka did not yearn for a ministerial or cabinet position as some Slovak �60 SLOVAKIA politicians did, making it appear as if this were the last station of happiness, or the main prize in the lottery of their life's career. Hlinka came to Prague on January 10, 1919. Hlinka had not been in Prague for a long time - the last time when he lectured in Prague, the city of Prague welcomed him as it had never welcomed any Slovak before or since. It was a welcome fit for a king. But all that seemed to be forgotten now. The majority of Slovak deputies, selected and named by Srobar and approved by Masaryk and Benes, had already taken the oath at previous sessions. The 15th session began with the announcement by chairman Tomasek that Andrew Hlinka, a member of the National Assembly, had presented himself and was ready to take the oath of office. Anton Stefanek read the form of the oath and Hlinka replied: "I do so promise!" At that instant the parliament r esponded with applause. This was the first and, at the same time, the last spontaneous applause that Hlinka received in the Prague parliament from the Czechs and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") . After taking the oath, Hlinka immediately returned home. In less than two weeks, while he was absent, Hlinka became the target of the most vicious and malicious attacks from members of the same parliament. It is strange, when we think of it now, that the attacks wer e initiated by the otherwise keen Czech Social Democrat, Mr. Rudolph Bechyne, who said on January 21, 1919: "I have here the organ of the Czecho-Slovak People's Party, the CZECH. In it is a report of a non-political meeting of Czecho-Slovak Catholics. I read here that the delegate from Slovakia, Andrew Hlinka, spoke at that meeting and this is what he said about the Czechs: ' They are ousting us from our churches!' Allow me to mark this by its right name : it is not dignified for a Catholic priest to lie." "Excellent," exclaimed the parliament, wildly applauding Bechyne. Bechyne: "Hlinka further stated that a hundred Czech teachers are going to Slovakia and what such a teacher knows, that we know." �SLOVAKIA 61 Cuprik: "We got to know that from Moravia!" Bechyiie: "Gentlemen, in such a manner, according to Hlinka's opinion, will be welcomed in Slovakia the Czech teachers, who are going there with real idealism, the kind of idealism we recommend to many of those for whom Hlinka speaks! Furthermore, it says that they are taking religion away from 90 percent of the Catholics. But where is the proof for this? Who is taking religion away from whom? Gentlemen, if anyone took religion away from the people in this war, then it was the army chaplains, about whose activities all soldiers, the faithful and unfaithful believers, are properly informed." As Bechyne continued to speak, he mentioned also that the separation of Church from State is just about ready and closed with this warning : "It is my wish that our public should not be prepared for this act in the manner that it was brought to us in royal Prague by Andrew Blinka, about whose head the aureola is very false." Blinka did have the martyr's aureola: a three-year prison term. And this was something that no other Slovak had. Bechyne's attack was the beginning of a bitter struggle - a struggle which in the end meant the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia, the end of Slovak-Czech collaboration for any sort of common political state. The signal for the attack on Hlinka was given. Even members of the Slovak Club of the Prague parliament caught on quickly; they sensed it would be to their advantage to attack Hlinka in Prague. To ingratiate themselves to the "progressive" Masaryk-Benes Czechs, they willingly and gladly did what they wanted them to do: smear Hlinka. They readily forgot that there were a thousand and one problems in Slovakia. These did not interest them primarily; the big problem was Hlinka. On January 23, 1919, the Prague parliament was the scene of the wildest conversations. The first attack against Blinka was made by Deputy Devecka, who said: "Mr. Hlinka was and is a puzzle for the Slovaks!" The "progressive" Czechs liked that remark, rewarding Devecka's "wisdom" with wild applause, as if he had �62 SLOVAKIA just set another column for the foundations of the newlyborn republic. What Illinka happened to be in 1919, and what the Slovaks thought of him, is not difficult to ascertain at all, but who was Devecka, who was the first Slovak in the Prague parliament to draw a sword against Hlinka? Public sources, literary handbooks, and encyclopediae have nothing to give about Devecka. But it is said by those who are informed that Devecka was a Lutheran preacher, one of the pre-war collaborators of the periodical "Prudy." In short, from time to time, Devecka contributed several lines to a periodical which had some 238 subscribers just before the war began. This was the man, then, who spoke in the name of the Slovak Club of Deputies, of which Hlinka, too, was a member, saying that he and the Club do not identify themselves with Illinka ! Of course, this pleased the Masaryk-Benes politicians exceedingly. Srobar, in his book "Oslobodene Slovensko" (Liberated Slovakia), recalls that there was much distrust of Slovak leaders in Prague for their separatistic stand. Devecka lost no time in assuring Prague that they were good and reliable Slovaks, with the exception of Hlinka, who was, in his estimation, no good. Devecka's speech was complemented by the "Slovensky dennik" (Slovak Daily) with this remark: "Hlinka fears that he will lose power; he does not want Czech enlightenment to shine into the dark corners of the pulpits and that is why he is instigating against progressive teachers.'' The Czechs use the term "devecka" for a maid. In politics that is exactly what Devecka was: an obedient .servant-maid of the Czech socialistic clique, which was determined to neutralize the political activity of Slovak Catholic leaders. During one of his last speeches, on March 5, 1937, Devecka again rehashed the question why Slovak Lutherans had to be employed to help the Czechs in the .administration of government in Slovakia. After nineteen years of Czecho-Slovakia, qualified Slovaks of the Catholic faith still found it difficult to find government employment, because, according to Devecka, it would not be pro- �SLOVAKIA 6'3 per now to replace the non-Catholics in Slovakia after they had performed so faithfully for Czecho-Slovakia. Devecka did not speak the truth. No one in Slovakia said that Slovak Lutherans should be thrown out of offices, but the majority of Slovaks were agreed that Slovak Catholics, too, should be placed in government jobs. Furthermore, few people said throw ALL the Czechs out of Slovakia, but many did speak out against sending more Czechs into Slovakia after the Slovaks did have qualified sons and daughters to fill the various positions which required education and training. Devecka, however, was in the service of the Czech regime in Prague and had to do its bidding for his own sake. Hlinka practically stood alone in the defense of the interests of his Slovak people in 1919. Outside of Juriga, no others were experienced politicians. He was not defended by his own people so much as by Czech Catholics under the leadership of Msgr. Sramek. They backed Hlinka not so much out of love for him, but rather for the practical political considerations which could be exacted with the aid of Hlinka's support. Sramek in fact could more easily and effectively defend Hlinka's clean shield than his own. Later on, of course, we know that Sramek turned against Hlinka and his party, but in 1919 he was Hlinka's "lone defender" so to speak. After Devecka's senseless attack against the absent Hlinka on January 23, 1919, Sramek asked for the floor to reply to Devecka's smear-statements. He had just begun to speak, addressing the members of parliament "most esteemed gentlemen," when a voice boomed out: "And what about ladies?" Sramek answered cooly: "I'm sorry, but I see none here." Thereupon Deputy Zemina (Zeminova) jumped up and shouted: "I am an enemy; I am no lady!" She was right and so was Sramek: Madame Zemina was no lady! Sramek then spoke how necessary it was to cultivate and preserve national unity, particularly at this time (1919) when the borders of the State were not yet defined. Even to this day it is difficult to explain why Sra.mek's words evoked such a storm of protest and opposition. He had attacked no one and had spoken clearly and without malice �64 SLOVAKIA on what he thought was one of the major problems of the new State. In those days, however, it made little difference what Hlinka or Sramek said about anything: all they had to do was ask for the floor and the Czech "progressives" would start barking. I quote from the record for the edification of our readers so they might get an idea of what the "progressive" Deputies in the Prague Parliament were like in the first years of the Republic. Bufival: That means that you must quit inciting against us in the churches! Aust: But it will happen one time that we shall reply to you in the churches. The lights in the heavens are already extinguished! When Sramek asked for a sense of justice and questioned whether the representation in parliament justly represented the people who sent their deputies, Deputy Aust barked: That is FATA MORGANA! Kubicek: Only according to the merits one has gained in the nation. Here every party is represented according to merits which it gained in the nation. "Gentlemen," asked Sramek, "do you really want me to cause a riot in this parliament?" Thereupon the entire parliament resounded with bitter invectives and outcries. When the clamor died down, various members asked and were given the privilege of the floor: Zemina: Well, go ahead and riot! Stransky: Just don't jingle your spurs! Johanis: You're capable of it, Mr. Professor. You used to send people drunk with alcohol against us. Zemina: In Vienna you had no courage. Bufival: In Vienna you made the politics of sneaks. Zemina: Hlinka is inciting against the teachers. Oufik: (one of Sramek's men): Hlinka incites no one; he is a martyr. If Hlinka did not exist, you would have no Slovakia! Markovic: Hlinka did not make Slovakia; he betrayed her. This man is one day a priest and something else the next. I am a Slovak! (Applause). "Allow me," Sramek tried again, "since the day be- �SLOVAKIA 65 fore yesterday the absent Hlinka was attacked in .such a manner ... " - but a booming voice bellowed: This is ingratitude! And then ... Zemina: He attacked Czech teachers. Cufik: Without Hlinka there would have been no Slovakia. To Hlinka belongs the credit that the Slovaks joined the Czechs. He was jailed for two years for the .Slovak cause. Thereupon shouts of ridicule broke out, and a voice ,c ried out: Tell us more, what else did Hlinka do? Markovic: If there were no Masaryk, there would be no Slovaks. Sramek: Permit me, esteemed gentlemen, to state that I felt embarrassed when a member of the presidium of the Czecho-Slovak Social Democratic Party, in such a crude manner, if I must say it, attacked the honor of an absent member of this parliament without ascertaining beforehand exactly what this man had said not in parliament, but at a meeting. Voices: But we read about it in the "Czech." "Esteemed gentlemen, coutinued Sramek, I recall for you what you already know very well, that we are here concerned with every word, every qualifying word, when such a great reproach is made against Andrew Hlinka with falsehoods." Jaros: He does not deserve anything else when he spits at Czech teachers! Zemina: He used to kiss the hand of a Magyar bishop! Sramek: Allow me to state further that there is no proof for what has been said here against Hlinka and no one of us knows exactly what Hlinka said. Jaros: Then he should have retracted it in the newspapers. Sramek: But he is in Slovakia and does not know what is going on here. Stransky: Wen, even one Slovak deputy condemned him. Cufik: From what party? Voice: He, too, was a clerical. Sramek at that time, however, stood his ground, de- �66 SLOVAKIA fending Hlinka against all "progressive" Czechs who wanted to discredit him. Hlinka had a great following in Slovakia, Sramek told the parliament, and by ridiculing and smearing him Hlinka's opponents were not rendering a noble service to the Slovaks and the Czechs and certainly not to the newly-born Czecho-Slovak Republic. When Deputy Bechyne claimed that he heard Hlinka speak against Masaryk in Prostejov and in Brno, Sramek asked him when that happened. When Bechyne replied that it happened b8fore the war, Deputy Sedlacek asked Bechyne what he himself happened to be before the war and what he had said about certain people and matters at that time. Bechyne, of course, would rather not talk about that! Sramek admired Hlinka for standing up for the rights of his people and for his fight in the defense of the individuality of the Slovak people. Promises had been made the Slovaks before they decided to join the Czechs to form a joint political State and those) promises should be kept. And Hlinka had the right to demand that they be kept. Hlinka was and is, Sramek said, for the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but he also is the Slovak nation's symbol of freedom and independence; he should be heard and everything should be done to make the Slovaks feel at home in the new Republic. But Sramek was yelled down by the Czech "progressive" anti-clericals who were egged on by Masaryk's "away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and condemned !" The Czech press of that time enthusiastically indulged in attacks against Andrew Hlinka. The "Lidove noviny" (People's News) said in an editorial that the regeneration of Slovakia is possible only on the foundation of modern Czech currents. "It will take only a few years and things will be the same in Slovakia as they are in the. Czech lands',' concluded the editorial (Feb. 27, 1919). Stenographic reports of the minutes of the Prague parliament from the beginning of 1919 make particularly interesting reading. They describe some very lively scenes, during which a speaker had to wait quite some time before he could resume speaking. Every mention of Hlinka's name, it seems, caused disturbances, insulting outcries, and �SLOVAKIA 67 bitter attacks. With the exception of the temperamental Bechyne, none of the foremost Czech politicians of the old Vienna school indulged in frivolous, senseless, and unsparing attacks against Hlinka. It is interesting that Markovic was of the opm10n that without Masaryk there would have been no Slovak nation, because it was Masaryk himself who had said that the Slovak nation is the invention of Magyar propaganda and that there was no Slovak nation! Imagine if you will, how much poorer the world would be without T. G. Masaryk: it would have to do without the Slovak nation and without "Czechoslovak" democracy! Masaryk represented the smallest Czech political party, but the world, including the Slovaks and Czechs who knew better, was supposed to believe that "Masaryk's teaching became the national Credo of Czecho-Slovakia." Masaryk, the great "progressive," was put in the saddle by the Allies and his disciples lost no time in building altars in his honor to replace those of the "outmoded, reactionary" saints. Two months after that "glorious October Day" (Oct. 28, 1918) - after Hlinka had come out resolutely against the Magyars and for joining the Czechs - the "progressive" Czechs of Masaryk and Benes proclaimed Hlinka a Magyarone, a coward who had surrendered to the Magyars. Scotus Viator replied at that time: "Hlinka never did submit to the Magyars. He lies who would make a Magyarone of him and makes himself stupid." Hlinka and his people wanted to serve the best interests of their new Republic; they proved this over and over again. But the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") in their service, welcomed Hlinka in Prague as an enemy of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The consequences of this folly were far-reachring. On January 30, 1919, Hlinka returned to Prague and read the records of the parliamentary sessions to learn what was said about him in his absence. When Hlinka did rise in his own defense, it is interesting to note that the Czech voices, so loud and disturbing when Sramek spoke, were now silent. Since the accusations and allegations made �68 SLOVAKIA against him were of a very serious nature, Hlinka openly demanded an investigation of each and every charge and all accusers. But the Czechs clammed up on that occasion. Markovic, descendant of one of Hlinka's very good friends, stood alone against Hlinka. Hlinka stressed the fact that no one can honestly accuse him of hating the Czechs or of working against the welfare and security of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He and his followers recognize and respect the right of the Czech people to certain inalienable rights, but by the same token, the Slovaks expect the Czechs and their leaders to recognize and respect the right of the Slovak people to the same inalienable rights. After what had happened in the Prague Parliament, Hlinka quit visiting the Slovak Club of which he was a member, but he did visit the Deputy's Club of Sramek's Czech People's Party. Hlinka later said: "That I appreciate good Czechs is proven by the fact that in Prague I do not visit the Slovak Club, but the Club of the Czech Peoples' Party." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are deeply convinced that this alliance (with the USSR) is to the benefit of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union and that it also is a contribution to international understanding. Whosoever among us does not want to acknowledge this supra-partisan and national character of the Czechoslovak-Soviet alliance, he is undermining this alliance and working against his very own aims." - (Dr. Peter Zenkl, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47) . • • • "In Ozech .p olitics, in Ozei:::h national life, it is urgent that we cOlffie to am understanding with the Communist Party . . . the Comnmnist party shahl remain the greatest force in oiur political scheme even after the elections are over, and socialism shall remain the foundation o.f our national life . . . . Coming to tern1s with the Communists is the golden theme of our political philo,so,p hy." - (Ferdinand Perouit:Jka, a Benei:\ Ctzech, DNESEIK, 2-.9-48). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 57 - - - - - - -- -- ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE By CONSTANTINE tULEN After the Czecho-Slovak Republic was born, two significant Slovak personalities became "problems" for the governing group in Prague, the men handpicked by T. G. Masaryk and Eduard Benes to run the infant state. The first was General Milan R. Stefanik. When the first World War was just about over, and T. G. Masaryk, at that time in Japan, had named the first Czecho-Slovak Government, Stefanik was named War Minister, while the department of Foreign Affairs was entrusted to Dr. Edward Benes. Stefanik expressed no desire for the office given him by Masaryk; he did not expect to be appointed War Minister, but Minister of Foreign Affairs of the new state, since he had opened the door for Masaryk to diplomatic circles which were most responsible for the creation of Czecho-Slovakia. Benes was a political unknown at that time, a politician without any practical political experience. As a result there was a conflict between Benes and Stefanik. The latter, however, was far away from Prague and not very close to Masaryk, while Benes, regarded as Masaryk's intimate and understudy, was right in Prague. Among the very first orders issued by Benes in Prague to his subordinates and lieutenants was the order to inform Slovak factors "in a proper manner" about Stefanik. In the secret documents of Benes's archive there were several accounts about reporting on Stefanik in such a "proper manner." From the tone of the accounts, it is evident that the information given Slovak factors in regard to Stefanik was anything but favorable to him even before he decided to return home. The documents frequently mentioned the "Stefanik problem." And those who regarded Stefanik as the most important problem of the new republic gave out with a sigh of relief when Stefanik's plane was shot up and crashed, killing its occupants, as it neared Bratislava on that fateful day of May 4, 1919. The same men went to Bradlo, made a few nice speeches, and had a gigantic mound built over the dead Stefanik, "one of the 58 SLOVAKIA founders of the Czecho-Slovak Republic." But even this the Benes Czechs would prefer to forget today. Thereafter, the "Stefanik problem" ceased to be a problem! The second Slovak personality that entered the life of the Czecho-Slovak Republic as a "problem" was Andrew Hlinka. In a way, Hlinka was given the same treatment as Stefanik. Before he had come to Prague, the same people in the service of Benes made it their business to inform the Czechs about the "Andrew Hlinka problem." In the life of Andrew Hlinka, between the end of October, 1918, and the end of January, 1919, there is a colossal abyss. In 1918, Hlinka was the only one in Slovakia who spoke out clearly and forcefully for secession from the Magyars and for union with the Czechs to form a common political state on the basis of "equals with equals." At the meeting in Martin, in May 1918, he prevented the flight of Slovak leaders from politics, shouting down Dula who wanted to resign the chairmanship of the group. At that time Hlinka said: "Let us not circumvent the issue, but let us say outright that we are for a Czech-Slovak orientation!" In 1918, at two secret meetings and one public meeting, when uncertainty and fear dominated all present, Andrew Hlinka stood up fearlessly and proclaimed: "Our marriage with the Magyars was not successful, we must part." But he went further and said what should be done: "Let us unite with the Czechs in one state." Official Prague had the opportunity to make Hlinka the greatest friend of the Czechs. All it had to do was tell the truth about Hlinka, what Hlinka had done to gain the Slovaks for the new republic. If it had done that, Hlinka would have been greeted in Prague with demonstrations which would have undoubtedly surpassed those in his honor in 1907 after the Cernova massacre. But official Prague had willed it otherwise. Masaryk and Benes and their political servants - were well aware of the fact that Hlinka was a Catholic priest, the leader of the Slovak Catholic People's Party, and a great Slovak patriot and champion of freedom and independence of the Slovak people. A small group of Slovak politicians, handpicked by Masa- SLOVAKIA 59 ryk and Benes to serve in Prague, saw to it that the "proper" information about Hlinka was propagated. Official Prague could then quote and spread it. It was obvious that the Masaryk-Benes political clique did not want Andrew Hlinka for a friend, so they did what they could to embarrass him and present him in a false light to the people of Czecho-Slovakia to ruin him politically and otherwise. When the Czecho-Slovak State was established, the Slovaks, including Hlinka, had no clear conception of what the new state would be like. That the new state would be run in the spirit of equality of both nations - on that, it seems, all were agreed. The Slovaks would run their country, while the Czechs would be masters of their own household; if the Slovaks needed help, the Czechs would help, but the quantity and quality of such help would be decided by the Slovaks, not the Czechs. The Czechs agreed with this in principle. After Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, some of the men who were afraid to open their mouths before October, 1918, suddenly acquired sufficient courage to run to Prague and tell what they had done for the creation of the state in order to secure political offices for themselves. Hlinka was not one of them. And thereby Hlinka became "dangerous" to the Prague clique of Masaryk and Benes. When Hlinka arrived in Prague as the last of the Slovak deputies, no one told him: "Hlinka, you behaved valiantly, thank you!" No, the Prague politicians, influenced by Masaryk and Benes, could not do that. When Hlinka arrived in Prague he was welcomed not as the greatest friend of the Czechs, but as the worst enemy of the new State. Long debates in parliament revolved around the personality of Andrew Hlinka. Appraising this behavior of the Benes Czechs years later, we can say that it was the first Czech defeat. The history of the advent of Hlinka to Prague and the history of the beginnings of the struggle, which is not finished to date, is very interesting. Andrew Hlinka did not run to Prague as soon as Czecho-Slovakia became a reality, because he realized that Slovakia needed to be consolidated first. Hlinka did not yearn for a ministerial or cabinet position as some Slovak 60 SLOVAKIA politicians did, making it appear as if this were the last station of happiness, or the main prize in the lottery of their life's career. Hlinka came to Prague on January 10, 1919. Hlinka had not been in Prague for a long time - the last time when he lectured in Prague, the city of Prague welcomed him as it had never welcomed any Slovak before or since. It was a welcome fit for a king. But all that seemed to be forgotten now. The majority of Slovak deputies, selected and named by Srobar and approved by Masaryk and Benes, had already taken the oath at previous sessions. The 15th session began with the announcement by chairman Tomasek that Andrew Hlinka, a member of the National Assembly, had presented himself and was ready to take the oath of office. Anton Stefanek read the form of the oath and Hlinka replied: "I do so promise!" At that instant the parliament r esponded with applause. This was the first and, at the same time, the last spontaneous applause that Hlinka received in the Prague parliament from the Czechs and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") . After taking the oath, Hlinka immediately returned home. In less than two weeks, while he was absent, Hlinka became the target of the most vicious and malicious attacks from members of the same parliament. It is strange, when we think of it now, that the attacks wer e initiated by the otherwise keen Czech Social Democrat, Mr. Rudolph Bechyne, who said on January 21, 1919: "I have here the organ of the Czecho-Slovak People's Party, the CZECH. In it is a report of a non-political meeting of Czecho-Slovak Catholics. I read here that the delegate from Slovakia, Andrew Hlinka, spoke at that meeting and this is what he said about the Czechs: ' They are ousting us from our churches!' Allow me to mark this by its right name : it is not dignified for a Catholic priest to lie." "Excellent," exclaimed the parliament, wildly applauding Bechyne. Bechyne: "Hlinka further stated that a hundred Czech teachers are going to Slovakia and what such a teacher knows, that we know." SLOVAKIA 61 Cuprik: "We got to know that from Moravia!" Bechyiie: "Gentlemen, in such a manner, according to Hlinka's opinion, will be welcomed in Slovakia the Czech teachers, who are going there with real idealism, the kind of idealism we recommend to many of those for whom Hlinka speaks! Furthermore, it says that they are taking religion away from 90 percent of the Catholics. But where is the proof for this? Who is taking religion away from whom? Gentlemen, if anyone took religion away from the people in this war, then it was the army chaplains, about whose activities all soldiers, the faithful and unfaithful believers, are properly informed." As Bechyne continued to speak, he mentioned also that the separation of Church from State is just about ready and closed with this warning : "It is my wish that our public should not be prepared for this act in the manner that it was brought to us in royal Prague by Andrew Blinka, about whose head the aureola is very false." Blinka did have the martyr's aureola: a three-year prison term. And this was something that no other Slovak had. Bechyne's attack was the beginning of a bitter struggle - a struggle which in the end meant the collapse of Czecho-Slovakia, the end of Slovak-Czech collaboration for any sort of common political state. The signal for the attack on Hlinka was given. Even members of the Slovak Club of the Prague parliament caught on quickly; they sensed it would be to their advantage to attack Hlinka in Prague. To ingratiate themselves to the "progressive" Masaryk-Benes Czechs, they willingly and gladly did what they wanted them to do: smear Hlinka. They readily forgot that there were a thousand and one problems in Slovakia. These did not interest them primarily; the big problem was Hlinka. On January 23, 1919, the Prague parliament was the scene of the wildest conversations. The first attack against Blinka was made by Deputy Devecka, who said: "Mr. Hlinka was and is a puzzle for the Slovaks!" The "progressive" Czechs liked that remark, rewarding Devecka's "wisdom" with wild applause, as if he had 62 SLOVAKIA just set another column for the foundations of the newlyborn republic. What Illinka happened to be in 1919, and what the Slovaks thought of him, is not difficult to ascertain at all, but who was Devecka, who was the first Slovak in the Prague parliament to draw a sword against Hlinka? Public sources, literary handbooks, and encyclopediae have nothing to give about Devecka. But it is said by those who are informed that Devecka was a Lutheran preacher, one of the pre-war collaborators of the periodical "Prudy." In short, from time to time, Devecka contributed several lines to a periodical which had some 238 subscribers just before the war began. This was the man, then, who spoke in the name of the Slovak Club of Deputies, of which Hlinka, too, was a member, saying that he and the Club do not identify themselves with Illinka ! Of course, this pleased the Masaryk-Benes politicians exceedingly. Srobar, in his book "Oslobodene Slovensko" (Liberated Slovakia), recalls that there was much distrust of Slovak leaders in Prague for their separatistic stand. Devecka lost no time in assuring Prague that they were good and reliable Slovaks, with the exception of Hlinka, who was, in his estimation, no good. Devecka's speech was complemented by the "Slovensky dennik" (Slovak Daily) with this remark: "Hlinka fears that he will lose power; he does not want Czech enlightenment to shine into the dark corners of the pulpits and that is why he is instigating against progressive teachers.'' The Czechs use the term "devecka" for a maid. In politics that is exactly what Devecka was: an obedient .servant-maid of the Czech socialistic clique, which was determined to neutralize the political activity of Slovak Catholic leaders. During one of his last speeches, on March 5, 1937, Devecka again rehashed the question why Slovak Lutherans had to be employed to help the Czechs in the .administration of government in Slovakia. After nineteen years of Czecho-Slovakia, qualified Slovaks of the Catholic faith still found it difficult to find government employment, because, according to Devecka, it would not be pro- SLOVAKIA 6'3 per now to replace the non-Catholics in Slovakia after they had performed so faithfully for Czecho-Slovakia. Devecka did not speak the truth. No one in Slovakia said that Slovak Lutherans should be thrown out of offices, but the majority of Slovaks were agreed that Slovak Catholics, too, should be placed in government jobs. Furthermore, few people said throw ALL the Czechs out of Slovakia, but many did speak out against sending more Czechs into Slovakia after the Slovaks did have qualified sons and daughters to fill the various positions which required education and training. Devecka, however, was in the service of the Czech regime in Prague and had to do its bidding for his own sake. Hlinka practically stood alone in the defense of the interests of his Slovak people in 1919. Outside of Juriga, no others were experienced politicians. He was not defended by his own people so much as by Czech Catholics under the leadership of Msgr. Sramek. They backed Hlinka not so much out of love for him, but rather for the practical political considerations which could be exacted with the aid of Hlinka's support. Sramek in fact could more easily and effectively defend Hlinka's clean shield than his own. Later on, of course, we know that Sramek turned against Hlinka and his party, but in 1919 he was Hlinka's "lone defender" so to speak. After Devecka's senseless attack against the absent Hlinka on January 23, 1919, Sramek asked for the floor to reply to Devecka's smear-statements. He had just begun to speak, addressing the members of parliament "most esteemed gentlemen," when a voice boomed out: "And what about ladies?" Sramek answered cooly: "I'm sorry, but I see none here." Thereupon Deputy Zemina (Zeminova) jumped up and shouted: "I am an enemy; I am no lady!" She was right and so was Sramek: Madame Zemina was no lady! Sramek then spoke how necessary it was to cultivate and preserve national unity, particularly at this time (1919) when the borders of the State were not yet defined. Even to this day it is difficult to explain why Sra.mek's words evoked such a storm of protest and opposition. He had attacked no one and had spoken clearly and without malice 64 SLOVAKIA on what he thought was one of the major problems of the new State. In those days, however, it made little difference what Hlinka or Sramek said about anything: all they had to do was ask for the floor and the Czech "progressives" would start barking. I quote from the record for the edification of our readers so they might get an idea of what the "progressive" Deputies in the Prague Parliament were like in the first years of the Republic. Bufival: That means that you must quit inciting against us in the churches! Aust: But it will happen one time that we shall reply to you in the churches. The lights in the heavens are already extinguished! When Sramek asked for a sense of justice and questioned whether the representation in parliament justly represented the people who sent their deputies, Deputy Aust barked: That is FATA MORGANA! Kubicek: Only according to the merits one has gained in the nation. Here every party is represented according to merits which it gained in the nation. "Gentlemen," asked Sramek, "do you really want me to cause a riot in this parliament?" Thereupon the entire parliament resounded with bitter invectives and outcries. When the clamor died down, various members asked and were given the privilege of the floor: Zemina: Well, go ahead and riot! Stransky: Just don't jingle your spurs! Johanis: You're capable of it, Mr. Professor. You used to send people drunk with alcohol against us. Zemina: In Vienna you had no courage. Bufival: In Vienna you made the politics of sneaks. Zemina: Hlinka is inciting against the teachers. Oufik: (one of Sramek's men): Hlinka incites no one; he is a martyr. If Hlinka did not exist, you would have no Slovakia! Markovic: Hlinka did not make Slovakia; he betrayed her. This man is one day a priest and something else the next. I am a Slovak! (Applause). "Allow me," Sramek tried again, "since the day be- SLOVAKIA 65 fore yesterday the absent Hlinka was attacked in .such a manner ... " - but a booming voice bellowed: This is ingratitude! And then ... Zemina: He attacked Czech teachers. Cufik: Without Hlinka there would have been no Slovakia. To Hlinka belongs the credit that the Slovaks joined the Czechs. He was jailed for two years for the .Slovak cause. Thereupon shouts of ridicule broke out, and a voice ,c ried out: Tell us more, what else did Hlinka do? Markovic: If there were no Masaryk, there would be no Slovaks. Sramek: Permit me, esteemed gentlemen, to state that I felt embarrassed when a member of the presidium of the Czecho-Slovak Social Democratic Party, in such a crude manner, if I must say it, attacked the honor of an absent member of this parliament without ascertaining beforehand exactly what this man had said not in parliament, but at a meeting. Voices: But we read about it in the "Czech." "Esteemed gentlemen, coutinued Sramek, I recall for you what you already know very well, that we are here concerned with every word, every qualifying word, when such a great reproach is made against Andrew Hlinka with falsehoods." Jaros: He does not deserve anything else when he spits at Czech teachers! Zemina: He used to kiss the hand of a Magyar bishop! Sramek: Allow me to state further that there is no proof for what has been said here against Hlinka and no one of us knows exactly what Hlinka said. Jaros: Then he should have retracted it in the newspapers. Sramek: But he is in Slovakia and does not know what is going on here. Stransky: Wen, even one Slovak deputy condemned him. Cufik: From what party? Voice: He, too, was a clerical. Sramek at that time, however, stood his ground, de- 66 SLOVAKIA fending Hlinka against all "progressive" Czechs who wanted to discredit him. Hlinka had a great following in Slovakia, Sramek told the parliament, and by ridiculing and smearing him Hlinka's opponents were not rendering a noble service to the Slovaks and the Czechs and certainly not to the newly-born Czecho-Slovak Republic. When Deputy Bechyne claimed that he heard Hlinka speak against Masaryk in Prostejov and in Brno, Sramek asked him when that happened. When Bechyne replied that it happened b8fore the war, Deputy Sedlacek asked Bechyne what he himself happened to be before the war and what he had said about certain people and matters at that time. Bechyne, of course, would rather not talk about that! Sramek admired Hlinka for standing up for the rights of his people and for his fight in the defense of the individuality of the Slovak people. Promises had been made the Slovaks before they decided to join the Czechs to form a joint political State and those) promises should be kept. And Hlinka had the right to demand that they be kept. Hlinka was and is, Sramek said, for the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but he also is the Slovak nation's symbol of freedom and independence; he should be heard and everything should be done to make the Slovaks feel at home in the new Republic. But Sramek was yelled down by the Czech "progressive" anti-clericals who were egged on by Masaryk's "away from Rome - Rome must be put on trial and condemned !" The Czech press of that time enthusiastically indulged in attacks against Andrew Hlinka. The "Lidove noviny" (People's News) said in an editorial that the regeneration of Slovakia is possible only on the foundation of modern Czech currents. "It will take only a few years and things will be the same in Slovakia as they are in the. Czech lands',' concluded the editorial (Feb. 27, 1919). Stenographic reports of the minutes of the Prague parliament from the beginning of 1919 make particularly interesting reading. They describe some very lively scenes, during which a speaker had to wait quite some time before he could resume speaking. Every mention of Hlinka's name, it seems, caused disturbances, insulting outcries, and SLOVAKIA 67 bitter attacks. With the exception of the temperamental Bechyne, none of the foremost Czech politicians of the old Vienna school indulged in frivolous, senseless, and unsparing attacks against Hlinka. It is interesting that Markovic was of the opm10n that without Masaryk there would have been no Slovak nation, because it was Masaryk himself who had said that the Slovak nation is the invention of Magyar propaganda and that there was no Slovak nation! Imagine if you will, how much poorer the world would be without T. G. Masaryk: it would have to do without the Slovak nation and without "Czechoslovak" democracy! Masaryk represented the smallest Czech political party, but the world, including the Slovaks and Czechs who knew better, was supposed to believe that "Masaryk's teaching became the national Credo of Czecho-Slovakia." Masaryk, the great "progressive," was put in the saddle by the Allies and his disciples lost no time in building altars in his honor to replace those of the "outmoded, reactionary" saints. Two months after that "glorious October Day" (Oct. 28, 1918) - after Hlinka had come out resolutely against the Magyars and for joining the Czechs - the "progressive" Czechs of Masaryk and Benes proclaimed Hlinka a Magyarone, a coward who had surrendered to the Magyars. Scotus Viator replied at that time: "Hlinka never did submit to the Magyars. He lies who would make a Magyarone of him and makes himself stupid." Hlinka and his people wanted to serve the best interests of their new Republic; they proved this over and over again. But the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, and the Czech Slovaks ("Czechoslovaks") in their service, welcomed Hlinka in Prague as an enemy of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. The consequences of this folly were far-reachring. On January 30, 1919, Hlinka returned to Prague and read the records of the parliamentary sessions to learn what was said about him in his absence. When Hlinka did rise in his own defense, it is interesting to note that the Czech voices, so loud and disturbing when Sramek spoke, were now silent. Since the accusations and allegations made 68 SLOVAKIA against him were of a very serious nature, Hlinka openly demanded an investigation of each and every charge and all accusers. But the Czechs clammed up on that occasion. Markovic, descendant of one of Hlinka's very good friends, stood alone against Hlinka. Hlinka stressed the fact that no one can honestly accuse him of hating the Czechs or of working against the welfare and security of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He and his followers recognize and respect the right of the Czech people to certain inalienable rights, but by the same token, the Slovaks expect the Czechs and their leaders to recognize and respect the right of the Slovak people to the same inalienable rights. After what had happened in the Prague Parliament, Hlinka quit visiting the Slovak Club of which he was a member, but he did visit the Deputy's Club of Sramek's Czech People's Party. Hlinka later said: "That I appreciate good Czechs is proven by the fact that in Prague I do not visit the Slovak Club, but the Club of the Czech Peoples' Party." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are deeply convinced that this alliance (with the USSR) is to the benefit of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union and that it also is a contribution to international understanding. Whosoever among us does not want to acknowledge this supra-partisan and national character of the Czechoslovak-Soviet alliance, he is undermining this alliance and working against his very own aims." - (Dr. Peter Zenkl, chairman "Council of Free Czechoslovakia," Karlove Vary, July 20, 1947, according to CAS, 7-25-47) . • • • "In Ozech .p olitics, in Ozei:::h national life, it is urgent that we cOlffie to am understanding with the Communist Party . . . the Comnmnist party shahl remain the greatest force in oiur political scheme even after the elections are over, and socialism shall remain the foundation o.f our national life . . . . Coming to tern1s with the Communists is the golden theme of our political philo,so,p hy." - (Ferdinand Perouit:Jka, a Benei:\ Ctzech, DNESEIK, 2-.9-48).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Andrew Hlinka and Prague Description An account of the resource Constantine Čulen Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 57-68 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Čulen, Konštantín, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9e75abd003abc3f364941f32d76f7d27.pdf d90ab220358aea1a179c82526f49d9f1 PDF Text Text 52 SLOVAKIA •RICHARD WEISHAR THE ROOTS OF OOMMUNISM IN THE C-SR I,F ONE TAKES THE TROUBLE to examine events preceding the February, 1948, "coup d'etat" in Czecho-Slovakia, he will soon learn that the ratification of the Communist list of cabinet members by Benes was but the finishing touch to his signatures on two other documents: the Russian-Czech treaty of December 12, 1943, and Kosice Program of April 5, 1945, by means of which Benes and the other "democrats" marked out their post-war aims. Just as in 1919, Benes was again able to dupe the western foreign powers both during and after the second world war. They looked upon his state as the "lighthouse of democracy", which he himself praised as such, and were very much surprised when atop this lighthouse the red flag was hoisted. Had people but taken cognizance of Benes's statements, the awakening would not have been quite so rough. For no matter how little Benes's words from 1919 to 1938 dovetailed with the truth, there is one thing he cannot rightly be accused of. He and his associates never were ambiguous, in dealing with the West which granted them asylum, as to the direction in which they would steer the second Czech republic after an eventual German defeat. His allies, however, felt there was no reason to take serious interest in Benes's written and spoken statements. They were only too glad to find in him a fellow who was far out in front with respect to hating anything German. His hatred, in fact, found only one satisfying outlet: the expulsion of 3½ millions Sudeten Germans from their ancestral homesteads. To execute this deed he needed the agreement of the allies, who simply followed the example of Josef Stalin. The price for Stalin's consent was that "treaty on friendship, cooperation and mutual aid in the post-war period between the USSR and C-SR" of December 12, 1943, in which the country was sold out to Russia. (Stalin was furthermore beholden to Benes for having - as an unconscious tool of Heydrich - handed over to him Marshal �SLOVAKIA 53 Tukachevski.) The late Hubert Ripka, a close associate of Benes, later minister of trade in the second Czech Republic, still later an exile in London, tried at the time to disperse the fears of the less attentive: "I know that in certain circles within the West it is feared that we could become Russian vassals, but the name of Dr. Benes is the best guarantee for the independence of the (>SR" (Central European Observer, 1943, p. 304). And Benes himself appealed as follows to his fellow-countrymen : "Don't let the Germans lead you astray when they speak to you of Bolshevist terror and dictatorship; the Soviet Union desires nothing more than to be our friend. Our State will be a democracy, naturally a people's democracy new style" (Central European Observer, 194'5, p. 194.) One can hardly say that Benes kept his aims secret. He knew at all times how to adapt himself to the mentality of those on whom he was dependent. If h e posed to the western statesmen at the peace conference of St. Germain in 1919 as a representative of a "middle-class government", which would be rejected by the "Marxist Sudeten Germans" , he went overboard in the other direction in 1943 and 1945 in displaying even more Communist zeal than the Czech emigres in Moscow. He states in his Memoirs (p. 126) that he feared he had not gone far enough in his talks with the Czech Communists in Moscow, until Fierlinger reassured him that the conference "had followed a most satisfying course and surpassed all expectations." The result alluded to in the latter statement showed itself in 19415, when Benes convoked the first Czech government in Kosice. The Communists put up two deputy premiers and received the important ministries of interior, education, information and agriculture. A Communist secretary of state was paired with non-partisan foreign minister, Jan Masaryk. In Kosice a "program of the new Czecho-Slovak Government of the National Front of Czech and Slovaks" was proclaimed, which began with the country's Bolshevization. This declaration is replete with expressions of "undying gratitude for the glorious and heroic Red Army, admiration for the unrivalled Soviet art of war," while the west- �54 SLOVAKIA ern allies were mentioned in only one sentence. Partially out of gratitude to the "glorious Soviet Union," Benes ceded the Carpatho-Ukraine - which had been a part of the first republic from 1919 to 1939 - to the Soviet Union, 'although he had always insisted on the pre- Munich boundaries, within which the Carpatho-Ukraine was situated. In the Kosice Program reference is again made to the fact that the country's foreign policy is "determined for all time" by the Moscow treaty of 1943. At the same time it was announced that the republic would maintain "close fraternal relations" with all the Slavic countries (all of which were under Bolshevist control). Even Hungary, looked upon as an arch-enemy during the period of the first Czech republic, was now received into this circle of friendships, meantime having become Bolshevist-dominated! Benes had thus foreseen Prague's entrance into the Cominform. In order to pave the way intellectually for central Muscovite rule, Benes appointed Communist Nejedly as minister of education and Communist Kopecky as minister of information. He gave them - in the Kosice Program - certain guidelines calling for a "revision of the relationship to German culture," which in plain language meant a clean break in a centuries old spiritual tie with the West. This also meant indoctrinating Czech and Slovak youth in the "creation, development, economy, and culture of the USSR" and the "disappearance from school books and youth education programs of anti-Soviet influences." Russian became the top priority foreign language in the schools; and replacing the humanistic education of former years was the requirement of "history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." All this took place within the initial stages of Benes's presidency, not under his successor Gottwald. The latter did not need to alter the set-up, because Benes made thorough preparations. Benes's minister of education declared: "Right now (1945) we must choose between Eeast and West. I do not think there is any question as far as the Czech people are concerned. We belong to the great Slavic family of nations led by the mighty Russian nation with the great leader Stalin as its head" ("Unity" June, 2, �SLOVAKIA 55 1945). Those who saw little to rejoice in at the Bolshevization of the country were lulled into submission by the .strains of Pan-Slavism. Hand in glove with a foreign-political adjustment to Russian plans and those of the satellites came a radical domestic political change. All elements of opposition were ,crushed. All parties not belonging to the "National l<ront" - and they were the strongest parties till 19·39 - were forbidden, to say nothing of the dispossession and expulsion of the Sudeten Germans and Magyars. Benes used the "people's courts" to get rid of his opponents, whom he threw into jail as "arch-traitors" and collaborators" or sent to the gallows. All regard for democratic or human rights was tossed to the four winds. "I am a real democrat," said Benes. "I know that in the development of nations and States there are times when violent revolutions are necessary" (-Memoirs, p. 285). This of course meant expelling of the Sudeten Germans (national revolution) which made rapid Bolshevization of the country much easier. From the wealth of these expelled a 'W'und of National Revival" was created and placed under State control. It was not just a question of robbing the Sudeten German population. This act of spoliage was but the first blow at the existing economic order. Benes's economic decrees of 1945 were to bear this out in crystal clarity. They called for certain factories to be dispossessed and nationalized in principle, and for all factories with more than 50 employees as well. By his decrees "on penal protection of national enterprises," "penal protection of the execution of the two-year economic plan," "measures for executing national mobilization of the labor force," the Communist economic system was introduced as early as 1945. Everything that smacked of compulsion, uncommnoly stringent economic penal law, were not just the achievements of the February Revolution, but the work of Benes and his team. The field of agriculture experienced like changes. The property stolen from the Germans was handed over to Communists who had served the government well. Care was taken to create socalled "midget" agricultural enterprises that were not long �56 SLOVAKIA self-supporting and of necessity led to forming of kholkhozes. There was not much left for Gottwald to do. From Benes he had inherited the Moscow political course, education based on a Bolshevist pattern, a "National Front" without opposition, liquidation of basic rights, and a Communist planned economy. All this continued according to plan. The parliamentary elections of 1'946 brought the Communists 38 % of the vote, and Benes appointed Gottwald premier supported ·b y eight other Communist ministers. The wheels were well oiled; the new machine functioned beautifully. The minister of information set about to prohibit all publications stemming from other-than-government parties, one of which had already been dissolved. When Czech-Slovakia began to ogle Marshall Plan funds, Moscow soon let it be known how the Russian-Czech treaty of 1943 was to be interpreted. Gott w a 1 d repeated Benes 's mouthings about C-SR being a "people's democracy", pointed out that this was no longer an "old-fashioned bourgeois republic" but a socialist republic based on a system of nationalized economy. And no doubt - in 1947 - he was right. The Communist minister of the interior armed his police force and cleansed it of "unreliable" elements. The Communists forced the few non-Communist ministers to resign. Benes for the second time put his name on a new list of ministers, 'headed by Klement Gottwald, and received still more Com;munists than had thus far been the case. A month later Masaryk the younger plunged from the third floor of the Czech foreign ministry in Czernin Palace. Benes abdicated in June, 194'8, for the second time within ten years and died shortly thereafter. 1 The so-called "February Putsch" is referred to as the "violent end of freedom-loving Czecho~Slovak democracy." But on February 25, 1948, little more occured than the Communists threw some non-Communists out of the government. The Communists were no longer in need of the further support of their collaborators. (Sudeten Bulletin) � 52 SLOVAKIA •RICHARD WEISHAR THE ROOTS OF OOMMUNISM IN THE C-SR I,F ONE TAKES THE TROUBLE to examine events preceding the February, 1948, "coup d'etat" in Czecho-Slovakia, he will soon learn that the ratification of the Communist list of cabinet members by Benes was but the finishing touch to his signatures on two other documents: the Russian-Czech treaty of December 12, 1943, and Kosice Program of April 5, 1945, by means of which Benes and the other "democrats" marked out their post-war aims. Just as in 1919, Benes was again able to dupe the western foreign powers both during and after the second world war. They looked upon his state as the "lighthouse of democracy", which he himself praised as such, and were very much surprised when atop this lighthouse the red flag was hoisted. Had people but taken cognizance of Benes's statements, the awakening would not have been quite so rough. For no matter how little Benes's words from 1919 to 1938 dovetailed with the truth, there is one thing he cannot rightly be accused of. He and his associates never were ambiguous, in dealing with the West which granted them asylum, as to the direction in which they would steer the second Czech republic after an eventual German defeat. His allies, however, felt there was no reason to take serious interest in Benes's written and spoken statements. They were only too glad to find in him a fellow who was far out in front with respect to hating anything German. His hatred, in fact, found only one satisfying outlet: the expulsion of 3½ millions Sudeten Germans from their ancestral homesteads. To execute this deed he needed the agreement of the allies, who simply followed the example of Josef Stalin. The price for Stalin's consent was that "treaty on friendship, cooperation and mutual aid in the post-war period between the USSR and C-SR" of December 12, 1943, in which the country was sold out to Russia. (Stalin was furthermore beholden to Benes for having - as an unconscious tool of Heydrich - handed over to him Marshal �SLOVAKIA 53 Tukachevski.) The late Hubert Ripka, a close associate of Benes, later minister of trade in the second Czech Republic, still later an exile in London, tried at the time to disperse the fears of the less attentive: "I know that in certain circles within the West it is feared that we could become Russian vassals, but the name of Dr. Benes is the best guarantee for the independence of the (>SR" (Central European Observer, 1943, p. 304). And Benes himself appealed as follows to his fellow-countrymen : "Don't let the Germans lead you astray when they speak to you of Bolshevist terror and dictatorship; the Soviet Union desires nothing more than to be our friend. Our State will be a democracy, naturally a people's democracy new style" (Central European Observer, 194'5, p. 194.) One can hardly say that Benes kept his aims secret. He knew at all times how to adapt himself to the mentality of those on whom he was dependent. If h e posed to the western statesmen at the peace conference of St. Germain in 1919 as a representative of a "middle-class government", which would be rejected by the "Marxist Sudeten Germans" , he went overboard in the other direction in 1943 and 1945 in displaying even more Communist zeal than the Czech emigres in Moscow. He states in his Memoirs (p. 126) that he feared he had not gone far enough in his talks with the Czech Communists in Moscow, until Fierlinger reassured him that the conference "had followed a most satisfying course and surpassed all expectations." The result alluded to in the latter statement showed itself in 19415, when Benes convoked the first Czech government in Kosice. The Communists put up two deputy premiers and received the important ministries of interior, education, information and agriculture. A Communist secretary of state was paired with non-partisan foreign minister, Jan Masaryk. In Kosice a "program of the new Czecho-Slovak Government of the National Front of Czech and Slovaks" was proclaimed, which began with the country's Bolshevization. This declaration is replete with expressions of "undying gratitude for the glorious and heroic Red Army, admiration for the unrivalled Soviet art of war," while the west- �54 SLOVAKIA ern allies were mentioned in only one sentence. Partially out of gratitude to the "glorious Soviet Union," Benes ceded the Carpatho-Ukraine - which had been a part of the first republic from 1919 to 1939 - to the Soviet Union, 'although he had always insisted on the pre- Munich boundaries, within which the Carpatho-Ukraine was situated. In the Kosice Program reference is again made to the fact that the country's foreign policy is "determined for all time" by the Moscow treaty of 1943. At the same time it was announced that the republic would maintain "close fraternal relations" with all the Slavic countries (all of which were under Bolshevist control). Even Hungary, looked upon as an arch-enemy during the period of the first Czech republic, was now received into this circle of friendships, meantime having become Bolshevist-dominated! Benes had thus foreseen Prague's entrance into the Cominform. In order to pave the way intellectually for central Muscovite rule, Benes appointed Communist Nejedly as minister of education and Communist Kopecky as minister of information. He gave them - in the Kosice Program - certain guidelines calling for a "revision of the relationship to German culture," which in plain language meant a clean break in a centuries old spiritual tie with the West. This also meant indoctrinating Czech and Slovak youth in the "creation, development, economy, and culture of the USSR" and the "disappearance from school books and youth education programs of anti-Soviet influences." Russian became the top priority foreign language in the schools; and replacing the humanistic education of former years was the requirement of "history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." All this took place within the initial stages of Benes's presidency, not under his successor Gottwald. The latter did not need to alter the set-up, because Benes made thorough preparations. Benes's minister of education declared: "Right now (1945) we must choose between Eeast and West. I do not think there is any question as far as the Czech people are concerned. We belong to the great Slavic family of nations led by the mighty Russian nation with the great leader Stalin as its head" ("Unity" June, 2, �SLOVAKIA 55 1945). Those who saw little to rejoice in at the Bolshevization of the country were lulled into submission by the .strains of Pan-Slavism. Hand in glove with a foreign-political adjustment to Russian plans and those of the satellites came a radical domestic political change. All elements of opposition were ,crushed. All parties not belonging to the "National l<ront" - and they were the strongest parties till 19·39 - were forbidden, to say nothing of the dispossession and expulsion of the Sudeten Germans and Magyars. Benes used the "people's courts" to get rid of his opponents, whom he threw into jail as "arch-traitors" and collaborators" or sent to the gallows. All regard for democratic or human rights was tossed to the four winds. "I am a real democrat," said Benes. "I know that in the development of nations and States there are times when violent revolutions are necessary" (-Memoirs, p. 285). This of course meant expelling of the Sudeten Germans (national revolution) which made rapid Bolshevization of the country much easier. From the wealth of these expelled a 'W'und of National Revival" was created and placed under State control. It was not just a question of robbing the Sudeten German population. This act of spoliage was but the first blow at the existing economic order. Benes's economic decrees of 1945 were to bear this out in crystal clarity. They called for certain factories to be dispossessed and nationalized in principle, and for all factories with more than 50 employees as well. By his decrees "on penal protection of national enterprises," "penal protection of the execution of the two-year economic plan," "measures for executing national mobilization of the labor force," the Communist economic system was introduced as early as 1945. Everything that smacked of compulsion, uncommnoly stringent economic penal law, were not just the achievements of the February Revolution, but the work of Benes and his team. The field of agriculture experienced like changes. The property stolen from the Germans was handed over to Communists who had served the government well. Care was taken to create socalled "midget" agricultural enterprises that were not long �56 SLOVAKIA self-supporting and of necessity led to forming of kholkhozes. There was not much left for Gottwald to do. From Benes he had inherited the Moscow political course, education based on a Bolshevist pattern, a "National Front" without opposition, liquidation of basic rights, and a Communist planned economy. All this continued according to plan. The parliamentary elections of 1'946 brought the Communists 38 % of the vote, and Benes appointed Gottwald premier supported ·b y eight other Communist ministers. The wheels were well oiled; the new machine functioned beautifully. The minister of information set about to prohibit all publications stemming from other-than-government parties, one of which had already been dissolved. When Czech-Slovakia began to ogle Marshall Plan funds, Moscow soon let it be known how the Russian-Czech treaty of 1943 was to be interpreted. Gott w a 1 d repeated Benes 's mouthings about C-SR being a "people's democracy", pointed out that this was no longer an "old-fashioned bourgeois republic" but a socialist republic based on a system of nationalized economy. And no doubt - in 1947 - he was right. The Communist minister of the interior armed his police force and cleansed it of "unreliable" elements. The Communists forced the few non-Communist ministers to resign. Benes for the second time put his name on a new list of ministers, 'headed by Klement Gottwald, and received still more Com;munists than had thus far been the case. A month later Masaryk the younger plunged from the third floor of the Czech foreign ministry in Czernin Palace. Benes abdicated in June, 194'8, for the second time within ten years and died shortly thereafter. 1 The so-called "February Putsch" is referred to as the "violent end of freedom-loving Czecho~Slovak democracy." But on February 25, 1948, little more occured than the Communists threw some non-Communists out of the government. The Communists were no longer in need of the further support of their collaborators. (Sudeten Bulletin) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 52 SLOVAKIA •RICHARD WEISHAR THE ROOTS OF OOMMUNISM IN THE C-SR I,F ONE TAKES THE TROUBLE to examine events preceding the February, 1948, "coup d'etat" in Czecho-Slovakia, he will soon learn that the ratification of the Communist list of cabinet members by Benes was but the finishing touch to his signatures on two other documents: the Russian-Czech treaty of December 12, 1943, and Kosice Program of April 5, 1945, by means of which Benes and the other "democrats" marked out their post-war aims. Just as in 1919, Benes was again able to dupe the western foreign powers both during and after the second world war. They looked upon his state as the "lighthouse of democracy", which he himself praised as such, and were very much surprised when atop this lighthouse the red flag was hoisted. Had people but taken cognizance of Benes's statements, the awakening would not have been quite so rough. For no matter how little Benes's words from 1919 to 1938 dovetailed with the truth, there is one thing he cannot rightly be accused of. He and his associates never were ambiguous, in dealing with the West which granted them asylum, as to the direction in which they would steer the second Czech republic after an eventual German defeat. His allies, however, felt there was no reason to take serious interest in Benes's written and spoken statements. They were only too glad to find in him a fellow who was far out in front with respect to hating anything German. His hatred, in fact, found only one satisfying outlet: the expulsion of 3½ millions Sudeten Germans from their ancestral homesteads. To execute this deed he needed the agreement of the allies, who simply followed the example of Josef Stalin. The price for Stalin's consent was that "treaty on friendship, cooperation and mutual aid in the post-war period between the USSR and C-SR" of December 12, 1943, in which the country was sold out to Russia. (Stalin was furthermore beholden to Benes for having - as an unconscious tool of Heydrich - handed over to him Marshal SLOVAKIA 53 Tukachevski.) The late Hubert Ripka, a close associate of Benes, later minister of trade in the second Czech Republic, still later an exile in London, tried at the time to disperse the fears of the less attentive: "I know that in certain circles within the West it is feared that we could become Russian vassals, but the name of Dr. Benes is the best guarantee for the independence of the (>SR" (Central European Observer, 1943, p. 304). And Benes himself appealed as follows to his fellow-countrymen : "Don't let the Germans lead you astray when they speak to you of Bolshevist terror and dictatorship; the Soviet Union desires nothing more than to be our friend. Our State will be a democracy, naturally a people's democracy new style" (Central European Observer, 194'5, p. 194.) One can hardly say that Benes kept his aims secret. He knew at all times how to adapt himself to the mentality of those on whom he was dependent. If h e posed to the western statesmen at the peace conference of St. Germain in 1919 as a representative of a "middle-class government", which would be rejected by the "Marxist Sudeten Germans" , he went overboard in the other direction in 1943 and 1945 in displaying even more Communist zeal than the Czech emigres in Moscow. He states in his Memoirs (p. 126) that he feared he had not gone far enough in his talks with the Czech Communists in Moscow, until Fierlinger reassured him that the conference "had followed a most satisfying course and surpassed all expectations." The result alluded to in the latter statement showed itself in 19415, when Benes convoked the first Czech government in Kosice. The Communists put up two deputy premiers and received the important ministries of interior, education, information and agriculture. A Communist secretary of state was paired with non-partisan foreign minister, Jan Masaryk. In Kosice a "program of the new Czecho-Slovak Government of the National Front of Czech and Slovaks" was proclaimed, which began with the country's Bolshevization. This declaration is replete with expressions of "undying gratitude for the glorious and heroic Red Army, admiration for the unrivalled Soviet art of war," while the west- 54 SLOVAKIA ern allies were mentioned in only one sentence. Partially out of gratitude to the "glorious Soviet Union," Benes ceded the Carpatho-Ukraine - which had been a part of the first republic from 1919 to 1939 - to the Soviet Union, 'although he had always insisted on the pre- Munich boundaries, within which the Carpatho-Ukraine was situated. In the Kosice Program reference is again made to the fact that the country's foreign policy is "determined for all time" by the Moscow treaty of 1943. At the same time it was announced that the republic would maintain "close fraternal relations" with all the Slavic countries (all of which were under Bolshevist control). Even Hungary, looked upon as an arch-enemy during the period of the first Czech republic, was now received into this circle of friendships, meantime having become Bolshevist-dominated! Benes had thus foreseen Prague's entrance into the Cominform. In order to pave the way intellectually for central Muscovite rule, Benes appointed Communist Nejedly as minister of education and Communist Kopecky as minister of information. He gave them - in the Kosice Program - certain guidelines calling for a "revision of the relationship to German culture," which in plain language meant a clean break in a centuries old spiritual tie with the West. This also meant indoctrinating Czech and Slovak youth in the "creation, development, economy, and culture of the USSR" and the "disappearance from school books and youth education programs of anti-Soviet influences." Russian became the top priority foreign language in the schools; and replacing the humanistic education of former years was the requirement of "history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." All this took place within the initial stages of Benes's presidency, not under his successor Gottwald. The latter did not need to alter the set-up, because Benes made thorough preparations. Benes's minister of education declared: "Right now (1945) we must choose between Eeast and West. I do not think there is any question as far as the Czech people are concerned. We belong to the great Slavic family of nations led by the mighty Russian nation with the great leader Stalin as its head" ("Unity" June, 2, SLOVAKIA 55 1945). Those who saw little to rejoice in at the Bolshevization of the country were lulled into submission by the .strains of Pan-Slavism. Hand in glove with a foreign-political adjustment to Russian plans and those of the satellites came a radical domestic political change. All elements of opposition were ,crushed. All parties not belonging to the "National l<ront" - and they were the strongest parties till 19·39 - were forbidden, to say nothing of the dispossession and expulsion of the Sudeten Germans and Magyars. Benes used the "people's courts" to get rid of his opponents, whom he threw into jail as "arch-traitors" and collaborators" or sent to the gallows. All regard for democratic or human rights was tossed to the four winds. "I am a real democrat," said Benes. "I know that in the development of nations and States there are times when violent revolutions are necessary" (-Memoirs, p. 285). This of course meant expelling of the Sudeten Germans (national revolution) which made rapid Bolshevization of the country much easier. From the wealth of these expelled a 'W'und of National Revival" was created and placed under State control. It was not just a question of robbing the Sudeten German population. This act of spoliage was but the first blow at the existing economic order. Benes's economic decrees of 1945 were to bear this out in crystal clarity. They called for certain factories to be dispossessed and nationalized in principle, and for all factories with more than 50 employees as well. By his decrees "on penal protection of national enterprises," "penal protection of the execution of the two-year economic plan," "measures for executing national mobilization of the labor force," the Communist economic system was introduced as early as 1945. Everything that smacked of compulsion, uncommnoly stringent economic penal law, were not just the achievements of the February Revolution, but the work of Benes and his team. The field of agriculture experienced like changes. The property stolen from the Germans was handed over to Communists who had served the government well. Care was taken to create socalled "midget" agricultural enterprises that were not long 56 SLOVAKIA self-supporting and of necessity led to forming of kholkhozes. There was not much left for Gottwald to do. From Benes he had inherited the Moscow political course, education based on a Bolshevist pattern, a "National Front" without opposition, liquidation of basic rights, and a Communist planned economy. All this continued according to plan. The parliamentary elections of 1'946 brought the Communists 38 % of the vote, and Benes appointed Gottwald premier supported ·b y eight other Communist ministers. The wheels were well oiled; the new machine functioned beautifully. The minister of information set about to prohibit all publications stemming from other-than-government parties, one of which had already been dissolved. When Czech-Slovakia began to ogle Marshall Plan funds, Moscow soon let it be known how the Russian-Czech treaty of 1943 was to be interpreted. Gott w a 1 d repeated Benes 's mouthings about C-SR being a "people's democracy", pointed out that this was no longer an "old-fashioned bourgeois republic" but a socialist republic based on a system of nationalized economy. And no doubt - in 1947 - he was right. The Communist minister of the interior armed his police force and cleansed it of "unreliable" elements. The Communists forced the few non-Communist ministers to resign. Benes for the second time put his name on a new list of ministers, 'headed by Klement Gottwald, and received still more Com;munists than had thus far been the case. A month later Masaryk the younger plunged from the third floor of the Czech foreign ministry in Czernin Palace. Benes abdicated in June, 194'8, for the second time within ten years and died shortly thereafter. 1 The so-called "February Putsch" is referred to as the "violent end of freedom-loving Czecho~Slovak democracy." But on February 25, 1948, little more occured than the Communists threw some non-Communists out of the government. The Communists were no longer in need of the further support of their collaborators. (Sudeten Bulletin)  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Roots of Communism in the Č-SR Description An account of the resource Richard Weishar Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 52-56 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Weishar, Richard Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/de7449d95c77a4ef87848308a2cdb2bf.pdf 16106590001f2d94cc051620375935a2 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 47 SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH mE WEST Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky Slovakia's political plight is more difficult than that of the other countries caught behind the iron curtain because Slovakia is ruled not only by Prague, but also by Moscow, thus suffering under a double yoke. The fight of the Slovak people against tyranny and oppression is a two-front fight. There is no doubt that there are communists in Slovakia, but their number and their possibilities are so limited that they cannot impose their rule on the Slovak population without the Czech Communists. It is no mere coincidence that the first secretary of the Communist Party in Slovakia, the most powerful man in the country, is the Czech Karel Bacilek. Key positions in the party and in the state apparatus are also held by Czechs. Even when it is considered expedient to place "comrades" from Slovakia in important positions in the party, state apparatus, or labor unions, these are very often persons of other than Slovak descent. To acquire a deeper insight into this strong adhesion of Prague to Moscow, it is important to realize that the two nations are not only related by Communist, but also by the Pan-Slavic aims. Prague's objectives in ruling Slovakia are supported by Moscow at every turn. Czecho-Slovakia, falsely presented to the West by Edward Benes and his collaborators as a dam against Muscovite pressure, has in reality been nothing more than a springboard between Soviet Russia and the West since 1945. As early as World War H, technical politicians-in-exile, with Benes at their head, determined to work most intimately with Moscow and the Communists, knowing quite well that the Slovaks and the Sudeten Germans would offer resistance to any future domination by Prague. Tangible evidence of this Prague-Moscow liaison is the Moscow-signed treaty between the two governments on December 12, 1943. The Kremlin even used this as a model for later treaties concluded in the building up of its satellite system in Central Europe. This act of Benes, long before Yalta agreements of February 11, 1945, shows that the Czechs were not a victim of Yalta policies 1 �48 SLOVAKIA but its precursors, paving the way for sure support of the Soviet Union in dominating Slovakia and the Sudetenland. Moscow strove during World War II to win over Slovak patriots for Communist collaboration by a ruse calling for Slovak independence. Responsible 'S lovak government officials refused this bait, whereupon the Kremlin sold out Slovakia to Prague. It would be false to speak of CzechoSlovakia as having been taken over by the Kremlin by force, for the majority of the Czech people - under Dr. Edward Benes - declared themselves in agreement with the satellite status of the "legal" introduction into the country of the Communist regime, not in February 1948 as is claimed, but back in 1945. This explains the closely knit relationship between the Czechs and the Soviets as well as the unique nationalistic aspect of the Communist Party in Czecho-Slovakia. To shed further and perhaps more piercing light - if such be needed - on the tight linkage between Prague and the Kremlin, it should be noted that in every controversy between the Kremlin despots and other Communists, Prague always supports Moscow against the others. It is significant that Benes's envoy to the United Nations, Dr. Jan Papanek, voted with the U.S. S. R. on practically all major issues. When misunderstanding and tensions arose, in 1948, between Moscow and Belgrade, the Prague Communist leaders had the main say in the resultant inflammatory campaign of the Soviets against Tito. During the crisis between Warsaw and Moscow in October, 1956, Prague lined up for Khrushchev against Gomulka. When on October 23, 1956, the Hungarian people revolted against Communist tyranny, Prague immediately opposed Imre Nagy in favor of the greatest possible military intervention by the Soviets in Hungary. Not only did Prague let the Soviet military units pass through Slovakia but did all it could to guarantee them unmolested transit in the face of popular indignation. Prague even intervened militarily itself along part of the frontier. When Soviets units imposed the Kadar government of the Hungarians, Prague tried from the first moment on to strengthen its position both politically and economically as far as possible. �SLOVAKIA 49 Vanguard of Soviet Imperialism When, after the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, under the motto of de-Stalinization, a certain easing up of dictatorship was introduced and partial reinstatement took place for some of the victims of Stalinist lawlessness and measures of violence not only in the Soviet Union but also in the satellit es the Communist clique in Prague refused to be influenced thereby and remained completely passive. The Slovak "Titoists", the only kind there are in present Czecho-1Slovakia, have thus far not been reinstated. On the contrary, as a symbol of Stalinist instransigency and loyalty to his methods, Stalin's illuminated statue shines out over Prague after dark. By the election of Antonin Novotny, first party secretary of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia, to the position of president of the republic, Moscow's most faithful servant has become the all-powerful viceroy of the Kremlin despots in the C-SR. The logical conclusion is that just as Moscow rulers could rely on 'Prague's Communist leaders in the past, so they shall rely upon them even in the future. Prague despots identify their own Czech interests not only with the Communist aims of Moscow but consider themselves a vanguard of Russian imperialism. Further evidence of Prague's loyalty to Moscow is seen continually in its indiscriminate abetting of all the latter's foreign political aims. It backs up more rigidly than any other satellite Moscow's anti-Adenauer campaign and endeavors to cement the position of the Soviet Zone government in the eastern half of Germany. In the United States, Prague's henchmen seek every opportunity to oppose the perpetuation of a status quo in Asia and Africa and favor the separation of those areas from the sphere of influence of the European powers. Prague has gone so far as to train Asiatics and Africans to become Communist agents and by shipments of arms has gone far to create the insecurity and unrest that prevail in the Near East, Africa, and Asia. Prague Communist rulers have mobilized the vast industrial potential and the capabilities of the people in lands within Czecho-Slovakia to aid Moscow's economic offensive �50 SLOVAKIA in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and - disregarding the drop in the standard of living of their own population have pursued this aim indefatigably. By means of Communist-schooled advisers, labor unionists and experts, who are employed in installing of industrial plants in these lands, Prague creates seats of unrest in these areas and helps incorporate them into the Moscow sphere of influence. In short, Prague consistently and persistently aids and abets the world-power objectives of the Soviet Union. Ever since 1945 a policy of violence has been exercised against the Slovaks by the Prague government. In May, 1947, the then head of that government, Klement Gottwald, threatened Slovak patriots and asserted that it was a matter of duty to "persecute, ideologically and politically, and if need be administrative ly, the remaining People's Party separatists in Slovakia who are a source of dissent within Czecho-Slovakia." Shortly thereafter he spoke the words: "Today, in every respect, Slovakia is the weakest link in the Republic". Attempts have been made time and again to break the resistance of the Slovak population to Communism by resorting to deportations, acts of violence, concentration camps and a wide variety of oppressive measures customary within Communist countries. Since 1945 more than one-half million persons have been taken from Slovakia and scattered throughout the entire Sudet enland as workers in mines, factories, and agricultural associations, and about 250 thousand Czechs have been resettled into Slovakia as key figures in party and State administration, in agriculture, and the security apparatus, as well as Czech military units which represents pillars of the regime. It suffices to look at the map of Central Europe to see that Slovakia, by dint of her position between Hungary and Poland, on the one side, and the fact that she serves as link for the Bohemian lands and the Soviet Union, on the other side, - while bordering on the free world in the West through Austria - has a key position in the Danubian area. ,Slovak independence is not only in harmony with the wishes of the population, the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the ideals of democracy and of human �S!,OVAKIA 51 progress, but the interests of the free world. It is to the advantage of freedom-loving people to support the Slovak people's fight for freedom. The independence of Slovakia means a weakening of Prague, a weakening of the Communist empire. Since World War IT, the free world, misled by false hopes, has expected the Kremlin rulers to be satisfied with the status quo and desist from any further ag,g ression. This has caused the powers that were victorious in that war to take a positive stand only with respect to th,~ proCommunist and pro-Soviet political trends from behind the Iron Curtain while turning a cold shoulder to the principal opponent of Communism and Russian imperialism. It is this policy of the western powers and not Soviet military victories - that explains Moscow's success. Because of this unfortunate policy, Moscow's lust for power has been whetted to such a degree that today Khrushchev regards as a matter of course the recognition by the free world of the status quo which the Soviets arrived at by violence and fraud - and in fact, he demands such recognition. The free world fails to see that by supporting the traditional but artificial structure known as "Czecho-Slovakia", it is acting in opposition to its own interests. As long as Prague can continue to throttle Slovakia, the lifeline that feeds the spirit of freedom among the Slovak people runs the grave danger of being cut off from the West forever. • • • WHO SAID IT? "On this, the twenty-,seventh anniversary of the founding Oif the Union of SOIV!iet Sociallist Repu.Jblios, may I express on 'behalJ.f of Sooretary Hull and myself sincere felicitations to you. We may aJl looik forward with full confidence to an eair.ly victory aver the Nazi barbarians and the establishment of an enduring and just peace built on the firm foun:datio1ns of coQPeration and mutual understanding which have been wrought so f.inn1ly in the cru.c1ble o:f war." Edward R. Stettiniius, Acting Secretary of Staite in crublegram sent to V. M. Molotov, Nov. 6, 1944. � SLOVAKIA 47 SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH mE WEST Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky Slovakia's political plight is more difficult than that of the other countries caught behind the iron curtain because Slovakia is ruled not only by Prague, but also by Moscow, thus suffering under a double yoke. The fight of the Slovak people against tyranny and oppression is a two-front fight. There is no doubt that there are communists in Slovakia, but their number and their possibilities are so limited that they cannot impose their rule on the Slovak population without the Czech Communists. It is no mere coincidence that the first secretary of the Communist Party in Slovakia, the most powerful man in the country, is the Czech Karel Bacilek. Key positions in the party and in the state apparatus are also held by Czechs. Even when it is considered expedient to place "comrades" from Slovakia in important positions in the party, state apparatus, or labor unions, these are very often persons of other than Slovak descent. To acquire a deeper insight into this strong adhesion of Prague to Moscow, it is important to realize that the two nations are not only related by Communist, but also by the Pan-Slavic aims. Prague's objectives in ruling Slovakia are supported by Moscow at every turn. Czecho-Slovakia, falsely presented to the West by Edward Benes and his collaborators as a dam against Muscovite pressure, has in reality been nothing more than a springboard between Soviet Russia and the West since 1945. As early as World War H, technical politicians-in-exile, with Benes at their head, determined to work most intimately with Moscow and the Communists, knowing quite well that the Slovaks and the Sudeten Germans would offer resistance to any future domination by Prague. Tangible evidence of this Prague-Moscow liaison is the Moscow-signed treaty between the two governments on December 12, 1943. The Kremlin even used this as a model for later treaties concluded in the building up of its satellite system in Central Europe. This act of Benes, long before Yalta agreements of February 11, 1945, shows that the Czechs were not a victim of Yalta policies 1 �48 SLOVAKIA but its precursors, paving the way for sure support of the Soviet Union in dominating Slovakia and the Sudetenland. Moscow strove during World War II to win over Slovak patriots for Communist collaboration by a ruse calling for Slovak independence. Responsible 'S lovak government officials refused this bait, whereupon the Kremlin sold out Slovakia to Prague. It would be false to speak of CzechoSlovakia as having been taken over by the Kremlin by force, for the majority of the Czech people - under Dr. Edward Benes - declared themselves in agreement with the satellite status of the "legal" introduction into the country of the Communist regime, not in February 1948 as is claimed, but back in 1945. This explains the closely knit relationship between the Czechs and the Soviets as well as the unique nationalistic aspect of the Communist Party in Czecho-Slovakia. To shed further and perhaps more piercing light - if such be needed - on the tight linkage between Prague and the Kremlin, it should be noted that in every controversy between the Kremlin despots and other Communists, Prague always supports Moscow against the others. It is significant that Benes's envoy to the United Nations, Dr. Jan Papanek, voted with the U.S. S. R. on practically all major issues. When misunderstanding and tensions arose, in 1948, between Moscow and Belgrade, the Prague Communist leaders had the main say in the resultant inflammatory campaign of the Soviets against Tito. During the crisis between Warsaw and Moscow in October, 1956, Prague lined up for Khrushchev against Gomulka. When on October 23, 1956, the Hungarian people revolted against Communist tyranny, Prague immediately opposed Imre Nagy in favor of the greatest possible military intervention by the Soviets in Hungary. Not only did Prague let the Soviet military units pass through Slovakia but did all it could to guarantee them unmolested transit in the face of popular indignation. Prague even intervened militarily itself along part of the frontier. When Soviets units imposed the Kadar government of the Hungarians, Prague tried from the first moment on to strengthen its position both politically and economically as far as possible. �SLOVAKIA 49 Vanguard of Soviet Imperialism When, after the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, under the motto of de-Stalinization, a certain easing up of dictatorship was introduced and partial reinstatement took place for some of the victims of Stalinist lawlessness and measures of violence not only in the Soviet Union but also in the satellit es the Communist clique in Prague refused to be influenced thereby and remained completely passive. The Slovak "Titoists", the only kind there are in present Czecho-1Slovakia, have thus far not been reinstated. On the contrary, as a symbol of Stalinist instransigency and loyalty to his methods, Stalin's illuminated statue shines out over Prague after dark. By the election of Antonin Novotny, first party secretary of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia, to the position of president of the republic, Moscow's most faithful servant has become the all-powerful viceroy of the Kremlin despots in the C-SR. The logical conclusion is that just as Moscow rulers could rely on 'Prague's Communist leaders in the past, so they shall rely upon them even in the future. Prague despots identify their own Czech interests not only with the Communist aims of Moscow but consider themselves a vanguard of Russian imperialism. Further evidence of Prague's loyalty to Moscow is seen continually in its indiscriminate abetting of all the latter's foreign political aims. It backs up more rigidly than any other satellite Moscow's anti-Adenauer campaign and endeavors to cement the position of the Soviet Zone government in the eastern half of Germany. In the United States, Prague's henchmen seek every opportunity to oppose the perpetuation of a status quo in Asia and Africa and favor the separation of those areas from the sphere of influence of the European powers. Prague has gone so far as to train Asiatics and Africans to become Communist agents and by shipments of arms has gone far to create the insecurity and unrest that prevail in the Near East, Africa, and Asia. Prague Communist rulers have mobilized the vast industrial potential and the capabilities of the people in lands within Czecho-Slovakia to aid Moscow's economic offensive �50 SLOVAKIA in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and - disregarding the drop in the standard of living of their own population have pursued this aim indefatigably. By means of Communist-schooled advisers, labor unionists and experts, who are employed in installing of industrial plants in these lands, Prague creates seats of unrest in these areas and helps incorporate them into the Moscow sphere of influence. In short, Prague consistently and persistently aids and abets the world-power objectives of the Soviet Union. Ever since 1945 a policy of violence has been exercised against the Slovaks by the Prague government. In May, 1947, the then head of that government, Klement Gottwald, threatened Slovak patriots and asserted that it was a matter of duty to "persecute, ideologically and politically, and if need be administrative ly, the remaining People's Party separatists in Slovakia who are a source of dissent within Czecho-Slovakia." Shortly thereafter he spoke the words: "Today, in every respect, Slovakia is the weakest link in the Republic". Attempts have been made time and again to break the resistance of the Slovak population to Communism by resorting to deportations, acts of violence, concentration camps and a wide variety of oppressive measures customary within Communist countries. Since 1945 more than one-half million persons have been taken from Slovakia and scattered throughout the entire Sudet enland as workers in mines, factories, and agricultural associations, and about 250 thousand Czechs have been resettled into Slovakia as key figures in party and State administration, in agriculture, and the security apparatus, as well as Czech military units which represents pillars of the regime. It suffices to look at the map of Central Europe to see that Slovakia, by dint of her position between Hungary and Poland, on the one side, and the fact that she serves as link for the Bohemian lands and the Soviet Union, on the other side, - while bordering on the free world in the West through Austria - has a key position in the Danubian area. ,Slovak independence is not only in harmony with the wishes of the population, the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the ideals of democracy and of human �S!,OVAKIA 51 progress, but the interests of the free world. It is to the advantage of freedom-loving people to support the Slovak people's fight for freedom. The independence of Slovakia means a weakening of Prague, a weakening of the Communist empire. Since World War IT, the free world, misled by false hopes, has expected the Kremlin rulers to be satisfied with the status quo and desist from any further ag,g ression. This has caused the powers that were victorious in that war to take a positive stand only with respect to th,~ proCommunist and pro-Soviet political trends from behind the Iron Curtain while turning a cold shoulder to the principal opponent of Communism and Russian imperialism. It is this policy of the western powers and not Soviet military victories - that explains Moscow's success. Because of this unfortunate policy, Moscow's lust for power has been whetted to such a degree that today Khrushchev regards as a matter of course the recognition by the free world of the status quo which the Soviets arrived at by violence and fraud - and in fact, he demands such recognition. The free world fails to see that by supporting the traditional but artificial structure known as "Czecho-Slovakia", it is acting in opposition to its own interests. As long as Prague can continue to throttle Slovakia, the lifeline that feeds the spirit of freedom among the Slovak people runs the grave danger of being cut off from the West forever. • • • WHO SAID IT? "On this, the twenty-,seventh anniversary of the founding Oif the Union of SOIV!iet Sociallist Repu.Jblios, may I express on 'behalJ.f of Sooretary Hull and myself sincere felicitations to you. We may aJl looik forward with full confidence to an eair.ly victory aver the Nazi barbarians and the establishment of an enduring and just peace built on the firm foun:datio1ns of coQPeration and mutual understanding which have been wrought so f.inn1ly in the cru.c1ble o:f war." Edward R. Stettiniius, Acting Secretary of Staite in crublegram sent to V. M. Molotov, Nov. 6, 1944. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 47 SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH mE WEST Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky Slovakia's political plight is more difficult than that of the other countries caught behind the iron curtain because Slovakia is ruled not only by Prague, but also by Moscow, thus suffering under a double yoke. The fight of the Slovak people against tyranny and oppression is a two-front fight. There is no doubt that there are communists in Slovakia, but their number and their possibilities are so limited that they cannot impose their rule on the Slovak population without the Czech Communists. It is no mere coincidence that the first secretary of the Communist Party in Slovakia, the most powerful man in the country, is the Czech Karel Bacilek. Key positions in the party and in the state apparatus are also held by Czechs. Even when it is considered expedient to place "comrades" from Slovakia in important positions in the party, state apparatus, or labor unions, these are very often persons of other than Slovak descent. To acquire a deeper insight into this strong adhesion of Prague to Moscow, it is important to realize that the two nations are not only related by Communist, but also by the Pan-Slavic aims. Prague's objectives in ruling Slovakia are supported by Moscow at every turn. Czecho-Slovakia, falsely presented to the West by Edward Benes and his collaborators as a dam against Muscovite pressure, has in reality been nothing more than a springboard between Soviet Russia and the West since 1945. As early as World War H, technical politicians-in-exile, with Benes at their head, determined to work most intimately with Moscow and the Communists, knowing quite well that the Slovaks and the Sudeten Germans would offer resistance to any future domination by Prague. Tangible evidence of this Prague-Moscow liaison is the Moscow-signed treaty between the two governments on December 12, 1943. The Kremlin even used this as a model for later treaties concluded in the building up of its satellite system in Central Europe. This act of Benes, long before Yalta agreements of February 11, 1945, shows that the Czechs were not a victim of Yalta policies 1 48 SLOVAKIA but its precursors, paving the way for sure support of the Soviet Union in dominating Slovakia and the Sudetenland. Moscow strove during World War II to win over Slovak patriots for Communist collaboration by a ruse calling for Slovak independence. Responsible 'S lovak government officials refused this bait, whereupon the Kremlin sold out Slovakia to Prague. It would be false to speak of CzechoSlovakia as having been taken over by the Kremlin by force, for the majority of the Czech people - under Dr. Edward Benes - declared themselves in agreement with the satellite status of the "legal" introduction into the country of the Communist regime, not in February 1948 as is claimed, but back in 1945. This explains the closely knit relationship between the Czechs and the Soviets as well as the unique nationalistic aspect of the Communist Party in Czecho-Slovakia. To shed further and perhaps more piercing light - if such be needed - on the tight linkage between Prague and the Kremlin, it should be noted that in every controversy between the Kremlin despots and other Communists, Prague always supports Moscow against the others. It is significant that Benes's envoy to the United Nations, Dr. Jan Papanek, voted with the U.S. S. R. on practically all major issues. When misunderstanding and tensions arose, in 1948, between Moscow and Belgrade, the Prague Communist leaders had the main say in the resultant inflammatory campaign of the Soviets against Tito. During the crisis between Warsaw and Moscow in October, 1956, Prague lined up for Khrushchev against Gomulka. When on October 23, 1956, the Hungarian people revolted against Communist tyranny, Prague immediately opposed Imre Nagy in favor of the greatest possible military intervention by the Soviets in Hungary. Not only did Prague let the Soviet military units pass through Slovakia but did all it could to guarantee them unmolested transit in the face of popular indignation. Prague even intervened militarily itself along part of the frontier. When Soviets units imposed the Kadar government of the Hungarians, Prague tried from the first moment on to strengthen its position both politically and economically as far as possible. SLOVAKIA 49 Vanguard of Soviet Imperialism When, after the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, under the motto of de-Stalinization, a certain easing up of dictatorship was introduced and partial reinstatement took place for some of the victims of Stalinist lawlessness and measures of violence not only in the Soviet Union but also in the satellit es the Communist clique in Prague refused to be influenced thereby and remained completely passive. The Slovak "Titoists", the only kind there are in present Czecho-1Slovakia, have thus far not been reinstated. On the contrary, as a symbol of Stalinist instransigency and loyalty to his methods, Stalin's illuminated statue shines out over Prague after dark. By the election of Antonin Novotny, first party secretary of the Communist Party of Czecho-Slovakia, to the position of president of the republic, Moscow's most faithful servant has become the all-powerful viceroy of the Kremlin despots in the C-SR. The logical conclusion is that just as Moscow rulers could rely on 'Prague's Communist leaders in the past, so they shall rely upon them even in the future. Prague despots identify their own Czech interests not only with the Communist aims of Moscow but consider themselves a vanguard of Russian imperialism. Further evidence of Prague's loyalty to Moscow is seen continually in its indiscriminate abetting of all the latter's foreign political aims. It backs up more rigidly than any other satellite Moscow's anti-Adenauer campaign and endeavors to cement the position of the Soviet Zone government in the eastern half of Germany. In the United States, Prague's henchmen seek every opportunity to oppose the perpetuation of a status quo in Asia and Africa and favor the separation of those areas from the sphere of influence of the European powers. Prague has gone so far as to train Asiatics and Africans to become Communist agents and by shipments of arms has gone far to create the insecurity and unrest that prevail in the Near East, Africa, and Asia. Prague Communist rulers have mobilized the vast industrial potential and the capabilities of the people in lands within Czecho-Slovakia to aid Moscow's economic offensive 50 SLOVAKIA in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and - disregarding the drop in the standard of living of their own population have pursued this aim indefatigably. By means of Communist-schooled advisers, labor unionists and experts, who are employed in installing of industrial plants in these lands, Prague creates seats of unrest in these areas and helps incorporate them into the Moscow sphere of influence. In short, Prague consistently and persistently aids and abets the world-power objectives of the Soviet Union. Ever since 1945 a policy of violence has been exercised against the Slovaks by the Prague government. In May, 1947, the then head of that government, Klement Gottwald, threatened Slovak patriots and asserted that it was a matter of duty to "persecute, ideologically and politically, and if need be administrative ly, the remaining People's Party separatists in Slovakia who are a source of dissent within Czecho-Slovakia." Shortly thereafter he spoke the words: "Today, in every respect, Slovakia is the weakest link in the Republic". Attempts have been made time and again to break the resistance of the Slovak population to Communism by resorting to deportations, acts of violence, concentration camps and a wide variety of oppressive measures customary within Communist countries. Since 1945 more than one-half million persons have been taken from Slovakia and scattered throughout the entire Sudet enland as workers in mines, factories, and agricultural associations, and about 250 thousand Czechs have been resettled into Slovakia as key figures in party and State administration, in agriculture, and the security apparatus, as well as Czech military units which represents pillars of the regime. It suffices to look at the map of Central Europe to see that Slovakia, by dint of her position between Hungary and Poland, on the one side, and the fact that she serves as link for the Bohemian lands and the Soviet Union, on the other side, - while bordering on the free world in the West through Austria - has a key position in the Danubian area. ,Slovak independence is not only in harmony with the wishes of the population, the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the ideals of democracy and of human S!,OVAKIA 51 progress, but the interests of the free world. It is to the advantage of freedom-loving people to support the Slovak people's fight for freedom. The independence of Slovakia means a weakening of Prague, a weakening of the Communist empire. Since World War IT, the free world, misled by false hopes, has expected the Kremlin rulers to be satisfied with the status quo and desist from any further ag,g ression. This has caused the powers that were victorious in that war to take a positive stand only with respect to th,~ proCommunist and pro-Soviet political trends from behind the Iron Curtain while turning a cold shoulder to the principal opponent of Communism and Russian imperialism. It is this policy of the western powers and not Soviet military victories - that explains Moscow's success. Because of this unfortunate policy, Moscow's lust for power has been whetted to such a degree that today Khrushchev regards as a matter of course the recognition by the free world of the status quo which the Soviets arrived at by violence and fraud - and in fact, he demands such recognition. The free world fails to see that by supporting the traditional but artificial structure known as "Czecho-Slovakia", it is acting in opposition to its own interests. As long as Prague can continue to throttle Slovakia, the lifeline that feeds the spirit of freedom among the Slovak people runs the grave danger of being cut off from the West forever. • • • WHO SAID IT? "On this, the twenty-,seventh anniversary of the founding Oif the Union of SOIV!iet Sociallist Repu.Jblios, may I express on 'behalJ.f of Sooretary Hull and myself sincere felicitations to you. We may aJl looik forward with full confidence to an eair.ly victory aver the Nazi barbarians and the establishment of an enduring and just peace built on the firm foun:datio1ns of coQPeration and mutual understanding which have been wrought so f.inn1ly in the cru.c1ble o:f war." Edward R. Stettiniius, Acting Secretary of Staite in crublegram sent to V. M. Molotov, Nov. 6, 1944.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovakia's Lifeline with the West Description An account of the resource Dr. Ferdinand Ďurčanský Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 47-51 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ďurčanský, Ferdinand Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2d14e30f0105888799fed57587d3616e.pdf f630c65d43bdf6cc14322441540bc6e6 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50 �SLOVAKIA 45 years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and, from time to time, added new buildings. In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514 Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle. When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death. When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557. In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he gave up his high position and again began to worm himself �46 SLOVAKIA into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed. He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka for some 300 years. In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown, and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv• ing there. During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again repaired and fortified, but the management was turned over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children. After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of Maria Theresa with the title of Count. In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both were very good to their subjects and showed great concern for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days gone by. • • • WHO SAID IT? Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943. � SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50 �SLOVAKIA 45 years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and, from time to time, added new buildings. In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514 Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle. When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death. When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557. In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he gave up his high position and again began to worm himself �46 SLOVAKIA into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed. He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka for some 300 years. In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown, and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv• ing there. During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again repaired and fortified, but the management was turned over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children. After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of Maria Theresa with the title of Count. In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both were very good to their subjects and showed great concern for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days gone by. • • • WHO SAID IT? Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50 SLOVAKIA 45 years. Dominic Bebek must have won the dispute because he is mentioned as the owner in the year 1352. The family took good care of the fortress, kept it in good repair and, from time to time, added new buildings. In the year 1441 John of Brandys besieged the fortress as well as all surrounding fortresses, and held it for some twenty years. Then came the Czech Hussites, who took the fortress and made it impregnable. Later on the fortress became the property of Stephen Bebek. In 1514 Bebek and Zapofsky put down an insurrection of the peasants. When John Bebek fell in the famous battle of Mohac in 1526, Francis Bebek became the owner of Krasna Horka. He made counterfeit coins from the metal of bells that he stole from the surrounding churches. He was helped in this infamous work by the owner of Muran Castle. When Bebek felt the earth falling under his feet, he informed against Basa, the owner of Muran. The court ordered Basa apprehended and appointed Bebek as head of the expedition to carry out the order. Later on he was caught by a shepherd and brought to Bebek, who sentenced him to death. When Bebek tok over the fortress, he repaired and fortified it. Later on he again plied his nefarious trade as counterfeiter and cast his lot with John Zapofsky, an enemy of the emperor. When the emperor learned this, he sent his army against Bebek, but Bebek defeated the royal army. Not feeling safe in the fortress, Bebek left it and took up his residence at the Court of King Zigmund. The mother of King Zigmund, proving that Bebek was a traitor, had him killed in the year 1552. The fortress then became the property of the emperor's commander, Lazarus Schwendi. Bebek's son, George, casting his fortunes with the emperor, became the possessor of the fortress in 1557. In the year 1560 George Bebek was captured by the Turk, Hasan, and sent to Constantinople where he was a prisoner for five years. Enlisting the sympathy of King Zigmund and promising him life-long support, he was freed and became the commander-in-chief of all the armies of King Zigmund. It was not long after this that he gave up his high position and again began to worm himself 46 SLOVAKIA into the good graces of the emperor. He did not succeed. He died in Transylvania without issue; and with him died the last of the Bebek family, which owned Krasna Horka for some 300 years. In 1556 the fortress became the property of the crown, and to the year 1580 it was administered by various captains of the king. In that year the famous Peter Andrassy became its administrator. The Andrassy family is well known in Slovakia; some of its descendants are still liv• ing there. During the Rak6czi uprising, Stephen Andrassy helped Rak6czi, was named general of a part of the army that defeated the emperor's forces at Rab. The fortress was again repaired and fortified, but the management was turned over to Andrassy's wife, nee Seredi, and to his children. After a colorful career, full of intrigue, Stephen Andrassy died. His son, Francis, became owner, but leaving no direct descendants, the fortress passed into the possession of his nephew Charles, who became a general in the army of Maria Theresa with the title of Count. In 1847, when the fortress was destroyed by lightning and fire, it was completely repaired. Later on Dyonisius Andrassy became the owner of the fortress. He married a commoner, a Bohemian girl, Frances Hablavec. Both were very good to their subjects and showed great concern for the fortress , keeping it in very good repair. Today the fortress is a museum and contains many treasures of days gone by. • • • WHO SAID IT? Benes's trtp (to Moscow) is the Czechoslwak contribution to the struoture cxf world 1peace. Afl decent people are rejoidng, becaiuse it is a victory for democracy, the triumph of a good cause. . . The Soviet Czechoslo,vak Treaty is for him a great sati,s faotion. It is a great victory of the Czechoslov0Jk cause. It is a gigantic contrilbution to the structure of a happier Europe. It is the sollid foundation to lasting pea'Ce of the world. It is a great victory of Benes's politics." - Editorial, NEW YORK:SKY DENN1K Czechoslovak daily in Slovak language) , Dec. 15, 1943.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Castles of Slovakia: Krásna Hôrka Description An account of the resource Hubert Macko, OSB. Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 44-46 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Macko, Hubert Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 castles name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/eaa706385bb38b2d95fcd8f94c12e8ca.pdf a334fa9aa5ee7c6eaf42f769bc58d2f8 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 33 THE SWVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS God had •willed it that the Slovaks settle in Central Europe, in the valleys of the Vah, Nitra, Hron, and Ipel, Ondava and Laborec. The land of the Slovaks is watered by the huge waves of the Danube which flows in the south for a hundred miles. The Morava river in the west and the Tisa in the east make contact with Slovakia. Altogether 9'7 % of the rivers and streams of ,S lovakia flow south into the Danube and the Tisa rivers - only the Dunajec wends its way north to the Visla and the Baltic Sea. The Slovak mountains, the Carpathians, rise on the northern 1borders, and therefrom to the south we find hills and valleys of natural and romantic beauty. In the High and Low Tatra Mountains there are deep lakes and very beautiful bathing and recreational spots. In the valleys there are inexhaustible mineral springs. Practically three-quarters of Slovakia is covered with fox-ests and hills. Rich, fertile land, however, makes UF much of the land in the east, south, and west. Slovakia is in fact a :Eiucharistic country. The wheat grown there provides the daily bread for the Slovaks just as it does for the Sacred Hosts they receive so frequently. Grapes provide refreshment for man and the wine necessary for the altars of the land. In the mountains there is an invaluable supply of green gold-thick forests of beech, oak, and pine trees. The rivers of the valleys abound in various kinds of fish, and in the bowels of the earth there are ice caverns and gold, coal, antimony, magnesite, naphtha, and mineral waters. Slovakia has a population of four million made up of Slovaks for the most part. Before · 19'46 quite a number of Germans, Ukrainians, Poles and Magyars had settled in Slovakia, but today, after the forced expulsion of the Germans and Magyars by Dr. Edward Benes and his regime, the Germans and Magyars form a negligible portion of the population. Hundred of thousands of Czechs, the socalled "reliable" element, have been settled there by the pro~Soviet Czech regime. At least 80 % of the total population is of the Catholic religion. Protestants and Jews �34 SLOVAKIA make up the rest of the population. There are practically no Slovaks without religious affiliation in Slovakia even at the present time even though religion is scorned by the Czech pro-.Soviet regime. Slovaks emigrated in large numbers before 1918, during the administration of the Magyars, and in appreciable m1mibers even during the reign of the Czechs from 191'8 to 1938. At least one-third of the Slovaks settled in America, Canada, and South America during that time. Emigration stopped completely after the Slovak parliament of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. It is noteworthy that the Slovak Republic did not depend on foreign loans : Slovakia depended entirely on her own resources and proved her viability and economic independence during the six years of her independence (1939-1M5). Adherence To Christian Culture It was only natural that the Slovaks were always on good terms with their neighbors: they had been guided by western Christian culture for over a thousand years. The church of Prince Pribina, built in 831, is still a part of the beautiful Nitra Cathedral. The Slovaks not only learned and preached Christianity, but actually lived it. They love God above all else, as taught by their apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, served the true Church of Jesus Christ, and loved their neighbors in the same measure that they did themselves. How did the Slovaks get along with their neighbors: the Austrians and Czechs in the west and northwest, the Poles in the north, the Ukrainians in the east, and the Magyars in the south? · Vienna, the capital of Austria, and Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia, are just an hour's ride by auto from each other. In the old Austro-Hungarian empire, the Slovaks and the Austrians got along very well, their contacts were cordial. The Habsburg dynasty had its members crowned as kings in the St. Martin Home in Bratislava. After 1918, when the T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes Czechs took over the reigns of the newly formed Czecho-Slovak State, �SLOVAKIA the borders between Austria and Slovakia were closed; one needed a visa to cross the border. Later, this regulation was retracted and Slovaks and Austrians could travel at will <between Vienna and Bratislava. This was a good neighborly relationship that was to the advantage of the !Slovaks living in Vienna, or in Austria proper. There were some 80,000 Slovaks settled in Austria. Politically, the Slovaks lived their own lives in Vienna. Recognized political and church leaders visited them regularly. Monsignor Andrew H1inka, founder of the Slovaks People's Party and champion of Slovak freedom and independence, had cordial contacts not only with Slovak leaders in Austria, but with influential Austrians a\3 well. Msgr. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the 1S lovak Republic, was educated in the Pazmaneum of Vienna, where the bishops of Hungary sent their most capable theologians for further priestly studies. In 1938, when Austria ceased to exist as an independent State, the Slovaks continued their friendly relationship with the Austrias. The Slovaks certainly will never forget how the Austrians helped the Slovaks in 1945 when about '5,000 of them sought asylum in Austria, including President Tiso and the Slovak Government, after the Reds broke through to Ruthenia and the eastern part of Slovakia. And they are grateful today for the assistance still proferred to Slovak escapees. There is every reason to believe that after the Red scourge is removed from Slovakia, the Slovaks and the Austrians will have no trouble at all in getting along with each other. The Moravians and the Czechs On the northwest there is a 1'25-mile border that separates the Moravians and Czechs from the Slovaks. This border, however, during the existence of Austro~Hungary never was an obstacle to good relations between the local populations. This is understandable, since on both sides of this border are settled the descendants of a common Slovak tribe, many of whom even today call themselves "Moravian Slovaks". The latter were strongly attracted into the political, cultural, and economic sphere of the Czechs and par- �36 SLOVAKIA tially succumbed and accepted Czech culture and the Czech language. Nevertheless the "Moravian Slovaks" still cling to Slovak customs and habits and are as Catholic as the Slovaks on the other side of the border. Hussitism and Protestantism has made as little headway among them as among the Slovaks themselves. From the times of Master John Hus, Comenius, and other Czech thinkers, therefore from the 1'5-16th centuries, Czech political ideology has strongly digressed from the traditions of King Saint Wenceslaus. It has divorced itself from them and has followed the path away from Rome and particularly from the pedagogical office of the Vatican. Havlicek, Masaryk, and Benes made Hus a symbol of Czech pride and attempted to alter Czech history and remake the Czech nation in the ima,ge of John Hus which, of course, was in opposition to the Christian mind of Europe. The Movement "away from Rome", headed by Masaryk, Benes, and other "enlightened and progressive" Czechs, gained momentum as soon as T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes took over the Hradcany in Pra:gue. With their blessing and active support, the "Czecho- Slovak National Church" was established. There was nothing Slovak about it except the second part of its appellation: it was strictly a Czech enterprise which sought to destroy the Roman Catholic Church in the newly-baked political unit called Czecho-Slovakia; the Slovaks had nothing in common with it. In 1948 it was the first religious organization to willingly offer its collaboration to the Red cause. When the Czech National Church of Czecho-'Slovakia (that is its real name) was founded, about a million Czech Catholics and some 360 Czech priests joined it, supporting thereby T. G. Masaryk's movement "away from Rome"! It was only natural that this display of chauvinistic nationalism isolated the Czechs from the spirit of Catholic Europe and tragically ended in the willing acceptance of Russian Bolshevism under the leadership of Clement Gottwald, the successor of Masaryk and Benes to the throne of the Czech kings at the Hradcany. In Europe it was only Prague, at that time still under the leadership of Ur. Edward Benes, that really welcomed the Red conquerors of �SLOVAKIA 37 the world and their Red Army in grand style as its liberators and the guarantor of its national, state and social life, of its growth and progress. Unfortunately Czech Catholic politics was never strong and vigorous enough to pursue its own course. Under the leadership of 'Monsignor John Sramek, the politics of Czech Catholics was always subordinated to the basic lines of Czech national policy which it adopted and followed. The sad awakening came later when it was too late to do anything about it. These facts, particularly the openly anti-Catholic policy of the Masaryk and Benes regimes during the twentyyear cohabitation of the Slovaks and Czechs, were the cause of much friction and bad blood between them. In a word, the Slovaks did not trust the ruling Czechs and told them in no uncertain terms on many occasions that their policies would lead to the collapse of the Czecho-1Slovak Republic. Making friends of the Russian Reds and enemies of immediate neighbors could hardly be termed wise politics. In many respects, however, the ,S lovaks gained much from the Czechs in its transitional period in their march to independence. Not, of course, at the price demanded by the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the surrender of their inherent right to freedom and independence, the repudiation of their own ethnic individuality. We know that T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes had stated at the Paris Peace Conference that "the Czechs and the Slovaks are the same". The Slovaks, according to them were only a "branch" of the Czech nation, and the Slovak language was but a "dialect" of the Czech. While representatives of the Czechs propagated this "Czeclto-Slovak" ideology that the Slovaks and Czechs were one ethnic unit, the Slovaks under the leadership of the Catholic Monsignors Andrew Hlinka and Dr. Joseph Tiso and the Protestant clergyman Martin Razus replied that they could not accept this false ideology. The Slovaks, they said, never were and at no time felt that they are a "branch" of the Czech nation. They always were and still feel that they are a distinct ethnic unit, as are the other Slovanic nations. The Slovaks had no intentions of commiting national sui- �38 SLOVAKIA cide when they decided to form a common political state with the Czechs in 1918. The Masaryk..1Benes Czechs, however, continued to propagate the ideology that had no historical foundation in fact with all the propaganda means at their disposal, that is, with State funds and, therefore, ironically, even at the expense of the Slovaks. When Dr. Benes visited Bratislava in 1933, he declared that the Slovaks had to accept the idea of an ethnic "Czecho-Slovak" nation in their own interest. "In the fight against us," he said, "the entire pressure shall go against Slovakia. Our relationship with Germany is good and correct and so it shall continue to remain in every case. Between us and the Germans there have not been and there shall not be any quarrels and difficulties about boundaries." The events of 1,938-1939, however, proved how wrong Benes was. Pressure was exerted not against the Slovaks, but against the Czechs, because the relationship between the Czechs and the Germans never had been, as Benes declared, "good and correct", but always bad and insincere. The historical record, as written, informed and impartial observers, is quite clear on this point. The resolution of this relationship was one of the causes of World War II. And what happened after 1945? With the help of Stalin, Dr. Edward Benes resolved this problem of "good relations" with the Germans by brutally expelling more than three million ·S udeten Germans for the "new people's Republic" of Czecho-lSlovakia ! The Slovaks were opposed to the forced expulsion of the Germans from Czecho-'S lovakia at that time and still adamantly condemn it. The responsibility for this shamefull crime against humanity must be credited to the account of the foreign policy which Masaryk and Benes initiated at the beginning of the Republic, the policy with which the Slovaks never identified themselves and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for it or its consequences. There was nothing Slovak about Czecho-Slovak foreign policy. During the entire life of the first Czecho-Slovak Republic (1918-1938), Dr. Edward Benes, leader of the Czech National Socialists, was "Mr. Foreign ,Policy"! After twenty long years of the brand of democracy promulgated by the �SLOVAKIA 39 Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the relation between the two "closely related nations", the Slovaks and the Czechs, were strained to the limit. The Republic had to fall, because the majority of its population had been treated as second-rate citizens. It was a democracy only for the Czechs, but in the end not even a Czech could be found to fire a single shot in its defense! After the sad experiences in the Czecho-,Slovak Republic under the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the Slovaks do not even want to think about another common political state with them. Of course, Czecho..(Slovakia still exists, but not because the Slovaks willed it so. The political will of the Slovak nation was utterly disregarded in 1945 by the victorious United Nations. "Away from Prague - back to Bratislava" is the cry of all Slovak nationals who are convinced now more than ever that the highest interests of the Slovak nation can best ·be safeguarded and secured only in an independent Slovak Republic. A proper neighborly relationship on an international basis is, however, possible between the Slovaks and the Czechs, if it is allowed to develop under international supervision. But never again on an intra-state basis. The Slovaks remember the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918, which T. G. Masaryk himself had drafted and undersigned - and then repudiated completely. And they shall never forget the antiSlovak policy of Masaryk's star pupil, Dr. Edward Benes, In 193'5, the latter promised Slovakia complete autonomy within a year, if the deputies of the Hlinka party would vote him in as president of the Republic. The Slovaks fulfilled their part of the given word, but Benes did not. When they pressed him in 1936 to fulfill his promise, Dr. Benes officially annonced to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party that he must first grant autonomy to Ruthenia, because he was bound to do so by the peace treaty of St. Germaine and the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But nothing happened: Ruthenia, like Slovakia, continued to be regarded as a colony of the Benes Czechs. President Ha.cha; the constitutional successor of Dr. Benes, is responsible for the March, 1939, military putsch in Slovakia, whereby an attempt was made to repudiate �40 SLOVAKIA the rights of autonomous Slovakia. The latter, we know, was granted autonomy by Prague on October 6, 19,38. And what did Gottwald, the Czech Red, do later? In Kosice, in 194'5, he proclaimed that the Czecho-Slovak Republic "must" safeguard and cultivate the right of the Slovaksbut in 1948, when he succeeded Benes as president, Gottwald proceeded to repudiate all his promises, because Slovakia, he said, was anti-communist! T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, Dr. Ha.cha, Gottwald, Zapotocky, and Novotny-all presidents of CzechoSlovakia - had promised the Slovaks a fuller life of freedom, but failed to fulfill their promises. Little wonder, then, that the Slovaks have completely lost their faith in leading representatives of Czech political life. Let the Czechs go their way, and let the ,Slovaks be free to develop and decide their own destiny-that is the sentiment of at least 95 % of the Slovaks at home and in the free world. The Slovaks stand for a Central-European or an European Federation: let the Czechs join as an independent political unit, and the Slovaks likewise: but no more Czech domination! The Slovaks and the Poles In the course of the ages, the ,Slovaks had no serious trouble with the Poles. They were practically always on good terms with them and symphathized with them. In one of their first political manifestations, that of 1'849 in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas, the Slovaks expressly stated that they were for the realization of national and state rights of the Poles. And the Slovaks remember that the Poles made it possible ,f or Msgr. Andrew Hlinka to travel in 1919 in an attempt to present the 'Slovak demands (the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918) to the Peace Conference. They were opposed to the solution of the problem of the Orava and Spis Counties, whereby over twenty villages that had belonged to Slovakia for more than a thousand years were awarded to Poland at the Paris Peace Conference. The Slovaks were angered more at Benes than at the Poles when they learned that Benes had traded these villages for the coal fields of Tesin in Silesia. Mter that relations between the Slovaks and the Poles improved until 1938 when the Czecho-Slovak �SLOVAKIA 41 Republic collapsed and the Poles again sought a revision of the Slovak-Polish frontier to protect themselves against a German attack from the south. At that time the Prague regime did not defend Slovakia, so the latter entered directly into negotiations with the Poles in October, 1938, where the Poles cut their demands to a minimum. More obstacles to better relations were removed during a conference with the Poles in Ruzomberok in February, 1939. Poland was among the first countries to recognize the independent Republic of Slovakia, after the Slovak Parliament proclaimed its independence of Prague on March 14, 1939. When Hitler and Stalin decided to partition Poland in 1939, many Poles emigrated through Slovakia, while many remained there throughout the war. They were given every courtesy; they had Slovak passes and were employed by private and state industry where they spent the worst years of the war and later left unmolested to fight for the liberation of Poland. The friendship of the Slovaks for the ·P oles was never approved by the Benes Czechs in Prague who preferred to do business with Stalin at the expense of Poland and Slovakia. The Slovaks and the Ukrainians The border between Slovakia and Ruthenia is 40 miles long. Known as Sub.JCarpathian Russia, Ruthenia today belongs to Soviet Ukrainia which is a part of the Soviet Union. Dr. Edward Benes and his pro-Soviet "provisional" government sold out the Ruthenians to Stalin in 1945. Slovakia today borders directly on the Soviet Union, and the Slovaks know that Ruthenia is administrated directly by Moscow. The old inhabitants of those parts have been transferred deep into Russia by Moscow, resettling the evacuated towns and villages with non-!Slovanic elements from Asia. The Slovaks were always on good terms with the original inhabitants. The history of the rSlovaks and the Ruthenians had much in common; both had suffered the heavy hand of foreign rulers for centuries. In October, 1938, representatives of Ruthenia came to 2ilina to confer with the Slovaks. It was there that they said: we have lived for cen- �42 SLOVAKIA turies on good terms with the Slovaks; we fought for 20 years within the Czecho-Slovak framework to gain autonomy as the Slovaks did; we shall go along with the Slovaks also in the future; if the Slovaks tie their future with the Czechs, we shall do so; if, however, the Slovaks should proclaim their independence of the Czechs and shall be for an independent Slovak State, we also shall declare our separation from Prague and proclaim an independent Republic of Carpatho-Ukrainia. And that is exactly what happened. The ,S lovaks proclaimed their State independence on March 14, 1939, in Bratislava, while the deputies of Ruthenia did the same thing on the same day in Chust. True, they enjoyed independence only 24 hours, because Ruthenia was incorporated into Hungary on the basis of an agreement between Hitler and the Magyars. After World War II, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. gyars. After World War ll, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. 1 The Slovaks and the Magyars The longest border between Slovakia and any other neighboring country is that between Slovakia and Hungary; it is 31·2 miles long. The Hungarian State originated from the ruins of the first Slovak State--the Great Moravian Empire-after 907 A. D. St. Stephen, King of Hungary, made Christians of the pagan Magyars and tied them spiritually to Rome. Believing that a "uni-lingual state is weak", St. Stephen did not allow the Magyar language or any other language to be the official language of the state, but established Latin as the official language and so conserved, like an ice pack, all the living languages of the inhabitants of Hungary. It was only at the beginning of the last century that Latin was replaced by Magyar as the official language of the State. Unhealthy chauvinism began to spread the Magyar tongue at the expense of the native Slovak. The result was that the Slovaks revolted against the dominating Magyars over a hundred years ago, in 1848. Disregarding the admonition of St. Stephen about an one-language State, the Ma- �SLOVAKIA 43 gyars pressed for one •~Hungarian" nation with Magyar as the official language "from the Carpathians to the Adriatic Sea". The partition of Hungary in 1918 was due to excessive Ma:gyar nationalism which made enemies of all the other nationalities of the realm. Before 1918, the Magyars accused the Slovaks of being Pan-,Slavs. After 1918, the Masaryk-Benes Czechs accused the Slovaks of being Magyarones. While the Magyars fostered hatred of the Slovanic nations, the Czechs on the other hand propagated hatred of the Magyars among the Slovaks and Czechs. Excessive chauvinism prompted both movements. Many of the younger Slovak set succumbed to the anti..;Magyar propaganda of official Prague and only later discovered that thereby the Masaryk-/Benes Czechs wanted to conceal their own real goal: the Czechization bf the Slovak nation. The Magyar "Hungarian nation-state from the Carpathians to the Adriatic" became for the Czechs "a united Czechoslovak nation from Sumava to the Tatras". Obviously the Czechs learned nothing from past history-and ended up just as did the Magyars: alone and hated by the non-Czech citizens and by all their neighbors. When the Slovaks declared their independence of Prague in 1939, the Magyars recognized the independent Republic of Slovakia de jure and established diplomatic contacts forthwith. Of course, the Slovaks were crudely jarred by the Vienna negotiations of Ribbentrop and Ciano in 1938, whereby the Magyars were favored with about one-third of 1S lovak territory (Vienna Award). After 1945 these southern regions were returned to Slovakia so that Benes could expel the Magyars from them in exchange for Slovaks settled in Hungary proper. The Benes Czechs are alone responsible for the brutalities committed during the forced "transfer" of Magyars from Slovak territory. The Slovaks condemned this forced transfer of Magyars as strongly as they did the brutal expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from Bohemia. The Hungarian National Council, under the leadership of Monsignor Bela Varga, has recognized the inherent right of the Slovak nation to freedom and independence. Cordial contacts have been established with Slovaks in exile and 1 �SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50 � SLOVAKIA 33 THE SWVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS God had •willed it that the Slovaks settle in Central Europe, in the valleys of the Vah, Nitra, Hron, and Ipel, Ondava and Laborec. The land of the Slovaks is watered by the huge waves of the Danube which flows in the south for a hundred miles. The Morava river in the west and the Tisa in the east make contact with Slovakia. Altogether 9'7 % of the rivers and streams of ,S lovakia flow south into the Danube and the Tisa rivers - only the Dunajec wends its way north to the Visla and the Baltic Sea. The Slovak mountains, the Carpathians, rise on the northern 1borders, and therefrom to the south we find hills and valleys of natural and romantic beauty. In the High and Low Tatra Mountains there are deep lakes and very beautiful bathing and recreational spots. In the valleys there are inexhaustible mineral springs. Practically three-quarters of Slovakia is covered with fox-ests and hills. Rich, fertile land, however, makes UF much of the land in the east, south, and west. Slovakia is in fact a :Eiucharistic country. The wheat grown there provides the daily bread for the Slovaks just as it does for the Sacred Hosts they receive so frequently. Grapes provide refreshment for man and the wine necessary for the altars of the land. In the mountains there is an invaluable supply of green gold-thick forests of beech, oak, and pine trees. The rivers of the valleys abound in various kinds of fish, and in the bowels of the earth there are ice caverns and gold, coal, antimony, magnesite, naphtha, and mineral waters. Slovakia has a population of four million made up of Slovaks for the most part. Before · 19'46 quite a number of Germans, Ukrainians, Poles and Magyars had settled in Slovakia, but today, after the forced expulsion of the Germans and Magyars by Dr. Edward Benes and his regime, the Germans and Magyars form a negligible portion of the population. Hundred of thousands of Czechs, the socalled "reliable" element, have been settled there by the pro~Soviet Czech regime. At least 80 % of the total population is of the Catholic religion. Protestants and Jews �34 SLOVAKIA make up the rest of the population. There are practically no Slovaks without religious affiliation in Slovakia even at the present time even though religion is scorned by the Czech pro-.Soviet regime. Slovaks emigrated in large numbers before 1918, during the administration of the Magyars, and in appreciable m1mibers even during the reign of the Czechs from 191'8 to 1938. At least one-third of the Slovaks settled in America, Canada, and South America during that time. Emigration stopped completely after the Slovak parliament of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. It is noteworthy that the Slovak Republic did not depend on foreign loans : Slovakia depended entirely on her own resources and proved her viability and economic independence during the six years of her independence (1939-1M5). Adherence To Christian Culture It was only natural that the Slovaks were always on good terms with their neighbors: they had been guided by western Christian culture for over a thousand years. The church of Prince Pribina, built in 831, is still a part of the beautiful Nitra Cathedral. The Slovaks not only learned and preached Christianity, but actually lived it. They love God above all else, as taught by their apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, served the true Church of Jesus Christ, and loved their neighbors in the same measure that they did themselves. How did the Slovaks get along with their neighbors: the Austrians and Czechs in the west and northwest, the Poles in the north, the Ukrainians in the east, and the Magyars in the south? · Vienna, the capital of Austria, and Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia, are just an hour's ride by auto from each other. In the old Austro-Hungarian empire, the Slovaks and the Austrians got along very well, their contacts were cordial. The Habsburg dynasty had its members crowned as kings in the St. Martin Home in Bratislava. After 1918, when the T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes Czechs took over the reigns of the newly formed Czecho-Slovak State, �SLOVAKIA the borders between Austria and Slovakia were closed; one needed a visa to cross the border. Later, this regulation was retracted and Slovaks and Austrians could travel at will <between Vienna and Bratislava. This was a good neighborly relationship that was to the advantage of the !Slovaks living in Vienna, or in Austria proper. There were some 80,000 Slovaks settled in Austria. Politically, the Slovaks lived their own lives in Vienna. Recognized political and church leaders visited them regularly. Monsignor Andrew H1inka, founder of the Slovaks People's Party and champion of Slovak freedom and independence, had cordial contacts not only with Slovak leaders in Austria, but with influential Austrians a\3 well. Msgr. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the 1S lovak Republic, was educated in the Pazmaneum of Vienna, where the bishops of Hungary sent their most capable theologians for further priestly studies. In 1938, when Austria ceased to exist as an independent State, the Slovaks continued their friendly relationship with the Austrias. The Slovaks certainly will never forget how the Austrians helped the Slovaks in 1945 when about '5,000 of them sought asylum in Austria, including President Tiso and the Slovak Government, after the Reds broke through to Ruthenia and the eastern part of Slovakia. And they are grateful today for the assistance still proferred to Slovak escapees. There is every reason to believe that after the Red scourge is removed from Slovakia, the Slovaks and the Austrians will have no trouble at all in getting along with each other. The Moravians and the Czechs On the northwest there is a 1'25-mile border that separates the Moravians and Czechs from the Slovaks. This border, however, during the existence of Austro~Hungary never was an obstacle to good relations between the local populations. This is understandable, since on both sides of this border are settled the descendants of a common Slovak tribe, many of whom even today call themselves "Moravian Slovaks". The latter were strongly attracted into the political, cultural, and economic sphere of the Czechs and par- �36 SLOVAKIA tially succumbed and accepted Czech culture and the Czech language. Nevertheless the "Moravian Slovaks" still cling to Slovak customs and habits and are as Catholic as the Slovaks on the other side of the border. Hussitism and Protestantism has made as little headway among them as among the Slovaks themselves. From the times of Master John Hus, Comenius, and other Czech thinkers, therefore from the 1'5-16th centuries, Czech political ideology has strongly digressed from the traditions of King Saint Wenceslaus. It has divorced itself from them and has followed the path away from Rome and particularly from the pedagogical office of the Vatican. Havlicek, Masaryk, and Benes made Hus a symbol of Czech pride and attempted to alter Czech history and remake the Czech nation in the ima,ge of John Hus which, of course, was in opposition to the Christian mind of Europe. The Movement "away from Rome", headed by Masaryk, Benes, and other "enlightened and progressive" Czechs, gained momentum as soon as T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes took over the Hradcany in Pra:gue. With their blessing and active support, the "Czecho- Slovak National Church" was established. There was nothing Slovak about it except the second part of its appellation: it was strictly a Czech enterprise which sought to destroy the Roman Catholic Church in the newly-baked political unit called Czecho-Slovakia; the Slovaks had nothing in common with it. In 1948 it was the first religious organization to willingly offer its collaboration to the Red cause. When the Czech National Church of Czecho-'Slovakia (that is its real name) was founded, about a million Czech Catholics and some 360 Czech priests joined it, supporting thereby T. G. Masaryk's movement "away from Rome"! It was only natural that this display of chauvinistic nationalism isolated the Czechs from the spirit of Catholic Europe and tragically ended in the willing acceptance of Russian Bolshevism under the leadership of Clement Gottwald, the successor of Masaryk and Benes to the throne of the Czech kings at the Hradcany. In Europe it was only Prague, at that time still under the leadership of Ur. Edward Benes, that really welcomed the Red conquerors of �SLOVAKIA 37 the world and their Red Army in grand style as its liberators and the guarantor of its national, state and social life, of its growth and progress. Unfortunately Czech Catholic politics was never strong and vigorous enough to pursue its own course. Under the leadership of 'Monsignor John Sramek, the politics of Czech Catholics was always subordinated to the basic lines of Czech national policy which it adopted and followed. The sad awakening came later when it was too late to do anything about it. These facts, particularly the openly anti-Catholic policy of the Masaryk and Benes regimes during the twentyyear cohabitation of the Slovaks and Czechs, were the cause of much friction and bad blood between them. In a word, the Slovaks did not trust the ruling Czechs and told them in no uncertain terms on many occasions that their policies would lead to the collapse of the Czecho-1Slovak Republic. Making friends of the Russian Reds and enemies of immediate neighbors could hardly be termed wise politics. In many respects, however, the ,S lovaks gained much from the Czechs in its transitional period in their march to independence. Not, of course, at the price demanded by the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the surrender of their inherent right to freedom and independence, the repudiation of their own ethnic individuality. We know that T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes had stated at the Paris Peace Conference that "the Czechs and the Slovaks are the same". The Slovaks, according to them were only a "branch" of the Czech nation, and the Slovak language was but a "dialect" of the Czech. While representatives of the Czechs propagated this "Czeclto-Slovak" ideology that the Slovaks and Czechs were one ethnic unit, the Slovaks under the leadership of the Catholic Monsignors Andrew Hlinka and Dr. Joseph Tiso and the Protestant clergyman Martin Razus replied that they could not accept this false ideology. The Slovaks, they said, never were and at no time felt that they are a "branch" of the Czech nation. They always were and still feel that they are a distinct ethnic unit, as are the other Slovanic nations. The Slovaks had no intentions of commiting national sui- �38 SLOVAKIA cide when they decided to form a common political state with the Czechs in 1918. The Masaryk..1Benes Czechs, however, continued to propagate the ideology that had no historical foundation in fact with all the propaganda means at their disposal, that is, with State funds and, therefore, ironically, even at the expense of the Slovaks. When Dr. Benes visited Bratislava in 1933, he declared that the Slovaks had to accept the idea of an ethnic "Czecho-Slovak" nation in their own interest. "In the fight against us," he said, "the entire pressure shall go against Slovakia. Our relationship with Germany is good and correct and so it shall continue to remain in every case. Between us and the Germans there have not been and there shall not be any quarrels and difficulties about boundaries." The events of 1,938-1939, however, proved how wrong Benes was. Pressure was exerted not against the Slovaks, but against the Czechs, because the relationship between the Czechs and the Germans never had been, as Benes declared, "good and correct", but always bad and insincere. The historical record, as written, informed and impartial observers, is quite clear on this point. The resolution of this relationship was one of the causes of World War II. And what happened after 1945? With the help of Stalin, Dr. Edward Benes resolved this problem of "good relations" with the Germans by brutally expelling more than three million ·S udeten Germans for the "new people's Republic" of Czecho-lSlovakia ! The Slovaks were opposed to the forced expulsion of the Germans from Czecho-'S lovakia at that time and still adamantly condemn it. The responsibility for this shamefull crime against humanity must be credited to the account of the foreign policy which Masaryk and Benes initiated at the beginning of the Republic, the policy with which the Slovaks never identified themselves and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for it or its consequences. There was nothing Slovak about Czecho-Slovak foreign policy. During the entire life of the first Czecho-Slovak Republic (1918-1938), Dr. Edward Benes, leader of the Czech National Socialists, was "Mr. Foreign ,Policy"! After twenty long years of the brand of democracy promulgated by the �SLOVAKIA 39 Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the relation between the two "closely related nations", the Slovaks and the Czechs, were strained to the limit. The Republic had to fall, because the majority of its population had been treated as second-rate citizens. It was a democracy only for the Czechs, but in the end not even a Czech could be found to fire a single shot in its defense! After the sad experiences in the Czecho-,Slovak Republic under the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the Slovaks do not even want to think about another common political state with them. Of course, Czecho..(Slovakia still exists, but not because the Slovaks willed it so. The political will of the Slovak nation was utterly disregarded in 1945 by the victorious United Nations. "Away from Prague - back to Bratislava" is the cry of all Slovak nationals who are convinced now more than ever that the highest interests of the Slovak nation can best ·be safeguarded and secured only in an independent Slovak Republic. A proper neighborly relationship on an international basis is, however, possible between the Slovaks and the Czechs, if it is allowed to develop under international supervision. But never again on an intra-state basis. The Slovaks remember the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918, which T. G. Masaryk himself had drafted and undersigned - and then repudiated completely. And they shall never forget the antiSlovak policy of Masaryk's star pupil, Dr. Edward Benes, In 193'5, the latter promised Slovakia complete autonomy within a year, if the deputies of the Hlinka party would vote him in as president of the Republic. The Slovaks fulfilled their part of the given word, but Benes did not. When they pressed him in 1936 to fulfill his promise, Dr. Benes officially annonced to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party that he must first grant autonomy to Ruthenia, because he was bound to do so by the peace treaty of St. Germaine and the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But nothing happened: Ruthenia, like Slovakia, continued to be regarded as a colony of the Benes Czechs. President Ha.cha; the constitutional successor of Dr. Benes, is responsible for the March, 1939, military putsch in Slovakia, whereby an attempt was made to repudiate �40 SLOVAKIA the rights of autonomous Slovakia. The latter, we know, was granted autonomy by Prague on October 6, 19,38. And what did Gottwald, the Czech Red, do later? In Kosice, in 194'5, he proclaimed that the Czecho-Slovak Republic "must" safeguard and cultivate the right of the Slovaksbut in 1948, when he succeeded Benes as president, Gottwald proceeded to repudiate all his promises, because Slovakia, he said, was anti-communist! T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, Dr. Ha.cha, Gottwald, Zapotocky, and Novotny-all presidents of CzechoSlovakia - had promised the Slovaks a fuller life of freedom, but failed to fulfill their promises. Little wonder, then, that the Slovaks have completely lost their faith in leading representatives of Czech political life. Let the Czechs go their way, and let the ,Slovaks be free to develop and decide their own destiny-that is the sentiment of at least 95 % of the Slovaks at home and in the free world. The Slovaks stand for a Central-European or an European Federation: let the Czechs join as an independent political unit, and the Slovaks likewise: but no more Czech domination! The Slovaks and the Poles In the course of the ages, the ,Slovaks had no serious trouble with the Poles. They were practically always on good terms with them and symphathized with them. In one of their first political manifestations, that of 1'849 in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas, the Slovaks expressly stated that they were for the realization of national and state rights of the Poles. And the Slovaks remember that the Poles made it possible ,f or Msgr. Andrew Hlinka to travel in 1919 in an attempt to present the 'Slovak demands (the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918) to the Peace Conference. They were opposed to the solution of the problem of the Orava and Spis Counties, whereby over twenty villages that had belonged to Slovakia for more than a thousand years were awarded to Poland at the Paris Peace Conference. The Slovaks were angered more at Benes than at the Poles when they learned that Benes had traded these villages for the coal fields of Tesin in Silesia. Mter that relations between the Slovaks and the Poles improved until 1938 when the Czecho-Slovak �SLOVAKIA 41 Republic collapsed and the Poles again sought a revision of the Slovak-Polish frontier to protect themselves against a German attack from the south. At that time the Prague regime did not defend Slovakia, so the latter entered directly into negotiations with the Poles in October, 1938, where the Poles cut their demands to a minimum. More obstacles to better relations were removed during a conference with the Poles in Ruzomberok in February, 1939. Poland was among the first countries to recognize the independent Republic of Slovakia, after the Slovak Parliament proclaimed its independence of Prague on March 14, 1939. When Hitler and Stalin decided to partition Poland in 1939, many Poles emigrated through Slovakia, while many remained there throughout the war. They were given every courtesy; they had Slovak passes and were employed by private and state industry where they spent the worst years of the war and later left unmolested to fight for the liberation of Poland. The friendship of the Slovaks for the ·P oles was never approved by the Benes Czechs in Prague who preferred to do business with Stalin at the expense of Poland and Slovakia. The Slovaks and the Ukrainians The border between Slovakia and Ruthenia is 40 miles long. Known as Sub.JCarpathian Russia, Ruthenia today belongs to Soviet Ukrainia which is a part of the Soviet Union. Dr. Edward Benes and his pro-Soviet "provisional" government sold out the Ruthenians to Stalin in 1945. Slovakia today borders directly on the Soviet Union, and the Slovaks know that Ruthenia is administrated directly by Moscow. The old inhabitants of those parts have been transferred deep into Russia by Moscow, resettling the evacuated towns and villages with non-!Slovanic elements from Asia. The Slovaks were always on good terms with the original inhabitants. The history of the rSlovaks and the Ruthenians had much in common; both had suffered the heavy hand of foreign rulers for centuries. In October, 1938, representatives of Ruthenia came to 2ilina to confer with the Slovaks. It was there that they said: we have lived for cen- �42 SLOVAKIA turies on good terms with the Slovaks; we fought for 20 years within the Czecho-Slovak framework to gain autonomy as the Slovaks did; we shall go along with the Slovaks also in the future; if the Slovaks tie their future with the Czechs, we shall do so; if, however, the Slovaks should proclaim their independence of the Czechs and shall be for an independent Slovak State, we also shall declare our separation from Prague and proclaim an independent Republic of Carpatho-Ukrainia. And that is exactly what happened. The ,S lovaks proclaimed their State independence on March 14, 1939, in Bratislava, while the deputies of Ruthenia did the same thing on the same day in Chust. True, they enjoyed independence only 24 hours, because Ruthenia was incorporated into Hungary on the basis of an agreement between Hitler and the Magyars. After World War II, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. gyars. After World War ll, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. 1 The Slovaks and the Magyars The longest border between Slovakia and any other neighboring country is that between Slovakia and Hungary; it is 31·2 miles long. The Hungarian State originated from the ruins of the first Slovak State--the Great Moravian Empire-after 907 A. D. St. Stephen, King of Hungary, made Christians of the pagan Magyars and tied them spiritually to Rome. Believing that a "uni-lingual state is weak", St. Stephen did not allow the Magyar language or any other language to be the official language of the state, but established Latin as the official language and so conserved, like an ice pack, all the living languages of the inhabitants of Hungary. It was only at the beginning of the last century that Latin was replaced by Magyar as the official language of the State. Unhealthy chauvinism began to spread the Magyar tongue at the expense of the native Slovak. The result was that the Slovaks revolted against the dominating Magyars over a hundred years ago, in 1848. Disregarding the admonition of St. Stephen about an one-language State, the Ma- �SLOVAKIA 43 gyars pressed for one •~Hungarian" nation with Magyar as the official language "from the Carpathians to the Adriatic Sea". The partition of Hungary in 1918 was due to excessive Ma:gyar nationalism which made enemies of all the other nationalities of the realm. Before 1918, the Magyars accused the Slovaks of being Pan-,Slavs. After 1918, the Masaryk-Benes Czechs accused the Slovaks of being Magyarones. While the Magyars fostered hatred of the Slovanic nations, the Czechs on the other hand propagated hatred of the Magyars among the Slovaks and Czechs. Excessive chauvinism prompted both movements. Many of the younger Slovak set succumbed to the anti..;Magyar propaganda of official Prague and only later discovered that thereby the Masaryk-/Benes Czechs wanted to conceal their own real goal: the Czechization bf the Slovak nation. The Magyar "Hungarian nation-state from the Carpathians to the Adriatic" became for the Czechs "a united Czechoslovak nation from Sumava to the Tatras". Obviously the Czechs learned nothing from past history-and ended up just as did the Magyars: alone and hated by the non-Czech citizens and by all their neighbors. When the Slovaks declared their independence of Prague in 1939, the Magyars recognized the independent Republic of Slovakia de jure and established diplomatic contacts forthwith. Of course, the Slovaks were crudely jarred by the Vienna negotiations of Ribbentrop and Ciano in 1938, whereby the Magyars were favored with about one-third of 1S lovak territory (Vienna Award). After 1945 these southern regions were returned to Slovakia so that Benes could expel the Magyars from them in exchange for Slovaks settled in Hungary proper. The Benes Czechs are alone responsible for the brutalities committed during the forced "transfer" of Magyars from Slovak territory. The Slovaks condemned this forced transfer of Magyars as strongly as they did the brutal expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from Bohemia. The Hungarian National Council, under the leadership of Monsignor Bela Varga, has recognized the inherent right of the Slovak nation to freedom and independence. Cordial contacts have been established with Slovaks in exile and 1 �SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 33 THE SWVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS God had •willed it that the Slovaks settle in Central Europe, in the valleys of the Vah, Nitra, Hron, and Ipel, Ondava and Laborec. The land of the Slovaks is watered by the huge waves of the Danube which flows in the south for a hundred miles. The Morava river in the west and the Tisa in the east make contact with Slovakia. Altogether 9'7 % of the rivers and streams of ,S lovakia flow south into the Danube and the Tisa rivers - only the Dunajec wends its way north to the Visla and the Baltic Sea. The Slovak mountains, the Carpathians, rise on the northern 1borders, and therefrom to the south we find hills and valleys of natural and romantic beauty. In the High and Low Tatra Mountains there are deep lakes and very beautiful bathing and recreational spots. In the valleys there are inexhaustible mineral springs. Practically three-quarters of Slovakia is covered with fox-ests and hills. Rich, fertile land, however, makes UF much of the land in the east, south, and west. Slovakia is in fact a :Eiucharistic country. The wheat grown there provides the daily bread for the Slovaks just as it does for the Sacred Hosts they receive so frequently. Grapes provide refreshment for man and the wine necessary for the altars of the land. In the mountains there is an invaluable supply of green gold-thick forests of beech, oak, and pine trees. The rivers of the valleys abound in various kinds of fish, and in the bowels of the earth there are ice caverns and gold, coal, antimony, magnesite, naphtha, and mineral waters. Slovakia has a population of four million made up of Slovaks for the most part. Before · 19'46 quite a number of Germans, Ukrainians, Poles and Magyars had settled in Slovakia, but today, after the forced expulsion of the Germans and Magyars by Dr. Edward Benes and his regime, the Germans and Magyars form a negligible portion of the population. Hundred of thousands of Czechs, the socalled "reliable" element, have been settled there by the pro~Soviet Czech regime. At least 80 % of the total population is of the Catholic religion. Protestants and Jews 34 SLOVAKIA make up the rest of the population. There are practically no Slovaks without religious affiliation in Slovakia even at the present time even though religion is scorned by the Czech pro-.Soviet regime. Slovaks emigrated in large numbers before 1918, during the administration of the Magyars, and in appreciable m1mibers even during the reign of the Czechs from 191'8 to 1938. At least one-third of the Slovaks settled in America, Canada, and South America during that time. Emigration stopped completely after the Slovak parliament of autonomous Slovakia proclaimed the independence of Slovakia on March 14, 1939. It is noteworthy that the Slovak Republic did not depend on foreign loans : Slovakia depended entirely on her own resources and proved her viability and economic independence during the six years of her independence (1939-1M5). Adherence To Christian Culture It was only natural that the Slovaks were always on good terms with their neighbors: they had been guided by western Christian culture for over a thousand years. The church of Prince Pribina, built in 831, is still a part of the beautiful Nitra Cathedral. The Slovaks not only learned and preached Christianity, but actually lived it. They love God above all else, as taught by their apostles, Sts. Cyril and Methodius, served the true Church of Jesus Christ, and loved their neighbors in the same measure that they did themselves. How did the Slovaks get along with their neighbors: the Austrians and Czechs in the west and northwest, the Poles in the north, the Ukrainians in the east, and the Magyars in the south? · Vienna, the capital of Austria, and Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia, are just an hour's ride by auto from each other. In the old Austro-Hungarian empire, the Slovaks and the Austrians got along very well, their contacts were cordial. The Habsburg dynasty had its members crowned as kings in the St. Martin Home in Bratislava. After 1918, when the T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes Czechs took over the reigns of the newly formed Czecho-Slovak State, SLOVAKIA the borders between Austria and Slovakia were closed; one needed a visa to cross the border. Later, this regulation was retracted and Slovaks and Austrians could travel at will <between Vienna and Bratislava. This was a good neighborly relationship that was to the advantage of the !Slovaks living in Vienna, or in Austria proper. There were some 80,000 Slovaks settled in Austria. Politically, the Slovaks lived their own lives in Vienna. Recognized political and church leaders visited them regularly. Monsignor Andrew H1inka, founder of the Slovaks People's Party and champion of Slovak freedom and independence, had cordial contacts not only with Slovak leaders in Austria, but with influential Austrians a\3 well. Msgr. Dr. Joseph Tiso, President of the 1S lovak Republic, was educated in the Pazmaneum of Vienna, where the bishops of Hungary sent their most capable theologians for further priestly studies. In 1938, when Austria ceased to exist as an independent State, the Slovaks continued their friendly relationship with the Austrias. The Slovaks certainly will never forget how the Austrians helped the Slovaks in 1945 when about '5,000 of them sought asylum in Austria, including President Tiso and the Slovak Government, after the Reds broke through to Ruthenia and the eastern part of Slovakia. And they are grateful today for the assistance still proferred to Slovak escapees. There is every reason to believe that after the Red scourge is removed from Slovakia, the Slovaks and the Austrians will have no trouble at all in getting along with each other. The Moravians and the Czechs On the northwest there is a 1'25-mile border that separates the Moravians and Czechs from the Slovaks. This border, however, during the existence of Austro~Hungary never was an obstacle to good relations between the local populations. This is understandable, since on both sides of this border are settled the descendants of a common Slovak tribe, many of whom even today call themselves "Moravian Slovaks". The latter were strongly attracted into the political, cultural, and economic sphere of the Czechs and par- 36 SLOVAKIA tially succumbed and accepted Czech culture and the Czech language. Nevertheless the "Moravian Slovaks" still cling to Slovak customs and habits and are as Catholic as the Slovaks on the other side of the border. Hussitism and Protestantism has made as little headway among them as among the Slovaks themselves. From the times of Master John Hus, Comenius, and other Czech thinkers, therefore from the 1'5-16th centuries, Czech political ideology has strongly digressed from the traditions of King Saint Wenceslaus. It has divorced itself from them and has followed the path away from Rome and particularly from the pedagogical office of the Vatican. Havlicek, Masaryk, and Benes made Hus a symbol of Czech pride and attempted to alter Czech history and remake the Czech nation in the ima,ge of John Hus which, of course, was in opposition to the Christian mind of Europe. The Movement "away from Rome", headed by Masaryk, Benes, and other "enlightened and progressive" Czechs, gained momentum as soon as T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes took over the Hradcany in Pra:gue. With their blessing and active support, the "Czecho- Slovak National Church" was established. There was nothing Slovak about it except the second part of its appellation: it was strictly a Czech enterprise which sought to destroy the Roman Catholic Church in the newly-baked political unit called Czecho-Slovakia; the Slovaks had nothing in common with it. In 1948 it was the first religious organization to willingly offer its collaboration to the Red cause. When the Czech National Church of Czecho-'Slovakia (that is its real name) was founded, about a million Czech Catholics and some 360 Czech priests joined it, supporting thereby T. G. Masaryk's movement "away from Rome"! It was only natural that this display of chauvinistic nationalism isolated the Czechs from the spirit of Catholic Europe and tragically ended in the willing acceptance of Russian Bolshevism under the leadership of Clement Gottwald, the successor of Masaryk and Benes to the throne of the Czech kings at the Hradcany. In Europe it was only Prague, at that time still under the leadership of Ur. Edward Benes, that really welcomed the Red conquerors of SLOVAKIA 37 the world and their Red Army in grand style as its liberators and the guarantor of its national, state and social life, of its growth and progress. Unfortunately Czech Catholic politics was never strong and vigorous enough to pursue its own course. Under the leadership of 'Monsignor John Sramek, the politics of Czech Catholics was always subordinated to the basic lines of Czech national policy which it adopted and followed. The sad awakening came later when it was too late to do anything about it. These facts, particularly the openly anti-Catholic policy of the Masaryk and Benes regimes during the twentyyear cohabitation of the Slovaks and Czechs, were the cause of much friction and bad blood between them. In a word, the Slovaks did not trust the ruling Czechs and told them in no uncertain terms on many occasions that their policies would lead to the collapse of the Czecho-1Slovak Republic. Making friends of the Russian Reds and enemies of immediate neighbors could hardly be termed wise politics. In many respects, however, the ,S lovaks gained much from the Czechs in its transitional period in their march to independence. Not, of course, at the price demanded by the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the surrender of their inherent right to freedom and independence, the repudiation of their own ethnic individuality. We know that T. G. Masaryk and Dr. Edward Benes had stated at the Paris Peace Conference that "the Czechs and the Slovaks are the same". The Slovaks, according to them were only a "branch" of the Czech nation, and the Slovak language was but a "dialect" of the Czech. While representatives of the Czechs propagated this "Czeclto-Slovak" ideology that the Slovaks and Czechs were one ethnic unit, the Slovaks under the leadership of the Catholic Monsignors Andrew Hlinka and Dr. Joseph Tiso and the Protestant clergyman Martin Razus replied that they could not accept this false ideology. The Slovaks, they said, never were and at no time felt that they are a "branch" of the Czech nation. They always were and still feel that they are a distinct ethnic unit, as are the other Slovanic nations. The Slovaks had no intentions of commiting national sui- 38 SLOVAKIA cide when they decided to form a common political state with the Czechs in 1918. The Masaryk..1Benes Czechs, however, continued to propagate the ideology that had no historical foundation in fact with all the propaganda means at their disposal, that is, with State funds and, therefore, ironically, even at the expense of the Slovaks. When Dr. Benes visited Bratislava in 1933, he declared that the Slovaks had to accept the idea of an ethnic "Czecho-Slovak" nation in their own interest. "In the fight against us," he said, "the entire pressure shall go against Slovakia. Our relationship with Germany is good and correct and so it shall continue to remain in every case. Between us and the Germans there have not been and there shall not be any quarrels and difficulties about boundaries." The events of 1,938-1939, however, proved how wrong Benes was. Pressure was exerted not against the Slovaks, but against the Czechs, because the relationship between the Czechs and the Germans never had been, as Benes declared, "good and correct", but always bad and insincere. The historical record, as written, informed and impartial observers, is quite clear on this point. The resolution of this relationship was one of the causes of World War II. And what happened after 1945? With the help of Stalin, Dr. Edward Benes resolved this problem of "good relations" with the Germans by brutally expelling more than three million ·S udeten Germans for the "new people's Republic" of Czecho-lSlovakia ! The Slovaks were opposed to the forced expulsion of the Germans from Czecho-'S lovakia at that time and still adamantly condemn it. The responsibility for this shamefull crime against humanity must be credited to the account of the foreign policy which Masaryk and Benes initiated at the beginning of the Republic, the policy with which the Slovaks never identified themselves and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for it or its consequences. There was nothing Slovak about Czecho-Slovak foreign policy. During the entire life of the first Czecho-Slovak Republic (1918-1938), Dr. Edward Benes, leader of the Czech National Socialists, was "Mr. Foreign ,Policy"! After twenty long years of the brand of democracy promulgated by the SLOVAKIA 39 Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the relation between the two "closely related nations", the Slovaks and the Czechs, were strained to the limit. The Republic had to fall, because the majority of its population had been treated as second-rate citizens. It was a democracy only for the Czechs, but in the end not even a Czech could be found to fire a single shot in its defense! After the sad experiences in the Czecho-,Slovak Republic under the Masaryk-Benes Czechs, the Slovaks do not even want to think about another common political state with them. Of course, Czecho..(Slovakia still exists, but not because the Slovaks willed it so. The political will of the Slovak nation was utterly disregarded in 1945 by the victorious United Nations. "Away from Prague - back to Bratislava" is the cry of all Slovak nationals who are convinced now more than ever that the highest interests of the Slovak nation can best ·be safeguarded and secured only in an independent Slovak Republic. A proper neighborly relationship on an international basis is, however, possible between the Slovaks and the Czechs, if it is allowed to develop under international supervision. But never again on an intra-state basis. The Slovaks remember the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918, which T. G. Masaryk himself had drafted and undersigned - and then repudiated completely. And they shall never forget the antiSlovak policy of Masaryk's star pupil, Dr. Edward Benes, In 193'5, the latter promised Slovakia complete autonomy within a year, if the deputies of the Hlinka party would vote him in as president of the Republic. The Slovaks fulfilled their part of the given word, but Benes did not. When they pressed him in 1936 to fulfill his promise, Dr. Benes officially annonced to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party that he must first grant autonomy to Ruthenia, because he was bound to do so by the peace treaty of St. Germaine and the Constitution of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. But nothing happened: Ruthenia, like Slovakia, continued to be regarded as a colony of the Benes Czechs. President Ha.cha; the constitutional successor of Dr. Benes, is responsible for the March, 1939, military putsch in Slovakia, whereby an attempt was made to repudiate 40 SLOVAKIA the rights of autonomous Slovakia. The latter, we know, was granted autonomy by Prague on October 6, 19,38. And what did Gottwald, the Czech Red, do later? In Kosice, in 194'5, he proclaimed that the Czecho-Slovak Republic "must" safeguard and cultivate the right of the Slovaksbut in 1948, when he succeeded Benes as president, Gottwald proceeded to repudiate all his promises, because Slovakia, he said, was anti-communist! T. G. Masaryk, Dr. Edward Benes, Dr. Ha.cha, Gottwald, Zapotocky, and Novotny-all presidents of CzechoSlovakia - had promised the Slovaks a fuller life of freedom, but failed to fulfill their promises. Little wonder, then, that the Slovaks have completely lost their faith in leading representatives of Czech political life. Let the Czechs go their way, and let the ,Slovaks be free to develop and decide their own destiny-that is the sentiment of at least 95 % of the Slovaks at home and in the free world. The Slovaks stand for a Central-European or an European Federation: let the Czechs join as an independent political unit, and the Slovaks likewise: but no more Czech domination! The Slovaks and the Poles In the course of the ages, the ,Slovaks had no serious trouble with the Poles. They were practically always on good terms with them and symphathized with them. In one of their first political manifestations, that of 1'849 in Liptovsky Svaty Mikulas, the Slovaks expressly stated that they were for the realization of national and state rights of the Poles. And the Slovaks remember that the Poles made it possible ,f or Msgr. Andrew Hlinka to travel in 1919 in an attempt to present the 'Slovak demands (the Pittsburgh Pact of 1918) to the Peace Conference. They were opposed to the solution of the problem of the Orava and Spis Counties, whereby over twenty villages that had belonged to Slovakia for more than a thousand years were awarded to Poland at the Paris Peace Conference. The Slovaks were angered more at Benes than at the Poles when they learned that Benes had traded these villages for the coal fields of Tesin in Silesia. Mter that relations between the Slovaks and the Poles improved until 1938 when the Czecho-Slovak SLOVAKIA 41 Republic collapsed and the Poles again sought a revision of the Slovak-Polish frontier to protect themselves against a German attack from the south. At that time the Prague regime did not defend Slovakia, so the latter entered directly into negotiations with the Poles in October, 1938, where the Poles cut their demands to a minimum. More obstacles to better relations were removed during a conference with the Poles in Ruzomberok in February, 1939. Poland was among the first countries to recognize the independent Republic of Slovakia, after the Slovak Parliament proclaimed its independence of Prague on March 14, 1939. When Hitler and Stalin decided to partition Poland in 1939, many Poles emigrated through Slovakia, while many remained there throughout the war. They were given every courtesy; they had Slovak passes and were employed by private and state industry where they spent the worst years of the war and later left unmolested to fight for the liberation of Poland. The friendship of the Slovaks for the ·P oles was never approved by the Benes Czechs in Prague who preferred to do business with Stalin at the expense of Poland and Slovakia. The Slovaks and the Ukrainians The border between Slovakia and Ruthenia is 40 miles long. Known as Sub.JCarpathian Russia, Ruthenia today belongs to Soviet Ukrainia which is a part of the Soviet Union. Dr. Edward Benes and his pro-Soviet "provisional" government sold out the Ruthenians to Stalin in 1945. Slovakia today borders directly on the Soviet Union, and the Slovaks know that Ruthenia is administrated directly by Moscow. The old inhabitants of those parts have been transferred deep into Russia by Moscow, resettling the evacuated towns and villages with non-!Slovanic elements from Asia. The Slovaks were always on good terms with the original inhabitants. The history of the rSlovaks and the Ruthenians had much in common; both had suffered the heavy hand of foreign rulers for centuries. In October, 1938, representatives of Ruthenia came to 2ilina to confer with the Slovaks. It was there that they said: we have lived for cen- 42 SLOVAKIA turies on good terms with the Slovaks; we fought for 20 years within the Czecho-Slovak framework to gain autonomy as the Slovaks did; we shall go along with the Slovaks also in the future; if the Slovaks tie their future with the Czechs, we shall do so; if, however, the Slovaks should proclaim their independence of the Czechs and shall be for an independent Slovak State, we also shall declare our separation from Prague and proclaim an independent Republic of Carpatho-Ukrainia. And that is exactly what happened. The ,S lovaks proclaimed their State independence on March 14, 1939, in Bratislava, while the deputies of Ruthenia did the same thing on the same day in Chust. True, they enjoyed independence only 24 hours, because Ruthenia was incorporated into Hungary on the basis of an agreement between Hitler and the Magyars. After World War II, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. gyars. After World War ll, because of a secret agreement, Benes surrendered Ruthenia and its people to Stalin. 1 The Slovaks and the Magyars The longest border between Slovakia and any other neighboring country is that between Slovakia and Hungary; it is 31·2 miles long. The Hungarian State originated from the ruins of the first Slovak State--the Great Moravian Empire-after 907 A. D. St. Stephen, King of Hungary, made Christians of the pagan Magyars and tied them spiritually to Rome. Believing that a "uni-lingual state is weak", St. Stephen did not allow the Magyar language or any other language to be the official language of the state, but established Latin as the official language and so conserved, like an ice pack, all the living languages of the inhabitants of Hungary. It was only at the beginning of the last century that Latin was replaced by Magyar as the official language of the State. Unhealthy chauvinism began to spread the Magyar tongue at the expense of the native Slovak. The result was that the Slovaks revolted against the dominating Magyars over a hundred years ago, in 1848. Disregarding the admonition of St. Stephen about an one-language State, the Ma- SLOVAKIA 43 gyars pressed for one •~Hungarian" nation with Magyar as the official language "from the Carpathians to the Adriatic Sea". The partition of Hungary in 1918 was due to excessive Ma:gyar nationalism which made enemies of all the other nationalities of the realm. Before 1918, the Magyars accused the Slovaks of being Pan-,Slavs. After 1918, the Masaryk-Benes Czechs accused the Slovaks of being Magyarones. While the Magyars fostered hatred of the Slovanic nations, the Czechs on the other hand propagated hatred of the Magyars among the Slovaks and Czechs. Excessive chauvinism prompted both movements. Many of the younger Slovak set succumbed to the anti..;Magyar propaganda of official Prague and only later discovered that thereby the Masaryk-/Benes Czechs wanted to conceal their own real goal: the Czechization bf the Slovak nation. The Magyar "Hungarian nation-state from the Carpathians to the Adriatic" became for the Czechs "a united Czechoslovak nation from Sumava to the Tatras". Obviously the Czechs learned nothing from past history-and ended up just as did the Magyars: alone and hated by the non-Czech citizens and by all their neighbors. When the Slovaks declared their independence of Prague in 1939, the Magyars recognized the independent Republic of Slovakia de jure and established diplomatic contacts forthwith. Of course, the Slovaks were crudely jarred by the Vienna negotiations of Ribbentrop and Ciano in 1938, whereby the Magyars were favored with about one-third of 1S lovak territory (Vienna Award). After 1945 these southern regions were returned to Slovakia so that Benes could expel the Magyars from them in exchange for Slovaks settled in Hungary proper. The Benes Czechs are alone responsible for the brutalities committed during the forced "transfer" of Magyars from Slovak territory. The Slovaks condemned this forced transfer of Magyars as strongly as they did the brutal expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from Bohemia. The Hungarian National Council, under the leadership of Monsignor Bela Varga, has recognized the inherent right of the Slovak nation to freedom and independence. Cordial contacts have been established with Slovaks in exile and 1 SLOVAKIA 44 there is every reason to believe that the Slovaks and Magyars shall be able to come to an understanding when the Iron Curtain is lifted for benefit of both nations and in the common interests of all free peoples. In Conclusion It is a matter of historical record that the Slovaks always tried to get along with neighboring nations, at times even at the expense of Slovak interests. They realize that quarrels and chauvinistic desires settle nothing and simply cause trouble, not only for the nations concerned, but for all free nations. Today all the nations behind the Iron Curtain are, so to speak, in the same boat, suffering under the Red heel of communism. The Slovak nation as a whole has been adamantly opposed to the ideology of Marxistic socialism for over a hundred years. The Slovaks are a small nation, but as partners with other European nations they can do much to destroy the ,greatest evil of our time, the enemy of all humanity: Communism. Let's encourage them to do that! • • • (K. S.) CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA KRASNA HORKA By Hubert Macko, OSB. Krasna Horka (Mount Beautiful) is one of the few fortresses of Slovakia in a good state of preservation. As the name itself suggests, it is beautiful in its ancient splendor, standing atop a hill where the valleys of Sajava and Cermosne meet in Gerner. Perched on a steep hill in a very picturesque setting, proud and unconquered by time and the elements, it is indeed a jewel of the golden days that were. In Gerner they still sing: "Krasna Horka, pysny zamok ... " (Mount Beautiful, proud fortress). Of its beginning we have no record. It is mentioned in the annals of Slovak fortresses as early as 1341; it was called "Kastrum Krasnohorka" and was owned by the Bebek family. There seemed to be some dispute as to the ownership of the fortress, a dispute that lasted a full 50  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Slovaks and Their Neighbors Description An account of the resource Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 33-44 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/175032ad0419add59986bb244c13b3d1.pdf f95053c465777d45b43828f3cdd0e150 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 2"> SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. BUC, Ph.D. 1. The Struggle For Survival The most characteristic effort, underlying all the undertakings of re-awakened Slovak nationalism, is the attempt to gain recognition of national individuality first in Austria-Hungary and then in Czecho-Slovakia. Both of these states - Hungary under the pretense of the thousand-year common life of Slovaks within its confines and Czecho-Slovakia under the guise of Slav tribal kinship - pursued a similar aim, namely, to break the will of the Slovaks after they had developed their own national character and to enrich their own collectivity with Slovaks. When we take into consideration that the Slovaks appeared on the modern scene as an almost unknown political factor, we will realize that obstacles, which stood and at present still stand in the way of their political ambitions, were and are continually great. Slovak nationalism, therefore could not reckon with the rapid achievement of independence in its own state. For that rea:::on it had no direct aim in its program to break those state ties in which it found itself. It fought only for the change of its internal structure in such a way that its life would not be menaced. If it became an element of dissolution of state ties, this was more the result of external circumstances which occasioned the break rather than of internal efforts. In such case, Slovak nationalism was, therefore, forced to choose between two alternatives: to maintain its original ties and live in continual dread of losing its national individuality; or to accept a new solution, promising greater possibilities for its own development. Thus, external circumstances caused Slovak nationalism to become one of the elements of dissolution, first of Austria-Hungary, in 1918, and later of Czecho-Slovakia in 1938. Neither of those states were dissolved as the result of an �26 SLOVAKIA internal revolution, even if conditions for such action were favorable, but rather through the decisions of external agents who were interested in the creation of a different and more favorable form of Central Europe. In each instance an unexpected opportunity presented itself to Slovak nationalism for a near revolutionary transition to more favorable conditions. One can observe, however, that in its foundations Slovak nationalism manifests greater tendencies toward federative living with other nations in the Central European sphere of influence than toward its own sovereign statehood. The thought of a federated Central Europe, in one form or another, underlies all efforts of Slovak nationalism and is, of course, the principal aim of the entire Slovak struggle for self-preservation. 2. Federation Rather Than Dissolution of Austria-Hungary In general, the reason for the dissolution of Austria.Hungary rested in the many nationalities that were dissatisfied with this empire. On the other hand, it is also true that shortly before the First World War, the nations of Austria-Hungary as well as the Western Democracies saw in Habsburg Monarchy their best guarantee against German and Russian imperialism. The nations, therefore, opposed very sharply all assimilative efforts of this state, not, however, at the cost of its dissolution. They remembered that the origin of Austria-Hungary was not so much the result of the political genius of the Habsburgs, J::,ut rather of the political, economical, and geographical conditions of the Central European sphere of influence. AustriaHungary was regarded, therefore, as one of the main component parts of the political equilibrium in Europe. This supposition was wholly correct. With the displacement of Austria-Hungary, the European equilibrium was broken to the detriment of those nations which lived within its confines. All federative efforts in Central Europe tend principally to the formation of Austria-Hungary, not, however, in the form of the former Habsburg Monarchy, but on the basis of economical, geographical, and political expedients of that part of Europe, of which it was a political representative for several centuries. �SLOVAKIA 27 The first attempts of the nations of Austria-Hungary for a revived nationalism proceeded no further than its federation. Scarcely any other nation in Austria-Hungary manifested a greater impatience with the latter's politics than the Czechs; and even they proclaimed through the lips of their most renowned historian Francis Palacky: "If Austria did not exist, we would have to create it!" This same Czech historian, writing to the German revolutionary congress in Frankfurt-on-the-Main in 1848, said: "The preservation of Austria - its integrity and solidification is and must be the great and important concern not only of the Czech nation, but of the whole Europe, nay, of all humanity and foreign lands" (1). Even Dr. Edward Benes, one of the principal creators of Czecho-Slovakia and later an unreconciled enemy of the Habsburgs, wrote in 1908: "People often speak about the dissolution of Austria. I absolutely do not believe in it. The historical and economic ties, which mutually unite the nations of Austria, are too strong to allow Austria to collapse" (2). From the revolutionary years of 1848, the thought of federating Austria-Hungary was the foremost political goal of all nationalities of this monarchy, and was even accepted sympathetically by the imperial court itself. But after the so-called agreement with the Hungarians (Magyars) in 1867, the Habsburgs gave precedence to the forceful solution of the national problem by applying coercive methods of assimilation. This came as a disappointment to the other nationalities and increased greatly their movements toward complete emancipation. It made them to forget the historical and economic ties which bound them to the Habsb:irg monarchy and moved them to work for its dissolution. The federation of Austria-Hungary was demanded by the changed views of society, which the philosophy of the Enlightenment and Romanticism had created. These new views emphasized the principle of plurality instead of the former principle of unity, the principle of individual liberty instead of the principle of unreserved obedience to state authority. Had the Habsburgs recalled this great change in the thinking of people, they would certainly have held their GANS.ER LIBRARY �28 SLOVAKIA empire together even if they would have changed its former autocratic foundation. In accord with the other nationalities of Austria-Hungary, the aim of all Slovak undertakings was the federation of Austria-Hungary. The Slovaks publicly emphasized the thought of federation , first in a memorandum which they presented to the emperor at Vienna, in 1861, and then at the nationality congress in Budapest, in 1867. At the second nationality congress which was held on August 10, 1895, also in Budapest, during a time of great persecutions, "the Rumanians, Serbs and Slovaks, who assembled in Budapest (wrote the Neue Freie Presse) demand the division of Hungary into ethnic self-administrative units, which in effect is equal to the demand to abolish the union between Hungary and Transylvania, to renew the Serbian Duchy and create a self-administrative Slovakia, such as Hurban promoted already thirty years earlier" (3). The unwillingness of Budapest and Vienna to meet these demands led not only the Slovaks but also other nationalities to accept willingly such solutions to their problem that prepared the way for the complete dissolution of Austria-Hungary. The offer of this new solution came chiefly from the Western Democracies during the First World War even despite the fact that, in the West, Austria-Hungary was considered as late as 1903 as "the only barrier, sufficiently strong, at the beginning of the 20th century, which could discourage German ambitions the day when these would begin to threaten the European balance ( 4). During the First World War, however, it became apparent that Austria-Hungary proceeded in a completely opposite direction, that is, it abetted the ambitions of Germany Western Democracies, therefore, decided to dissolve it. The greatest influence came from the "American crusading spirit," which, in the form of Wilson's idealistic principle of self-determination of nations, gave the nationalities an unforeseen moral weapon. Austria-Hungary comprised such a mixture of nationalities that the realization of the principle of self-determination was impossible without repeating the situation of Austria-Hungary would - and that in a much worse form - in new national states along national lines. In the new states which had risen out of the ashes of �SLOVAKIA r Austria-Hungary, the burden of power passed from rulers to subordinates, while the political order remained as it was. The former national chauvinism of antagonism began to disintegrate the cohabitation of Central European nations more than ever before and opened the way for the repeated aggrandizement of German imperialism. 3. The Goal of the Slovak Autonomist Movement: A Federated Czecho-Slovakia It was self-evident that, as soon as suppositions for arranging Central Europe upon a new basis emerged, the Slovaks would accept this solution enthusiastically. They found an opportunity to free themselves from their "thousand-year slavery," by which term they referred to their life within the confines of Hungary after the downfall of Greater Moravia in 906. They joined with the Czechs to form one state under the condition that Czecho-Slovakia would be a federated state. This federation was guaranteed by two agreements between Czechs and Slovaks in the United States, in Cleveland in 1915, and then in Pittsburgh in 1918. At the Peace Conference, in 1919, even Dr. Edward Benes promised this in the name of the Czecho-Slovak Government when he stated that: "it is the intention of the Czecho-Slovak Government to create the organization of the state by accepting as a basis of natural rights the principles applied in the constitution of the Swiss Republic a sort of Switzerland . . ." (5). Immediately with the rise of Czecho-Slovakia, the lure of might showed itself more powerful for the Czech majority than the ideals of national equality and rights. For this reason they began to organize a new state on the basis of the principle of power, applying the narrowest centralization. Dr. Ferdis Juriga, one of the most eminent representatives of Slovak nationalism, opposed those Czech propensities on the floor of Parliament in Prague on January 28, 1920, in the following words: "We must tend to decentralization, toward self-administration, so that the Republic might develop on a federalistic basis, because federalism is the system of the future. We must preserve our individuality and not let ourselves be absorbed. Federation is not only in the interest of our nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but it also �30 SLOVAKIA answers the spirit of all mankind. It is an all-human tendency, the tendency of all mankind, this tendency to validate oneself to develop, to which every individual person and every national unit should have the right, which should crystalize out into a legal personality, so that these various nations could then become federalized in one great world republic. This would be the highest ideal and the path that leads to it is: federalism" (6) His position was a bit idealistic, but he expressed correctly the modern effort to arrange the cohabitation of nations on a pluralistic basis in the sense of the principle of equality. We have already said that the dissolution of Austria-Hungary must be charged to the lack of respect for this voice of the times. Czecho-Slovakia, which along national lines was only a worse copy of Austria-Hungary, gave precedence also to such a way. According to C. A. Macartney, "the Slovaks therefore reacted in the form of a flamboyant Slovak nationalism which was a main reason for the absence of revolt with which they accepted the dissolution of the Czecho-Slovak State"(7.) Despite the fact that Slovaks were co-creators of Czecho-Slovakia with the Czechs, they attracted to themselves all the national minorities and together with Germans, Hungarians, Poles, and Ruthenians fought against the so-called imperialism of Prague, as in former times, under AustriaHungary, they fought with Czechs, Serbs, Croatians, and Rumanians against the imperialism of Budapest and Vienna. In this struggle, the main issue at stake was the change of the internal structure of Czecho-Slovakia in the sense of former promises and agreements - and not in its dissolution. When in 1939 Czecho-Slovakia fell under the heel of Hitler's Germany, however, the Slovaks found the way open to the creation of their own state, which was the only way out under the given political circumstances as well as the logical conclusion of their former national endeavors. The short-lived existence of this independent state gave to the Slovak nationalism what it had hitherto lacked, namely, a uniform will to live independently and a conviction that it will know how to stand its ground as an equally worthy member among the other nations. �SLOVAKIA 31 4. Slovak Planners of a Federated Central Europe Slovak nationalism did not strive alone for the federation of those states with which it had ties, but also manifested great energies to raise the entire sphere of Central Europe upon a federated basis. The idea of a federated Central Europe was ever popular with the Slovaks, not simply because it assured the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogatives, as among other established nations, but principally it seemed to provide a surer guarantee for the protection of their threatened national individuality. Slovaks of all political convictions not only joined all federative efforts, but also presented several propositions for solving the problem of Central Europe in the sense of a federation. Perhaps the most renowned figure in this field was Dr. Milan Hodza, at first Minister of Agriculture and then Premier of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He devoted his whole life to this idea. He draws motives for his endeavors from the fact that, "Small nations are liable to become a nuisance for world politics if they are isolated and beset by rivalries; but they are certainly sure to become precious elements of a fair and therefore indispensable balance of political forces, if they can prove themselves capable of taking a common view of those things which are common among them, especially when their geographical position renders them important"(8). Dr. Hod.fa endeavored to develop cooperation between the Central European nations and the consolidation of the economic situation in this part of Europe. The climax of these endeavors was his "Danube Plan," which aimed to create, according to Hodza's own words: "one single, great economic unit in Central Europe." This was to be attained by removing tariff barriers and establishing a customs union which would regulate agriculture and industrial production, and reorganize the system of payments and transportation, etc. (9). Another Slovak plan for solving the Central European problem is the proposal for confederation originating with Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky, the first Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Slovak Republic during the Second World War. Dr. Durcansky developed his plan for the confederation of Central Europe at the beginning of 1944 in studies �32 SLOVAKIA which were published in the "Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques" in Geneva. He favors confederation chiefly to ward off every danger, which is said to threaten the sovereignty of small nations whenever they become a part of greater political bodies. According to Dr. :Durcansky, confederation "gives guarantees of independence and freedom to the nations of Central Europe, enables a solution of incidental disputes which could arise between the individual states of the confederation and, on the other hand, could defend Central Europe against external attacks" (10). Up to the present time, however, attempts for the federation of Central Europe have not ripened into practical results, whether their proponents were Slovaks or members of other nations. The reason of their failure, as stated by Dr. Edward Benes, "are much more of a sentimental, psychological, and moral nature than of a political and economic nature" (11). It is difficult to foretell at the present time whether the nations of Central Europe will be able to reach some settlement of their mutual differences and unite for the sake of their own preservation. The present tragedy of Central Europe brings even the most extreme elements to realize that some kind of federation is the "categorical imperative" for that sector of the world. (1) Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum: Slovakia and Central-European Federation Plans, Slovakia, April 1953, p. 3. (2) Le probleme Autrichien et la question Tcheque, Paris,, 1908, p. 307. (3) Aurel Popovici. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Grossoestreich, Leipzig, 1906, p . 43. (4) Henry Rene : Questions d'Autriche-Hongrie et Questions d'Orient, Paris, 1903, p . 126. (5) Lloyd George: The Truth About the Peace Treaties, London, 1925, p. 337. (6) Karol Sidor, Slovenska politika na pode praiskeho snemu, Bratislava, 1943, Vol I, p. 69. (7) Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942, p. 122. (8) Dr. Milan Hodza: Federation in Central Europe. London, 1942, p. 75. (9) Ibid., pp. 131-133. (10) Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques. XXII, annee, No. I, p. 23-52. (11) "Le probleme de !'Europe Central," Sources et documents tchecoslovaques, No. 24, p. 47. � SLOVAKIA 2"> SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. BUC, Ph.D. 1. The Struggle For Survival The most characteristic effort, underlying all the undertakings of re-awakened Slovak nationalism, is the attempt to gain recognition of national individuality first in Austria-Hungary and then in Czecho-Slovakia. Both of these states - Hungary under the pretense of the thousand-year common life of Slovaks within its confines and Czecho-Slovakia under the guise of Slav tribal kinship - pursued a similar aim, namely, to break the will of the Slovaks after they had developed their own national character and to enrich their own collectivity with Slovaks. When we take into consideration that the Slovaks appeared on the modern scene as an almost unknown political factor, we will realize that obstacles, which stood and at present still stand in the way of their political ambitions, were and are continually great. Slovak nationalism, therefore could not reckon with the rapid achievement of independence in its own state. For that rea:::on it had no direct aim in its program to break those state ties in which it found itself. It fought only for the change of its internal structure in such a way that its life would not be menaced. If it became an element of dissolution of state ties, this was more the result of external circumstances which occasioned the break rather than of internal efforts. In such case, Slovak nationalism was, therefore, forced to choose between two alternatives: to maintain its original ties and live in continual dread of losing its national individuality; or to accept a new solution, promising greater possibilities for its own development. Thus, external circumstances caused Slovak nationalism to become one of the elements of dissolution, first of Austria-Hungary, in 1918, and later of Czecho-Slovakia in 1938. Neither of those states were dissolved as the result of an �26 SLOVAKIA internal revolution, even if conditions for such action were favorable, but rather through the decisions of external agents who were interested in the creation of a different and more favorable form of Central Europe. In each instance an unexpected opportunity presented itself to Slovak nationalism for a near revolutionary transition to more favorable conditions. One can observe, however, that in its foundations Slovak nationalism manifests greater tendencies toward federative living with other nations in the Central European sphere of influence than toward its own sovereign statehood. The thought of a federated Central Europe, in one form or another, underlies all efforts of Slovak nationalism and is, of course, the principal aim of the entire Slovak struggle for self-preservation. 2. Federation Rather Than Dissolution of Austria-Hungary In general, the reason for the dissolution of Austria.Hungary rested in the many nationalities that were dissatisfied with this empire. On the other hand, it is also true that shortly before the First World War, the nations of Austria-Hungary as well as the Western Democracies saw in Habsburg Monarchy their best guarantee against German and Russian imperialism. The nations, therefore, opposed very sharply all assimilative efforts of this state, not, however, at the cost of its dissolution. They remembered that the origin of Austria-Hungary was not so much the result of the political genius of the Habsburgs, J::,ut rather of the political, economical, and geographical conditions of the Central European sphere of influence. AustriaHungary was regarded, therefore, as one of the main component parts of the political equilibrium in Europe. This supposition was wholly correct. With the displacement of Austria-Hungary, the European equilibrium was broken to the detriment of those nations which lived within its confines. All federative efforts in Central Europe tend principally to the formation of Austria-Hungary, not, however, in the form of the former Habsburg Monarchy, but on the basis of economical, geographical, and political expedients of that part of Europe, of which it was a political representative for several centuries. �SLOVAKIA 27 The first attempts of the nations of Austria-Hungary for a revived nationalism proceeded no further than its federation. Scarcely any other nation in Austria-Hungary manifested a greater impatience with the latter's politics than the Czechs; and even they proclaimed through the lips of their most renowned historian Francis Palacky: "If Austria did not exist, we would have to create it!" This same Czech historian, writing to the German revolutionary congress in Frankfurt-on-the-Main in 1848, said: "The preservation of Austria - its integrity and solidification is and must be the great and important concern not only of the Czech nation, but of the whole Europe, nay, of all humanity and foreign lands" (1). Even Dr. Edward Benes, one of the principal creators of Czecho-Slovakia and later an unreconciled enemy of the Habsburgs, wrote in 1908: "People often speak about the dissolution of Austria. I absolutely do not believe in it. The historical and economic ties, which mutually unite the nations of Austria, are too strong to allow Austria to collapse" (2). From the revolutionary years of 1848, the thought of federating Austria-Hungary was the foremost political goal of all nationalities of this monarchy, and was even accepted sympathetically by the imperial court itself. But after the so-called agreement with the Hungarians (Magyars) in 1867, the Habsburgs gave precedence to the forceful solution of the national problem by applying coercive methods of assimilation. This came as a disappointment to the other nationalities and increased greatly their movements toward complete emancipation. It made them to forget the historical and economic ties which bound them to the Habsb:irg monarchy and moved them to work for its dissolution. The federation of Austria-Hungary was demanded by the changed views of society, which the philosophy of the Enlightenment and Romanticism had created. These new views emphasized the principle of plurality instead of the former principle of unity, the principle of individual liberty instead of the principle of unreserved obedience to state authority. Had the Habsburgs recalled this great change in the thinking of people, they would certainly have held their GANS.ER LIBRARY �28 SLOVAKIA empire together even if they would have changed its former autocratic foundation. In accord with the other nationalities of Austria-Hungary, the aim of all Slovak undertakings was the federation of Austria-Hungary. The Slovaks publicly emphasized the thought of federation , first in a memorandum which they presented to the emperor at Vienna, in 1861, and then at the nationality congress in Budapest, in 1867. At the second nationality congress which was held on August 10, 1895, also in Budapest, during a time of great persecutions, "the Rumanians, Serbs and Slovaks, who assembled in Budapest (wrote the Neue Freie Presse) demand the division of Hungary into ethnic self-administrative units, which in effect is equal to the demand to abolish the union between Hungary and Transylvania, to renew the Serbian Duchy and create a self-administrative Slovakia, such as Hurban promoted already thirty years earlier" (3). The unwillingness of Budapest and Vienna to meet these demands led not only the Slovaks but also other nationalities to accept willingly such solutions to their problem that prepared the way for the complete dissolution of Austria-Hungary. The offer of this new solution came chiefly from the Western Democracies during the First World War even despite the fact that, in the West, Austria-Hungary was considered as late as 1903 as "the only barrier, sufficiently strong, at the beginning of the 20th century, which could discourage German ambitions the day when these would begin to threaten the European balance ( 4). During the First World War, however, it became apparent that Austria-Hungary proceeded in a completely opposite direction, that is, it abetted the ambitions of Germany Western Democracies, therefore, decided to dissolve it. The greatest influence came from the "American crusading spirit," which, in the form of Wilson's idealistic principle of self-determination of nations, gave the nationalities an unforeseen moral weapon. Austria-Hungary comprised such a mixture of nationalities that the realization of the principle of self-determination was impossible without repeating the situation of Austria-Hungary would - and that in a much worse form - in new national states along national lines. In the new states which had risen out of the ashes of �SLOVAKIA r Austria-Hungary, the burden of power passed from rulers to subordinates, while the political order remained as it was. The former national chauvinism of antagonism began to disintegrate the cohabitation of Central European nations more than ever before and opened the way for the repeated aggrandizement of German imperialism. 3. The Goal of the Slovak Autonomist Movement: A Federated Czecho-Slovakia It was self-evident that, as soon as suppositions for arranging Central Europe upon a new basis emerged, the Slovaks would accept this solution enthusiastically. They found an opportunity to free themselves from their "thousand-year slavery," by which term they referred to their life within the confines of Hungary after the downfall of Greater Moravia in 906. They joined with the Czechs to form one state under the condition that Czecho-Slovakia would be a federated state. This federation was guaranteed by two agreements between Czechs and Slovaks in the United States, in Cleveland in 1915, and then in Pittsburgh in 1918. At the Peace Conference, in 1919, even Dr. Edward Benes promised this in the name of the Czecho-Slovak Government when he stated that: "it is the intention of the Czecho-Slovak Government to create the organization of the state by accepting as a basis of natural rights the principles applied in the constitution of the Swiss Republic a sort of Switzerland . . ." (5). Immediately with the rise of Czecho-Slovakia, the lure of might showed itself more powerful for the Czech majority than the ideals of national equality and rights. For this reason they began to organize a new state on the basis of the principle of power, applying the narrowest centralization. Dr. Ferdis Juriga, one of the most eminent representatives of Slovak nationalism, opposed those Czech propensities on the floor of Parliament in Prague on January 28, 1920, in the following words: "We must tend to decentralization, toward self-administration, so that the Republic might develop on a federalistic basis, because federalism is the system of the future. We must preserve our individuality and not let ourselves be absorbed. Federation is not only in the interest of our nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but it also �30 SLOVAKIA answers the spirit of all mankind. It is an all-human tendency, the tendency of all mankind, this tendency to validate oneself to develop, to which every individual person and every national unit should have the right, which should crystalize out into a legal personality, so that these various nations could then become federalized in one great world republic. This would be the highest ideal and the path that leads to it is: federalism" (6) His position was a bit idealistic, but he expressed correctly the modern effort to arrange the cohabitation of nations on a pluralistic basis in the sense of the principle of equality. We have already said that the dissolution of Austria-Hungary must be charged to the lack of respect for this voice of the times. Czecho-Slovakia, which along national lines was only a worse copy of Austria-Hungary, gave precedence also to such a way. According to C. A. Macartney, "the Slovaks therefore reacted in the form of a flamboyant Slovak nationalism which was a main reason for the absence of revolt with which they accepted the dissolution of the Czecho-Slovak State"(7.) Despite the fact that Slovaks were co-creators of Czecho-Slovakia with the Czechs, they attracted to themselves all the national minorities and together with Germans, Hungarians, Poles, and Ruthenians fought against the so-called imperialism of Prague, as in former times, under AustriaHungary, they fought with Czechs, Serbs, Croatians, and Rumanians against the imperialism of Budapest and Vienna. In this struggle, the main issue at stake was the change of the internal structure of Czecho-Slovakia in the sense of former promises and agreements - and not in its dissolution. When in 1939 Czecho-Slovakia fell under the heel of Hitler's Germany, however, the Slovaks found the way open to the creation of their own state, which was the only way out under the given political circumstances as well as the logical conclusion of their former national endeavors. The short-lived existence of this independent state gave to the Slovak nationalism what it had hitherto lacked, namely, a uniform will to live independently and a conviction that it will know how to stand its ground as an equally worthy member among the other nations. �SLOVAKIA 31 4. Slovak Planners of a Federated Central Europe Slovak nationalism did not strive alone for the federation of those states with which it had ties, but also manifested great energies to raise the entire sphere of Central Europe upon a federated basis. The idea of a federated Central Europe was ever popular with the Slovaks, not simply because it assured the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogatives, as among other established nations, but principally it seemed to provide a surer guarantee for the protection of their threatened national individuality. Slovaks of all political convictions not only joined all federative efforts, but also presented several propositions for solving the problem of Central Europe in the sense of a federation. Perhaps the most renowned figure in this field was Dr. Milan Hodza, at first Minister of Agriculture and then Premier of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He devoted his whole life to this idea. He draws motives for his endeavors from the fact that, "Small nations are liable to become a nuisance for world politics if they are isolated and beset by rivalries; but they are certainly sure to become precious elements of a fair and therefore indispensable balance of political forces, if they can prove themselves capable of taking a common view of those things which are common among them, especially when their geographical position renders them important"(8). Dr. Hod.fa endeavored to develop cooperation between the Central European nations and the consolidation of the economic situation in this part of Europe. The climax of these endeavors was his "Danube Plan," which aimed to create, according to Hodza's own words: "one single, great economic unit in Central Europe." This was to be attained by removing tariff barriers and establishing a customs union which would regulate agriculture and industrial production, and reorganize the system of payments and transportation, etc. (9). Another Slovak plan for solving the Central European problem is the proposal for confederation originating with Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky, the first Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Slovak Republic during the Second World War. Dr. Durcansky developed his plan for the confederation of Central Europe at the beginning of 1944 in studies �32 SLOVAKIA which were published in the "Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques" in Geneva. He favors confederation chiefly to ward off every danger, which is said to threaten the sovereignty of small nations whenever they become a part of greater political bodies. According to Dr. :Durcansky, confederation "gives guarantees of independence and freedom to the nations of Central Europe, enables a solution of incidental disputes which could arise between the individual states of the confederation and, on the other hand, could defend Central Europe against external attacks" (10). Up to the present time, however, attempts for the federation of Central Europe have not ripened into practical results, whether their proponents were Slovaks or members of other nations. The reason of their failure, as stated by Dr. Edward Benes, "are much more of a sentimental, psychological, and moral nature than of a political and economic nature" (11). It is difficult to foretell at the present time whether the nations of Central Europe will be able to reach some settlement of their mutual differences and unite for the sake of their own preservation. The present tragedy of Central Europe brings even the most extreme elements to realize that some kind of federation is the "categorical imperative" for that sector of the world. (1) Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum: Slovakia and Central-European Federation Plans, Slovakia, April 1953, p. 3. (2) Le probleme Autrichien et la question Tcheque, Paris,, 1908, p. 307. (3) Aurel Popovici. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Grossoestreich, Leipzig, 1906, p . 43. (4) Henry Rene : Questions d'Autriche-Hongrie et Questions d'Orient, Paris, 1903, p . 126. (5) Lloyd George: The Truth About the Peace Treaties, London, 1925, p. 337. (6) Karol Sidor, Slovenska politika na pode praiskeho snemu, Bratislava, 1943, Vol I, p. 69. (7) Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942, p. 122. (8) Dr. Milan Hodza: Federation in Central Europe. London, 1942, p. 75. (9) Ibid., pp. 131-133. (10) Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques. XXII, annee, No. I, p. 23-52. (11) "Le probleme de !'Europe Central," Sources et documents tchecoslovaques, No. 24, p. 47. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 2"> SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. BUC, Ph.D. 1. The Struggle For Survival The most characteristic effort, underlying all the undertakings of re-awakened Slovak nationalism, is the attempt to gain recognition of national individuality first in Austria-Hungary and then in Czecho-Slovakia. Both of these states - Hungary under the pretense of the thousand-year common life of Slovaks within its confines and Czecho-Slovakia under the guise of Slav tribal kinship - pursued a similar aim, namely, to break the will of the Slovaks after they had developed their own national character and to enrich their own collectivity with Slovaks. When we take into consideration that the Slovaks appeared on the modern scene as an almost unknown political factor, we will realize that obstacles, which stood and at present still stand in the way of their political ambitions, were and are continually great. Slovak nationalism, therefore could not reckon with the rapid achievement of independence in its own state. For that rea:::on it had no direct aim in its program to break those state ties in which it found itself. It fought only for the change of its internal structure in such a way that its life would not be menaced. If it became an element of dissolution of state ties, this was more the result of external circumstances which occasioned the break rather than of internal efforts. In such case, Slovak nationalism was, therefore, forced to choose between two alternatives: to maintain its original ties and live in continual dread of losing its national individuality; or to accept a new solution, promising greater possibilities for its own development. Thus, external circumstances caused Slovak nationalism to become one of the elements of dissolution, first of Austria-Hungary, in 1918, and later of Czecho-Slovakia in 1938. Neither of those states were dissolved as the result of an 26 SLOVAKIA internal revolution, even if conditions for such action were favorable, but rather through the decisions of external agents who were interested in the creation of a different and more favorable form of Central Europe. In each instance an unexpected opportunity presented itself to Slovak nationalism for a near revolutionary transition to more favorable conditions. One can observe, however, that in its foundations Slovak nationalism manifests greater tendencies toward federative living with other nations in the Central European sphere of influence than toward its own sovereign statehood. The thought of a federated Central Europe, in one form or another, underlies all efforts of Slovak nationalism and is, of course, the principal aim of the entire Slovak struggle for self-preservation. 2. Federation Rather Than Dissolution of Austria-Hungary In general, the reason for the dissolution of Austria.Hungary rested in the many nationalities that were dissatisfied with this empire. On the other hand, it is also true that shortly before the First World War, the nations of Austria-Hungary as well as the Western Democracies saw in Habsburg Monarchy their best guarantee against German and Russian imperialism. The nations, therefore, opposed very sharply all assimilative efforts of this state, not, however, at the cost of its dissolution. They remembered that the origin of Austria-Hungary was not so much the result of the political genius of the Habsburgs, J::,ut rather of the political, economical, and geographical conditions of the Central European sphere of influence. AustriaHungary was regarded, therefore, as one of the main component parts of the political equilibrium in Europe. This supposition was wholly correct. With the displacement of Austria-Hungary, the European equilibrium was broken to the detriment of those nations which lived within its confines. All federative efforts in Central Europe tend principally to the formation of Austria-Hungary, not, however, in the form of the former Habsburg Monarchy, but on the basis of economical, geographical, and political expedients of that part of Europe, of which it was a political representative for several centuries. SLOVAKIA 27 The first attempts of the nations of Austria-Hungary for a revived nationalism proceeded no further than its federation. Scarcely any other nation in Austria-Hungary manifested a greater impatience with the latter's politics than the Czechs; and even they proclaimed through the lips of their most renowned historian Francis Palacky: "If Austria did not exist, we would have to create it!" This same Czech historian, writing to the German revolutionary congress in Frankfurt-on-the-Main in 1848, said: "The preservation of Austria - its integrity and solidification is and must be the great and important concern not only of the Czech nation, but of the whole Europe, nay, of all humanity and foreign lands" (1). Even Dr. Edward Benes, one of the principal creators of Czecho-Slovakia and later an unreconciled enemy of the Habsburgs, wrote in 1908: "People often speak about the dissolution of Austria. I absolutely do not believe in it. The historical and economic ties, which mutually unite the nations of Austria, are too strong to allow Austria to collapse" (2). From the revolutionary years of 1848, the thought of federating Austria-Hungary was the foremost political goal of all nationalities of this monarchy, and was even accepted sympathetically by the imperial court itself. But after the so-called agreement with the Hungarians (Magyars) in 1867, the Habsburgs gave precedence to the forceful solution of the national problem by applying coercive methods of assimilation. This came as a disappointment to the other nationalities and increased greatly their movements toward complete emancipation. It made them to forget the historical and economic ties which bound them to the Habsb:irg monarchy and moved them to work for its dissolution. The federation of Austria-Hungary was demanded by the changed views of society, which the philosophy of the Enlightenment and Romanticism had created. These new views emphasized the principle of plurality instead of the former principle of unity, the principle of individual liberty instead of the principle of unreserved obedience to state authority. Had the Habsburgs recalled this great change in the thinking of people, they would certainly have held their GANS.ER LIBRARY 28 SLOVAKIA empire together even if they would have changed its former autocratic foundation. In accord with the other nationalities of Austria-Hungary, the aim of all Slovak undertakings was the federation of Austria-Hungary. The Slovaks publicly emphasized the thought of federation , first in a memorandum which they presented to the emperor at Vienna, in 1861, and then at the nationality congress in Budapest, in 1867. At the second nationality congress which was held on August 10, 1895, also in Budapest, during a time of great persecutions, "the Rumanians, Serbs and Slovaks, who assembled in Budapest (wrote the Neue Freie Presse) demand the division of Hungary into ethnic self-administrative units, which in effect is equal to the demand to abolish the union between Hungary and Transylvania, to renew the Serbian Duchy and create a self-administrative Slovakia, such as Hurban promoted already thirty years earlier" (3). The unwillingness of Budapest and Vienna to meet these demands led not only the Slovaks but also other nationalities to accept willingly such solutions to their problem that prepared the way for the complete dissolution of Austria-Hungary. The offer of this new solution came chiefly from the Western Democracies during the First World War even despite the fact that, in the West, Austria-Hungary was considered as late as 1903 as "the only barrier, sufficiently strong, at the beginning of the 20th century, which could discourage German ambitions the day when these would begin to threaten the European balance ( 4). During the First World War, however, it became apparent that Austria-Hungary proceeded in a completely opposite direction, that is, it abetted the ambitions of Germany Western Democracies, therefore, decided to dissolve it. The greatest influence came from the "American crusading spirit," which, in the form of Wilson's idealistic principle of self-determination of nations, gave the nationalities an unforeseen moral weapon. Austria-Hungary comprised such a mixture of nationalities that the realization of the principle of self-determination was impossible without repeating the situation of Austria-Hungary would - and that in a much worse form - in new national states along national lines. In the new states which had risen out of the ashes of SLOVAKIA r Austria-Hungary, the burden of power passed from rulers to subordinates, while the political order remained as it was. The former national chauvinism of antagonism began to disintegrate the cohabitation of Central European nations more than ever before and opened the way for the repeated aggrandizement of German imperialism. 3. The Goal of the Slovak Autonomist Movement: A Federated Czecho-Slovakia It was self-evident that, as soon as suppositions for arranging Central Europe upon a new basis emerged, the Slovaks would accept this solution enthusiastically. They found an opportunity to free themselves from their "thousand-year slavery," by which term they referred to their life within the confines of Hungary after the downfall of Greater Moravia in 906. They joined with the Czechs to form one state under the condition that Czecho-Slovakia would be a federated state. This federation was guaranteed by two agreements between Czechs and Slovaks in the United States, in Cleveland in 1915, and then in Pittsburgh in 1918. At the Peace Conference, in 1919, even Dr. Edward Benes promised this in the name of the Czecho-Slovak Government when he stated that: "it is the intention of the Czecho-Slovak Government to create the organization of the state by accepting as a basis of natural rights the principles applied in the constitution of the Swiss Republic a sort of Switzerland . . ." (5). Immediately with the rise of Czecho-Slovakia, the lure of might showed itself more powerful for the Czech majority than the ideals of national equality and rights. For this reason they began to organize a new state on the basis of the principle of power, applying the narrowest centralization. Dr. Ferdis Juriga, one of the most eminent representatives of Slovak nationalism, opposed those Czech propensities on the floor of Parliament in Prague on January 28, 1920, in the following words: "We must tend to decentralization, toward self-administration, so that the Republic might develop on a federalistic basis, because federalism is the system of the future. We must preserve our individuality and not let ourselves be absorbed. Federation is not only in the interest of our nation and the Czecho-Slovak Republic, but it also 30 SLOVAKIA answers the spirit of all mankind. It is an all-human tendency, the tendency of all mankind, this tendency to validate oneself to develop, to which every individual person and every national unit should have the right, which should crystalize out into a legal personality, so that these various nations could then become federalized in one great world republic. This would be the highest ideal and the path that leads to it is: federalism" (6) His position was a bit idealistic, but he expressed correctly the modern effort to arrange the cohabitation of nations on a pluralistic basis in the sense of the principle of equality. We have already said that the dissolution of Austria-Hungary must be charged to the lack of respect for this voice of the times. Czecho-Slovakia, which along national lines was only a worse copy of Austria-Hungary, gave precedence also to such a way. According to C. A. Macartney, "the Slovaks therefore reacted in the form of a flamboyant Slovak nationalism which was a main reason for the absence of revolt with which they accepted the dissolution of the Czecho-Slovak State"(7.) Despite the fact that Slovaks were co-creators of Czecho-Slovakia with the Czechs, they attracted to themselves all the national minorities and together with Germans, Hungarians, Poles, and Ruthenians fought against the so-called imperialism of Prague, as in former times, under AustriaHungary, they fought with Czechs, Serbs, Croatians, and Rumanians against the imperialism of Budapest and Vienna. In this struggle, the main issue at stake was the change of the internal structure of Czecho-Slovakia in the sense of former promises and agreements - and not in its dissolution. When in 1939 Czecho-Slovakia fell under the heel of Hitler's Germany, however, the Slovaks found the way open to the creation of their own state, which was the only way out under the given political circumstances as well as the logical conclusion of their former national endeavors. The short-lived existence of this independent state gave to the Slovak nationalism what it had hitherto lacked, namely, a uniform will to live independently and a conviction that it will know how to stand its ground as an equally worthy member among the other nations. SLOVAKIA 31 4. Slovak Planners of a Federated Central Europe Slovak nationalism did not strive alone for the federation of those states with which it had ties, but also manifested great energies to raise the entire sphere of Central Europe upon a federated basis. The idea of a federated Central Europe was ever popular with the Slovaks, not simply because it assured the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogatives, as among other established nations, but principally it seemed to provide a surer guarantee for the protection of their threatened national individuality. Slovaks of all political convictions not only joined all federative efforts, but also presented several propositions for solving the problem of Central Europe in the sense of a federation. Perhaps the most renowned figure in this field was Dr. Milan Hodza, at first Minister of Agriculture and then Premier of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. He devoted his whole life to this idea. He draws motives for his endeavors from the fact that, "Small nations are liable to become a nuisance for world politics if they are isolated and beset by rivalries; but they are certainly sure to become precious elements of a fair and therefore indispensable balance of political forces, if they can prove themselves capable of taking a common view of those things which are common among them, especially when their geographical position renders them important"(8). Dr. Hod.fa endeavored to develop cooperation between the Central European nations and the consolidation of the economic situation in this part of Europe. The climax of these endeavors was his "Danube Plan," which aimed to create, according to Hodza's own words: "one single, great economic unit in Central Europe." This was to be attained by removing tariff barriers and establishing a customs union which would regulate agriculture and industrial production, and reorganize the system of payments and transportation, etc. (9). Another Slovak plan for solving the Central European problem is the proposal for confederation originating with Dr. Ferdinand Durcansky, the first Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Slovak Republic during the Second World War. Dr. Durcansky developed his plan for the confederation of Central Europe at the beginning of 1944 in studies 32 SLOVAKIA which were published in the "Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques" in Geneva. He favors confederation chiefly to ward off every danger, which is said to threaten the sovereignty of small nations whenever they become a part of greater political bodies. According to Dr. :Durcansky, confederation "gives guarantees of independence and freedom to the nations of Central Europe, enables a solution of incidental disputes which could arise between the individual states of the confederation and, on the other hand, could defend Central Europe against external attacks" (10). Up to the present time, however, attempts for the federation of Central Europe have not ripened into practical results, whether their proponents were Slovaks or members of other nations. The reason of their failure, as stated by Dr. Edward Benes, "are much more of a sentimental, psychological, and moral nature than of a political and economic nature" (11). It is difficult to foretell at the present time whether the nations of Central Europe will be able to reach some settlement of their mutual differences and unite for the sake of their own preservation. The present tragedy of Central Europe brings even the most extreme elements to realize that some kind of federation is the "categorical imperative" for that sector of the world. (1) Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum: Slovakia and Central-European Federation Plans, Slovakia, April 1953, p. 3. (2) Le probleme Autrichien et la question Tcheque, Paris,, 1908, p. 307. (3) Aurel Popovici. Die Vereinigten Staaten von Grossoestreich, Leipzig, 1906, p . 43. (4) Henry Rene : Questions d'Autriche-Hongrie et Questions d'Orient, Paris, 1903, p . 126. (5) Lloyd George: The Truth About the Peace Treaties, London, 1925, p. 337. (6) Karol Sidor, Slovenska politika na pode praiskeho snemu, Bratislava, 1943, Vol I, p. 69. (7) Problems of the Danube Basin, London, 1942, p. 122. (8) Dr. Milan Hodza: Federation in Central Europe. London, 1942, p. 75. (9) Ibid., pp. 131-133. (10) Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques. XXII, annee, No. I, p. 23-52. (11) "Le probleme de !'Europe Central," Sources et documents tchecoslovaques, No. 24, p. 47.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovak Nationalism: Federative Tendencies of Slovak Nationalism Description An account of the resource B. S. Buc, Ph.D.<br />Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958<br />pp. 25-32<br /><ol><li>The Struggle for Survival</li> <li>Federation Rather Than Dissolution of Austria-Hungary</li> <li>The Goal of the Slovak Autonomist Movement: A Federated Czecho-Slovakia</li> <li>Slovak Planners of a Federated Central Europe</li> </ol> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Buc, B. S. (Bonaventure S.), 1910-1966 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/ff74de252a983093167f8c3dbe9b6edb.pdf bc2368dcdabeca22f9f1eabb8e3121a3 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 9 HON. B. CARROLL REECE THE SUDETEN GERMANS Restoration of Internation al Morality Perhaps few people in the world today are more firmly united in opposing Communism than are the 16 million Germans expelled from the German provinces east of the Odes-Neise line, the Sudetenlan d, and other parts of Europe. These sturdy people, outnumber ing the total population of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark combined, experienced in 1945 the full impact of the Red invasion of their ancient homelands. Their expulsion to Western Germany resulted in the tragic death of more than 3 million of their number. Among these 16 million German expellees were 3.3 million Sudeten Germans, the latter group equal in size to the total population of either Eire or Norway. They were expelled in 1945 and 1946 from their ancient homeland by the Communist -led Czecho-'Slovak Governmen t of the socalled National Front. About 300,000 of them died during the process of expulsion. When speaking of the Sudetenlan d, I refer to the territory comprising the border regions of Bohemia and Moravia.Silesia, that is, the border regions of the western part of present-day Czecho-Slovakia. In 1921, 3.2 million Sudeten Germans and 6.8 million Czechs were living in Bohemia and Moravia-Si lesia while, in 1935, the figures showed 3.3 million Sudeten Germans and 7.4 million Czechs. As a political entity, a state, Czecho-Slo vakia does not antedate the year of 1918 when Bohemia and MoraviaSilesia, with its Czechs and German population, were combined with Slovakia, the latter comprising 2.3 million Slovaks and 692,000 Magyars, and with Carpathian Ruthenia inhabited by 549,000 Ruthenians . Neverthele ss, Czechs and Germans have been living side by side in those first-named regions for nearly a thousand years. The Foundation of Czecho-Slovakia Led by T. G. Masaryk and Edvard Benes, Czech politicians saw in World War I the opportunity for their people to �10 SLOVAKIA secede from the Hapsburg empire and set up an independent republic. Promising the Slovaks full autonomy, Masaryk persuaded them to join the Czechs in forming one state when he concluded with the Slovak League of America the Pittsburgh Agreement of May 30, 1918. The new Czecho-Slovak Republic then came into being on October 28, 1918. At that hour the Sudeten Cermans, on their part, decided to establish the provinces of German-Bohe mia and Sudetenland, and to associate these with the new Republic of Austria. Head of the provincial government at Prague was at the time Dr. Rudolf Lodgman von Auen. He is today the president of the National Union of Sudeten German Expellees. Dr. von Lodgman had long urged a solution of the probAustria-Hung ary on lines of federalism. He advocated of lem freedom - his ancestors had fled England at the time of Elizabeth I in search of freedom - and he stood for the right to self-determina tion. But in spite of the fact that Austria-Hung ary was ostensibly dismembered so as to realize that right, firmly proclaimed by our President Woodrow Wilson, it was squarely refused to the 3.2 million Sudeten Germans who were forced against their will to be part of the new Czecho-Slova k Republic. To subdue the demands of the people, the Czechs even dispatched troops to the Sudetenland and when, in March 1919, there were public demonstration s, the Czech military fired into the crowds causing many casualties. Leading the resistance movement in those days was Josef Seliger, chairman of the Sudeten German Social Democratic Party. Headed by Dr. Benes, the Czech delegation to the Paris Peace Conference did not shrink away from using such tricks as presenting maps showing a Sudeten German area falsely reduced. The deceit was later contradicted even by the official Czecho-Slova k census figure. In an oral statement to the Big Four, Benes admitted that the Sudeten Germans, if given a free choice, would probably secede from the new republic. To compensate for denying them the right to selfdetermination Benes, in ·a written memorandum to the peace conference, went on record in favor of a Swiss type of constitution for Czecho-Slovakia. It remained an empty promise. �SLOVAKIA 11 Dr. von Lodgman and the Slovak spokesman, Msgr. Andrew Hlinka, as well as leaders of the Magyars in CzechoSlovakia also managed to go to Paris to attend the peace conference. But they were kept in their hotels behind barbed wire ,and were not given a hearing. Prophetic Warning of a True American It was a man representing the United States who objected to the flagrant violation of the right to self-determination in the specific instance of the Sudeten Germans: Prof. Archibald Cary Coolidge, the well-known Harvard historian. In December 1918, he was appointed by the Secretary of State to be political observer in Austria-Hungary, assigned to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace and instructed to head a field mission to the former dual monarchy. (Professor Coolidge incidentally is a founder member of the New York Council in Foreign Relations and served as first editor of its quarterly, Foreign Affairs.) Dr. A. C. Coolidge summed up his observations in a detailed memorandum of March 10, 1919, which he submitted to the Peace Commission. He dealt with the problem of nationalities and new boundaries in all parts of the former Hapsburg monarchy and set out stating: "To grant to the Czecho-Slovaks all the territory they demand would be not only an injustice to millions of people unwilling to come under Czech rule, but it would also be dangerous and perhaps fatal to the future of the new state •.. The Bloodshed on March 3 when Czech soldiers in several towns fired on Germans crowds . . • was shed in a manner that is not easily f.orgiven .•• For the Bohemia of the future to contain withi,n its limits great numbers of deeply discon'tended inhabitants .•• will be a perilous experiment and one which can hardly promise success in the long run." Three weeks later, on April 1, 1919, the Sudeten German question was taken up at the Peace Conference meeting discussing the report of the Czecho-Slovak Commission on the frontiers between Czecho-Slovakia and Germany. It was at this meeting when our Secretary of State, Mr. Lansing, objected to including into the Czecho-Slovak State large Sudeten Germans areas and declared that The American delegates objected to the whole method of drawing frontier lines on strategic principles. And that - �12 SLOVAKIA The fixing of frontier lines with a view to their military strength was directly contrary to the whole spirit . . . of the policy of the United States as set forth in the declaration of President Wilson. Prospective Ally of France As Against Germany M. Laroche of the French delegation, upon being asked at this meeting whether the commission would approve of a plebiscite in the area, replied that a plebiscite could be proposed without extending it to the remainder of the German Bohemians, which would reduce the Czecho-Slovak state to very slender proportions. Mr. Lansing thereupon pl·ainly said that this was not a good reason to justify an injustice. However, the views of the French Foreign Minister prevailed, namely, to strengthen Czecho-Slovakia, which M. Pichon trusted "would remain an ally orf France" as against Germ-any. The United States, however, then began to withdraw from the scene of European political intrigues. The constitution of the CzechoJSlovak Republic was devised by a mostly Czech commission and not by a duly elected convention. Czech became the official language. The Sudeten Germans were not given a fair chance to participate. The facts of the undemocratic beginnings of Czecho-Slovakia should not be overlooked. The Czech land reform law of 1919 allotted 2,025,400 acres of German property in the Sudetenland to proteges of the Czech political parties. Only 7 percent of the land taken from Sudeten German owners was given to Sudeten German farmers, while 93 percent was handed over to new Czech settlers. In addition, land property expropriated in the central parts of Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia, that is, outside of the Sudetenland, amounting to -another 3,818,064 acres and owned by Germans, was also handed over to the Czechs. In the Sudetenland proper, 31 percent of the entire land area was confiscated in 1919. The Czech colonists were settled and Czech schools were built with the aim to break up the German language area. Discrimination Against the Sudeten Germans Although the Sudeten Germans represented about 30 percent of the total population of Bohemia and Moravia- �SLOVAKIA 13 Silesia, they made up only 10 percent of the employees of the general civil service, 13.1 percent of the postal service, 12.8 percent of the judicial administration service, 12.4 percent of the railway employees, and only 5.4 percent of the army officer corps. The police force was almost exclusively Czech. Administrative reforms in 1927 must also be regarded as discriminatory, though a smoothly working .publicity machine was able to show the outside world the picture of what appeared to be a democracy. In the 1920 parliamentary elections the Sudeten German Parties won 74 out of the 300 available seats. Some of these parties, the so-called Activists, entered the government coalition and, since 1926, most political parties of the Sudeten Germans participated in the government coalition, thus showing their honest desire to cooperate. But they were unable to gain any ground toward reforms on federative lines. Even a late-in-the-day palliative assurance of more posts to be assigned to Sudeten German civil servants remained an empty promise. The worldwide economic crisis at the end of the 1920's imposed a he::vy burden on the Sudeten Germans. Czech bankers and -administrators gave preference to Czech enterprises. Out of 800,000 unemployed 500,000 were Sudeten Germans. In 1935, the Sudeten German Party, a union of a number of political groups, polled 1,249,530 votes and thus emerged as the largest political party in all of Czecho-Slovakia, but ·was forced to remain in opposition. Early in 1937, several younger members of those German parties that participated in the government coalition made once more a concerted effort to convince the Czechs of the urgency of thoroughgoing reforms. Hans Schlitz, of the Christian Social Party, sternly demanded equal rights, while Wenzel Jaksch, of the Social Democratic Party, bluntly asked whether or not there was still a place in the Czecho-Slovak Republic for genuine Sudeten German partnership. Incidentally, both men are today distinguished members of th German Bundestag. In the growing crisis of 1938, Lord Runciman was chosen to head a mission of mediation and, after a close study on the ground, he reported: �14 SLOVAKIA " It is hard to be ruled by an alien race . . . In the last elections in 1935 the Sudeten German Party polled more votes than any other sin_gle party . . . But they can always be outvoted; and consequently some of them feel that constitutional action is useless for them ••• Even as late as the time of my mission, I could find no readiness on the part of the Czecho-Slovak Government to remedy (the complaints) on anything like an adequate scale . • • Just as it is essential for the international position of Switzerland that her policy should be entirely neutral, so an analogous policy is necessary for ,Czecho-Slovakia - not only for her own future existence but for the peace of Europe." However, Czecho-Slovakia refused to admit its multinational status and did not strive for a position of neutrality. In spite of its vulnerability, because of the large percentage of citizens of non-Czech nationality, it allowed itself to be used as a political pawn, and since the treaty in 1935 with the Soviet Union, increasingly as a pawn in the hands of the Kremlin, thereby causing its own gradual disintegration. The Prague government treated the Slovaks in much the same way as the Sudeten Germans. About half of CzechoSlovakia's total population was tired of being bossed by the 7.4 million Czechs. No wonder that the foundation of the republic began to crumble, when the Anglo-French demarche of September 21, 1938, demanded the cession to Germany of the Sudeten region. It was soon followed by demands of Poland and Hungary for the cession of areas inhabited by their conationals, 131,000 Poles and 692,000 Magyars, and finally by the declaration of independence of the 3 million Slovaks who sought recognition as a nation. Sauce of the Goose Not To Be Sauce for the Gander From the beginning the Czechs had been showing a lack of realism, a lack of willingness to plan, in good time, for constitutional reforms. If in the years after 1918 a wise solution had earnestly been sought, events might well have taken a different course. The word "Munich" has since been linked in our mind with a short-sighted, dangerous policy vis-a-vis an aggressive dictator. Surely the right to selfdetermination should not be exercised by employing violence which would only bring about new injustice. Nevertheless, the right to self-determination is today recognized as a canon of international law. A brief glance at the map of Asia and �SLOVAKIA 15 Africa will suffice to convince everybody of its potency and potentiality, of its full meaning in the realities of present-day world affairs. As to Munich, it should be remembered that neither the Czechs nor the Sudeten Germans were partners to that agreement. It was made by the four European big powers. When Hitler, in 1939, under a flimsy pretext occupied the central area of Bohemia and Moravia-'Silesia he openly violated the right to a.n independent national life of the Czech people just as the Czechs, two decades before, had violated that same right of the Sudeten Germans. To charge the Sudeten Germans with treason against the Czecho-Slovak Republic is beside the point, when the charge is made by the Czechs who themselves set the example. In opposing Austria-Hungary, Masaryk, Benes, and their adherents had solicited during World War I the support of foreign governments and had organized thousands of Czech deserters from the Austrian Army to join Czech legions on the side of the Allies. It was hard to make Sudeten Germans later believe that as to their own case "sauce of the goose was not to be sauce for the gander." The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans cannot be based on treason allegedly committed by them against the Czecho-Slovak Republic nor upon the charge of a£sociation with Hitler's policy of suppressing the Czechs. Expulsion of the Sudeten Germans Dr. Benes unfortunately seems to have blamed the Sudeten Germans for his own shortcomings and considered them instrumental in his downfall in 1938. His mind wa.3 beclouded by Germanophobia. He did not seek a just and fair solution in his dealings with those Sudeten Germans politicians who were, like he himself, exiled by the Nazi regime and living in London during World War II: I refer to Wenzel Jaksch and Richard Reitzner, both of whom now are members of the German Bundestag. According to his memoirs - Pameti - published in Prague in 1947, this is what Benes at a reception in London on January 7, 1942, told Wenzel Jaksch in an effort to have �16 SLOVAKIA him agree to deportation from Czecho-Slovakia of ,all Sudeten Germans, excepting a limited number of anti-Fascists: During the social revolution which will certainly occur we shall have to rid our country of all the German bour-geoisie, the pan.German intelligentsia and those workers whom hate turned Fascist. This would be the final solution and, so far as we are concerned, the only possible solution which we would be able to implement, namely combining our social revolution with the national revolution. I added to Jaksch and his friends: We must have the courage to speak about this openly; and especially you Social Democrats should have the cour-age to do so. This plan even contains an element of Marx. ism and Marxist dialectics in the revolutionary process which must inevitably accompany the changes in the social structure of the nation as an outcome of this great and worldwide catastrophe. After the firs,t world war . . . I foretold that the German nationalist bourgeoisie in our country would some time in the future attempt a counter-revolution and that there would be no peace between us until this bourgeoisie was subjected to a similar revolution to that which the Czechs had gone through in past centuries. Now, after the second world war, this revolution is inevitable; and the entire nationalities problem in our country will be radically solved at the same time. It is only fair to say that some Czech opposition was voiced aainst these .plans, notably from Army General Lev Prchala. Benes' Unscrupulous Play It is rather unfortunate that Benes apparently had no scruples as to how he would gain his end. For instance, in a conference on May 12, 1943, with President Roosevelt he asserted that the Russians were willing to agree to the transfer or the Sudeten Germans. Then, 17 days later, on May 29, Dr. Hubert Ripka eX!plained to Mr. Bogomolov, the Soviet ambassador in London, that the Americans had already agreed to the transfer, and that under these circumstances the Czecho-Slovak government in exile expected the Soviets to consent. On June 6, Ripka telephoned Benes, who was at the time in the United States, that Soviet Russia had just agreed to the transfer - the same agreement which Benes had used as a lever in his conference with President Roosevelt on May 12, 194·3. The Soviets were the first allies to grant to the Czech government in exile de jure recognition. Against the advice of western statesmen Benes went to Moscow and in 1943 signed a new treaty with the Soviet government. Eager to �SLOVAKIA 17 show his ability at playing an important role in the arena of world politics he may have thought of himself as a man who would build the great bridge between the West and the East. As seen in retrospect, however, he seems to have been prior to the Teheran Conference more than perh,a ps any other person active in strengthening Roosevelt's ill-conceived trust in Stal~n. In this way, I regret to say, he certainly proved to be a valuable tool of the Kremlin. Toward the end of World War II, Benes returned to Prague by way of Moscow, accompanying the Red Army, as it adv,anced from the east into Czecho-Slovakia, and himself was accompanied by a Czech government group led by a Communist, Zdenek Fierlinger, who is today the president of the Czecho-Slovak parliament. At Kosice, in eastern Slovakia, Benes and his colleagues proclaimed on April 5, 1945, the so-called Kosice program according to which the country for the time being was to be ruled by presidential decrees. The program was signed by: Zdenek Fierlinger, Josef David, Klement Gottwald, Viliam Siroky - today the Prime Minister, Dr. Jan Sramek, Jan Masaryk - son of the first president of Czecho.,Slovakia - Ludvik :Svoboda, Dr. Hubert Ripka, Vaclav Nosek, Dr. V,a vro Srobar, Dr. Zdenek Nejedly, Dr. Jaroslav Stransky, Vaclav Kopecky, Bohumil Lausman, Julius Duris, Dr. Jan Pietor, Antonin Hasal, Frantisek Hala, Dr. Jan Soltesz, Dr. Adolf Prochazka, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Vladimir Clementis, Dr. Mikulas Ferjencik, and Jan Lichner. Outlawing Political Opponents Czecho-:Slovakia was now restored within the pre-Munich boundaries, except for Carpathian Ruthenia which the Soviets had seized and incorporated into the Soviet Ukraine, and which the new Czecho-Slovak government then ceded to the Soviet Union. The Slovaks were once more subjected to Czech domination. The new government announced the formation of a so-called National Front, supposedly a coalition of the Communist Party and three parties willing to collaborate with them, that is, Social Democrats, National Socialists, and People's Party. All Czech political parties of the center and the right �18 SLOVAKIA side were declared illegal, among them the National Democrats, the Artisans, and the Republican Agrarians, the the latter being the biggest political party in pre-war CzechoSlovakia. Their leaders and functionaries were jailed. All Slovak parties were likewise outlawed and, instead, new leftist parties, such as the so-called Slovak Democratic Party and other puppet groups, were artificially created. In this way, political parties were abolished which, before World War II, had long represented the large majority of the nonCommunist Czech and Slovak peoples. In addition to these millions of Czechs and Slovaks, all Sudeten Germans and Magyars were disfranchised. Only by applying this method of outlawing political opponents - exactly copying Hitler's procedure in Berlin in 1933 - and of exploiting the prejudice of their willing collaborators, did the Communists succeed in 1946 in showing up as the largest political party. Now free elections, freedom of speech and press were abolished. Kangaroo courts, called people's courts, were established in order to liquidate the opponents of Communism. So-called National Committees, fashioned after the Russian local "Soviets", were set up to take over the work of administrative offices. The economy was nationalized. While Benes himself assumed the office of president, Communists were appointed to key positions at all levels and, from the beginning, were in control of police, army, and the state propaganda machine. The non-Communist ministers collaborated at every turn and supported the Communist line. Since some of these people later escaped to the West it may be of interest to mention, in addition to those who signed the Kosice program, some of the .p rominent politicians of the era of the so-called National Front: Dr. Peter Zenkl - Vice Premier; Dr. Jozef Lettrich - leader of the Red puppet Slovak Democratic Party who, after the 1946 elections when the Slovaks had failed to vote for the Communists, signed the agreement abolishing Slovakia's autonomy; Dr. Jan Papanek, Dr. Juraj Slavik, and Frantisek Nemec - who represented as ambassador abroad the Red regime of Prague; Ferdinand Peroutka. a. Socialist journalist; and Milos Vanek - one of the original bosses of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party. �SLOVAKIA 19 The Reign of Terror - Rule of Decrees A reign of terror began with the arrival of the Soviet Red Army and the regime which was to become the government of the so-called National Front. One of the first administrativ e measures provided for the hasty constructio n of concentrati on camps into which tens of thousands of Sudeten Germans were driven. The late R. R. Stokes, a former British minister, has given a vivid description of conditions in those camps which he himself had visited. Benes' inciting words; "Annihilate the Germans where you find them," broadcast from Kosice, led to a wave of cruel murder. The bloody Sunday at Aussig in July 1945, the massacres in Saaz, Brilx and Landskron, the death march of BrUnn are only some of those outrages for which the Czecho.1Slovak governmen t of that time will be held fully responsible . The Sudeten Germans were outlawed. Before being expropriated their homes were open for pillage either under the pretext of a raid for hidden weapons or merely by groups of police guards or plain Czech plunderers. In some towns orders were issued that homes of Germans must not be locked. Strict curfew was imposed on them. They were forced to wear white badges so as to make them conspicuou s. They were forbidden to use public conveyance s and the sidewalks, visit restaurants , write letters, change places of residence. They were restricted for buying groceries and shopping in stores to certain hours of the day, and special ration cards discriminat ing against them were issued. Schools and kindergartens were closed to their children. Adult Germans were called up and transported to the interior of Bohemia to provide forced labor on farms, in mines, and industry, at first without pay, later at low wages that were seldom paid. Still worse was the treatment in prisons,· where over-crowd ed cells, brutalities and disease, in addition to insufficien t rations, increased the death toll. Expulsions Were Planned We know now that the Communist s, by means of the expulsions, pursued the following objectives: First: By eliminating the German element from the �20 SLOVAKIA area, they wished to hasten the Communization of those countries. Second : In the depopulated regions, they wanted to introduce collective farms ,and state industrial enterprises fashioned after Russian Soviet examples before proceeding . with those schemes on a general scale. Third : The confiscated property was also to be used for bribery purposes, since destroying the sense of honesty turns into more pliable tools of immoral Communism. Fourth: By inciting to violence and acts of cruelty against the Germans, the Communists and their collabor ators hoped to build up hatred between the Germans and these Slavic peoples so as to make the latter wholly dependent on the alliance with Communist Russia. Fifth : The German expellees were to create social disorder and to be a hotbed of Communism in overcrowded West Germany. As to the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, it may safely be said that this was not a spontaneous reaction of the Czech people agains the German occupation of their country, but an act planned by Czech politicians in exile and carried out by the government of the so-called National Front with all possible haste before the large majority of the Czech people would have time to think twice about it. Presidential decrees were supposed to give the proceedings a cloak of legality. Quotations from some of these decrees will point toward the responsibility of the government of the so-called National Front. First: Constitutional Decree of the President of the Republic of August 2, 1945: Article 1 1. Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality who acquired German or Magyar citizenship under the regulation of the foreign occupational forces shall have lost their Czecho-Slovak citizenship by so doing. 2. The other Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality shall lose their Czecho-1Slovak citizenship on the day when this decree will come into force. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Masaryk, Nosek, Svoboda. �SLOVAKIA 21 Second: Decree of the President of the Republic of October 25, 1945: Any immovable and movable property shall be confiscated without any compensation, to the benefit of the Czecho-Slovak Republic . . . which is . . . owned: 1. By German or Magyar legal persons; or 2. by natural persons of German or Magyar nationality. Signed by the signers of the Kosice program. Third: Decree of the President of the Republic of January 21, 1946: Article 1 and without compensation and effect 1. With immediate for the purpose of the land reform such land property shall be confiscated as is owned by - (a) all persons of German or Magyar nationality without regard to their citizenship. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Nosek, Dr. Srobar, Dr. Stransky, Duris, Majer. Fourth: Law of May 8, 1946, passed by the povisional National Assembly: Article 1 Any act committed between September 30, 1938, and October 28, 1945, the object of which was to aid the struggle for liberty of the Czechs and Slovaks, or which represented due reprisals for actions of the occupation forces and their accomplices, is not illegal, even when such actions may otherwise be punishable by law. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Drtina, Svoboda. The last mentioned parliamentary act, which I have added to the decrees, provided for a general amnesty for all crimes committed against Germans, Magyars, and anti-Communist Czechs and Slovaks and thus gave ex port facto a semblance of legality to the law of the jungle. Expulsions a Violation of International Law The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the homes which they had inhabited for a thousand years violated the principle of the right to self-determination of peoples. We should remember that this right was solemnly proclaimed by our own President Woodrow Wilson, who in his Mount Vernon address of July 4, 1918, declared: �22 SLOVAKIA The settlement of every question, whether- of territory, of sover-eigty, of economic arrangement or political relationship, must be upon the basis of the free acceptance of that settlement by the peoples immediately concerned. It is well known that the U. S. Government has taken a prominent part in establishing this principle and in the development toward incorporating it into the law of nations. The expulsion of the Germans stands in direct contradiction to this great principle. The U. S. Government was also strenuously opposed to arbitrary displacement of persons during both World Wars. We protested against the transfer during World War I of Belgian workers and condemned, as a grave violation of international law, the displacement during World War II of Poles and other peoples within the then Nazi orbit. We asserted the right to resettle in their home countries, of all displaced persons. As to our own fellow citizens of Japanese descent, temporarily displaced after Pearl Harbor from their homes near the Pacific Ocean, we reaffirmed by an act of Congress the right to their homes. Let me also point out that article 9 of the United Nations Human Rights Declaration of December 10, 1948, as regards arbitrary e:xipulsion as contrary to international law and states that "no one shall be subject to arbitrary exile." Also relevant, it would seem to me, is the Convention on Genocide of December 11, 1946, which declares to be a crime, under international law, (a) killing members of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. About 300,000 Sudeten Germans, that is, a considerable part of their total number, did not survive the removal from their ancient homeland, a fact which proves that they were victims of this crime. Let me finally quote from the draft code, prepared in accordance with the resolution of November 21, 1947, of the United Nations General Assembly, to define "offenses against the peace and security of mankind" that would be �SLOVAKIA 23 "crimes under internation•al law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Article 2, paragraph 11, lists: Inhuman acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, or persecutions, committed against any civilian population on social, political, racial, religious, or cultural grounds by the authorities of a state or by private individuals acting at the instigation or with the toleration of such authorities. This adequately covers the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland as well as those from the German provinces east of the O<ler-Neisse line, and from other parts of Eastern Europe, and proves it to be - let me here repeat the words of article 1 of the penal draft code - among the "crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Voices Raised Against the Expulsions Many courageous persons have raised their voice against the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans. Even at the heyday of the so-called National Front regime, Rozsievac, a (Czech) Catholic paper in Olmtitz, dared to protest on October 31, 1945, against cruelties in internment camps and the rape of Sudeten German women; and in another newspaper, Obzory, Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, a journalist, objected to the cruelties of the expulsion. Of course, such voices were quickly suppressed and Dr. Kozeluhova, for instance, was forbidden to write another line - curiously by men who themselves are now in exile and professing to be anti-Communist. While the Sudeten Germans have stood up for the right to return to their ancient homeland, they have expressly renounced any thought of vengeance on the Czech people. The expellees publicly declared that they will support every endeavor toward a united Europe in which the peoples may live in freedom from fear and coercion. They called upon all nations and men of good will to join them in this great undertaking. Since then, the German expellees have persistently followed the policy to which their representatives had set hal¼d and seal at Stuttgart in 1950. Rejecting Communist and neutralist temptations as well ·a s appeals to �24 SLOVAKIA narrow nationalism, they are, today, perhaps the most dedicated adherents of a united Europe. But the Sudeten Germans did not rest their case with a solemn declaration of faith. They took practical steps toward an agreement, on the basis of mutual respect and a genuine search for a real solution, with their Czech and Slovak neighbors, now also in exile. In 1950, an agreement in London with the Czech National Committee, headed by Army General Lev Prchala. The agreement recognizes the right to self-determination of both nations, Czechs and Sudeten Germans. A realistic policy for Central as well as East Central Europe, that is, concerning Czecho-Slovakia and the Sudeten Germans, as well as concerning Poland, the Germans of East Prussia, and the other German provinces east of the OderN eisse Rivers can only be a policy that is both just and moral. It must be firmly based upon historical truth and the rule of international law. To assume that any government can ever develop a successful policy on the shaky structure of a wrong, and on perpetuating that wrong, is an illusion. It is my considered opinion that the German expellees should be encouraged to stand firm upon their right. It is in the best tradition of American foreign policy to denounce the wrong and to uphold the right. Moreover, wavering would be tantamount to further tightening the stranglehold on the captive peoples by the Kremlin and would thus actually support Soviet imperialism. Just as the Soviets dangled before the dizzy eyes of the Poles enticing bait of the German provinces east of the OderN eisse line, so the Czechs were being dazzled by Kremlin stooges with the rich spoils in the Sudetenland. To the same degree that the Poles accepted the German provinces, and the Czechs accepted the Sudeten properties out of the bloody hands of Stalin, they both permitted themselves to be chained to Moscow. This h•as been the fateful and deadly but logical result. Both the Czechs and Poles who think of keeping these spoils must continue to lean on Soviet Russian backing and thus render themselves subservient to the Kremlin. � SLOVAKIA 9 HON. B. CARROLL REECE THE SUDETEN GERMANS Restoration of Internation al Morality Perhaps few people in the world today are more firmly united in opposing Communism than are the 16 million Germans expelled from the German provinces east of the Odes-Neise line, the Sudetenlan d, and other parts of Europe. These sturdy people, outnumber ing the total population of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark combined, experienced in 1945 the full impact of the Red invasion of their ancient homelands. Their expulsion to Western Germany resulted in the tragic death of more than 3 million of their number. Among these 16 million German expellees were 3.3 million Sudeten Germans, the latter group equal in size to the total population of either Eire or Norway. They were expelled in 1945 and 1946 from their ancient homeland by the Communist -led Czecho-'Slovak Governmen t of the socalled National Front. About 300,000 of them died during the process of expulsion. When speaking of the Sudetenlan d, I refer to the territory comprising the border regions of Bohemia and Moravia.Silesia, that is, the border regions of the western part of present-day Czecho-Slovakia. In 1921, 3.2 million Sudeten Germans and 6.8 million Czechs were living in Bohemia and Moravia-Si lesia while, in 1935, the figures showed 3.3 million Sudeten Germans and 7.4 million Czechs. As a political entity, a state, Czecho-Slo vakia does not antedate the year of 1918 when Bohemia and MoraviaSilesia, with its Czechs and German population, were combined with Slovakia, the latter comprising 2.3 million Slovaks and 692,000 Magyars, and with Carpathian Ruthenia inhabited by 549,000 Ruthenians . Neverthele ss, Czechs and Germans have been living side by side in those first-named regions for nearly a thousand years. The Foundation of Czecho-Slovakia Led by T. G. Masaryk and Edvard Benes, Czech politicians saw in World War I the opportunity for their people to �10 SLOVAKIA secede from the Hapsburg empire and set up an independent republic. Promising the Slovaks full autonomy, Masaryk persuaded them to join the Czechs in forming one state when he concluded with the Slovak League of America the Pittsburgh Agreement of May 30, 1918. The new Czecho-Slovak Republic then came into being on October 28, 1918. At that hour the Sudeten Cermans, on their part, decided to establish the provinces of German-Bohe mia and Sudetenland, and to associate these with the new Republic of Austria. Head of the provincial government at Prague was at the time Dr. Rudolf Lodgman von Auen. He is today the president of the National Union of Sudeten German Expellees. Dr. von Lodgman had long urged a solution of the probAustria-Hung ary on lines of federalism. He advocated of lem freedom - his ancestors had fled England at the time of Elizabeth I in search of freedom - and he stood for the right to self-determina tion. But in spite of the fact that Austria-Hung ary was ostensibly dismembered so as to realize that right, firmly proclaimed by our President Woodrow Wilson, it was squarely refused to the 3.2 million Sudeten Germans who were forced against their will to be part of the new Czecho-Slova k Republic. To subdue the demands of the people, the Czechs even dispatched troops to the Sudetenland and when, in March 1919, there were public demonstration s, the Czech military fired into the crowds causing many casualties. Leading the resistance movement in those days was Josef Seliger, chairman of the Sudeten German Social Democratic Party. Headed by Dr. Benes, the Czech delegation to the Paris Peace Conference did not shrink away from using such tricks as presenting maps showing a Sudeten German area falsely reduced. The deceit was later contradicted even by the official Czecho-Slova k census figure. In an oral statement to the Big Four, Benes admitted that the Sudeten Germans, if given a free choice, would probably secede from the new republic. To compensate for denying them the right to selfdetermination Benes, in ·a written memorandum to the peace conference, went on record in favor of a Swiss type of constitution for Czecho-Slovakia. It remained an empty promise. �SLOVAKIA 11 Dr. von Lodgman and the Slovak spokesman, Msgr. Andrew Hlinka, as well as leaders of the Magyars in CzechoSlovakia also managed to go to Paris to attend the peace conference. But they were kept in their hotels behind barbed wire ,and were not given a hearing. Prophetic Warning of a True American It was a man representing the United States who objected to the flagrant violation of the right to self-determination in the specific instance of the Sudeten Germans: Prof. Archibald Cary Coolidge, the well-known Harvard historian. In December 1918, he was appointed by the Secretary of State to be political observer in Austria-Hungary, assigned to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace and instructed to head a field mission to the former dual monarchy. (Professor Coolidge incidentally is a founder member of the New York Council in Foreign Relations and served as first editor of its quarterly, Foreign Affairs.) Dr. A. C. Coolidge summed up his observations in a detailed memorandum of March 10, 1919, which he submitted to the Peace Commission. He dealt with the problem of nationalities and new boundaries in all parts of the former Hapsburg monarchy and set out stating: "To grant to the Czecho-Slovaks all the territory they demand would be not only an injustice to millions of people unwilling to come under Czech rule, but it would also be dangerous and perhaps fatal to the future of the new state •.. The Bloodshed on March 3 when Czech soldiers in several towns fired on Germans crowds . . • was shed in a manner that is not easily f.orgiven .•• For the Bohemia of the future to contain withi,n its limits great numbers of deeply discon'tended inhabitants .•• will be a perilous experiment and one which can hardly promise success in the long run." Three weeks later, on April 1, 1919, the Sudeten German question was taken up at the Peace Conference meeting discussing the report of the Czecho-Slovak Commission on the frontiers between Czecho-Slovakia and Germany. It was at this meeting when our Secretary of State, Mr. Lansing, objected to including into the Czecho-Slovak State large Sudeten Germans areas and declared that The American delegates objected to the whole method of drawing frontier lines on strategic principles. And that - �12 SLOVAKIA The fixing of frontier lines with a view to their military strength was directly contrary to the whole spirit . . . of the policy of the United States as set forth in the declaration of President Wilson. Prospective Ally of France As Against Germany M. Laroche of the French delegation, upon being asked at this meeting whether the commission would approve of a plebiscite in the area, replied that a plebiscite could be proposed without extending it to the remainder of the German Bohemians, which would reduce the Czecho-Slovak state to very slender proportions. Mr. Lansing thereupon pl·ainly said that this was not a good reason to justify an injustice. However, the views of the French Foreign Minister prevailed, namely, to strengthen Czecho-Slovakia, which M. Pichon trusted "would remain an ally orf France" as against Germ-any. The United States, however, then began to withdraw from the scene of European political intrigues. The constitution of the CzechoJSlovak Republic was devised by a mostly Czech commission and not by a duly elected convention. Czech became the official language. The Sudeten Germans were not given a fair chance to participate. The facts of the undemocratic beginnings of Czecho-Slovakia should not be overlooked. The Czech land reform law of 1919 allotted 2,025,400 acres of German property in the Sudetenland to proteges of the Czech political parties. Only 7 percent of the land taken from Sudeten German owners was given to Sudeten German farmers, while 93 percent was handed over to new Czech settlers. In addition, land property expropriated in the central parts of Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia, that is, outside of the Sudetenland, amounting to -another 3,818,064 acres and owned by Germans, was also handed over to the Czechs. In the Sudetenland proper, 31 percent of the entire land area was confiscated in 1919. The Czech colonists were settled and Czech schools were built with the aim to break up the German language area. Discrimination Against the Sudeten Germans Although the Sudeten Germans represented about 30 percent of the total population of Bohemia and Moravia- �SLOVAKIA 13 Silesia, they made up only 10 percent of the employees of the general civil service, 13.1 percent of the postal service, 12.8 percent of the judicial administration service, 12.4 percent of the railway employees, and only 5.4 percent of the army officer corps. The police force was almost exclusively Czech. Administrative reforms in 1927 must also be regarded as discriminatory, though a smoothly working .publicity machine was able to show the outside world the picture of what appeared to be a democracy. In the 1920 parliamentary elections the Sudeten German Parties won 74 out of the 300 available seats. Some of these parties, the so-called Activists, entered the government coalition and, since 1926, most political parties of the Sudeten Germans participated in the government coalition, thus showing their honest desire to cooperate. But they were unable to gain any ground toward reforms on federative lines. Even a late-in-the-day palliative assurance of more posts to be assigned to Sudeten German civil servants remained an empty promise. The worldwide economic crisis at the end of the 1920's imposed a he::vy burden on the Sudeten Germans. Czech bankers and -administrators gave preference to Czech enterprises. Out of 800,000 unemployed 500,000 were Sudeten Germans. In 1935, the Sudeten German Party, a union of a number of political groups, polled 1,249,530 votes and thus emerged as the largest political party in all of Czecho-Slovakia, but ·was forced to remain in opposition. Early in 1937, several younger members of those German parties that participated in the government coalition made once more a concerted effort to convince the Czechs of the urgency of thoroughgoing reforms. Hans Schlitz, of the Christian Social Party, sternly demanded equal rights, while Wenzel Jaksch, of the Social Democratic Party, bluntly asked whether or not there was still a place in the Czecho-Slovak Republic for genuine Sudeten German partnership. Incidentally, both men are today distinguished members of th German Bundestag. In the growing crisis of 1938, Lord Runciman was chosen to head a mission of mediation and, after a close study on the ground, he reported: �14 SLOVAKIA " It is hard to be ruled by an alien race . . . In the last elections in 1935 the Sudeten German Party polled more votes than any other sin_gle party . . . But they can always be outvoted; and consequently some of them feel that constitutional action is useless for them ••• Even as late as the time of my mission, I could find no readiness on the part of the Czecho-Slovak Government to remedy (the complaints) on anything like an adequate scale . • • Just as it is essential for the international position of Switzerland that her policy should be entirely neutral, so an analogous policy is necessary for ,Czecho-Slovakia - not only for her own future existence but for the peace of Europe." However, Czecho-Slovakia refused to admit its multinational status and did not strive for a position of neutrality. In spite of its vulnerability, because of the large percentage of citizens of non-Czech nationality, it allowed itself to be used as a political pawn, and since the treaty in 1935 with the Soviet Union, increasingly as a pawn in the hands of the Kremlin, thereby causing its own gradual disintegration. The Prague government treated the Slovaks in much the same way as the Sudeten Germans. About half of CzechoSlovakia's total population was tired of being bossed by the 7.4 million Czechs. No wonder that the foundation of the republic began to crumble, when the Anglo-French demarche of September 21, 1938, demanded the cession to Germany of the Sudeten region. It was soon followed by demands of Poland and Hungary for the cession of areas inhabited by their conationals, 131,000 Poles and 692,000 Magyars, and finally by the declaration of independence of the 3 million Slovaks who sought recognition as a nation. Sauce of the Goose Not To Be Sauce for the Gander From the beginning the Czechs had been showing a lack of realism, a lack of willingness to plan, in good time, for constitutional reforms. If in the years after 1918 a wise solution had earnestly been sought, events might well have taken a different course. The word "Munich" has since been linked in our mind with a short-sighted, dangerous policy vis-a-vis an aggressive dictator. Surely the right to selfdetermination should not be exercised by employing violence which would only bring about new injustice. Nevertheless, the right to self-determination is today recognized as a canon of international law. A brief glance at the map of Asia and �SLOVAKIA 15 Africa will suffice to convince everybody of its potency and potentiality, of its full meaning in the realities of present-day world affairs. As to Munich, it should be remembered that neither the Czechs nor the Sudeten Germans were partners to that agreement. It was made by the four European big powers. When Hitler, in 1939, under a flimsy pretext occupied the central area of Bohemia and Moravia-'Silesia he openly violated the right to a.n independent national life of the Czech people just as the Czechs, two decades before, had violated that same right of the Sudeten Germans. To charge the Sudeten Germans with treason against the Czecho-Slovak Republic is beside the point, when the charge is made by the Czechs who themselves set the example. In opposing Austria-Hungary, Masaryk, Benes, and their adherents had solicited during World War I the support of foreign governments and had organized thousands of Czech deserters from the Austrian Army to join Czech legions on the side of the Allies. It was hard to make Sudeten Germans later believe that as to their own case "sauce of the goose was not to be sauce for the gander." The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans cannot be based on treason allegedly committed by them against the Czecho-Slovak Republic nor upon the charge of a£sociation with Hitler's policy of suppressing the Czechs. Expulsion of the Sudeten Germans Dr. Benes unfortunately seems to have blamed the Sudeten Germans for his own shortcomings and considered them instrumental in his downfall in 1938. His mind wa.3 beclouded by Germanophobia. He did not seek a just and fair solution in his dealings with those Sudeten Germans politicians who were, like he himself, exiled by the Nazi regime and living in London during World War II: I refer to Wenzel Jaksch and Richard Reitzner, both of whom now are members of the German Bundestag. According to his memoirs - Pameti - published in Prague in 1947, this is what Benes at a reception in London on January 7, 1942, told Wenzel Jaksch in an effort to have �16 SLOVAKIA him agree to deportation from Czecho-Slovakia of ,all Sudeten Germans, excepting a limited number of anti-Fascists: During the social revolution which will certainly occur we shall have to rid our country of all the German bour-geoisie, the pan.German intelligentsia and those workers whom hate turned Fascist. This would be the final solution and, so far as we are concerned, the only possible solution which we would be able to implement, namely combining our social revolution with the national revolution. I added to Jaksch and his friends: We must have the courage to speak about this openly; and especially you Social Democrats should have the cour-age to do so. This plan even contains an element of Marx. ism and Marxist dialectics in the revolutionary process which must inevitably accompany the changes in the social structure of the nation as an outcome of this great and worldwide catastrophe. After the firs,t world war . . . I foretold that the German nationalist bourgeoisie in our country would some time in the future attempt a counter-revolution and that there would be no peace between us until this bourgeoisie was subjected to a similar revolution to that which the Czechs had gone through in past centuries. Now, after the second world war, this revolution is inevitable; and the entire nationalities problem in our country will be radically solved at the same time. It is only fair to say that some Czech opposition was voiced aainst these .plans, notably from Army General Lev Prchala. Benes' Unscrupulous Play It is rather unfortunate that Benes apparently had no scruples as to how he would gain his end. For instance, in a conference on May 12, 1943, with President Roosevelt he asserted that the Russians were willing to agree to the transfer or the Sudeten Germans. Then, 17 days later, on May 29, Dr. Hubert Ripka eX!plained to Mr. Bogomolov, the Soviet ambassador in London, that the Americans had already agreed to the transfer, and that under these circumstances the Czecho-Slovak government in exile expected the Soviets to consent. On June 6, Ripka telephoned Benes, who was at the time in the United States, that Soviet Russia had just agreed to the transfer - the same agreement which Benes had used as a lever in his conference with President Roosevelt on May 12, 194·3. The Soviets were the first allies to grant to the Czech government in exile de jure recognition. Against the advice of western statesmen Benes went to Moscow and in 1943 signed a new treaty with the Soviet government. Eager to �SLOVAKIA 17 show his ability at playing an important role in the arena of world politics he may have thought of himself as a man who would build the great bridge between the West and the East. As seen in retrospect, however, he seems to have been prior to the Teheran Conference more than perh,a ps any other person active in strengthening Roosevelt's ill-conceived trust in Stal~n. In this way, I regret to say, he certainly proved to be a valuable tool of the Kremlin. Toward the end of World War II, Benes returned to Prague by way of Moscow, accompanying the Red Army, as it adv,anced from the east into Czecho-Slovakia, and himself was accompanied by a Czech government group led by a Communist, Zdenek Fierlinger, who is today the president of the Czecho-Slovak parliament. At Kosice, in eastern Slovakia, Benes and his colleagues proclaimed on April 5, 1945, the so-called Kosice program according to which the country for the time being was to be ruled by presidential decrees. The program was signed by: Zdenek Fierlinger, Josef David, Klement Gottwald, Viliam Siroky - today the Prime Minister, Dr. Jan Sramek, Jan Masaryk - son of the first president of Czecho.,Slovakia - Ludvik :Svoboda, Dr. Hubert Ripka, Vaclav Nosek, Dr. V,a vro Srobar, Dr. Zdenek Nejedly, Dr. Jaroslav Stransky, Vaclav Kopecky, Bohumil Lausman, Julius Duris, Dr. Jan Pietor, Antonin Hasal, Frantisek Hala, Dr. Jan Soltesz, Dr. Adolf Prochazka, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Vladimir Clementis, Dr. Mikulas Ferjencik, and Jan Lichner. Outlawing Political Opponents Czecho-:Slovakia was now restored within the pre-Munich boundaries, except for Carpathian Ruthenia which the Soviets had seized and incorporated into the Soviet Ukraine, and which the new Czecho-Slovak government then ceded to the Soviet Union. The Slovaks were once more subjected to Czech domination. The new government announced the formation of a so-called National Front, supposedly a coalition of the Communist Party and three parties willing to collaborate with them, that is, Social Democrats, National Socialists, and People's Party. All Czech political parties of the center and the right �18 SLOVAKIA side were declared illegal, among them the National Democrats, the Artisans, and the Republican Agrarians, the the latter being the biggest political party in pre-war CzechoSlovakia. Their leaders and functionaries were jailed. All Slovak parties were likewise outlawed and, instead, new leftist parties, such as the so-called Slovak Democratic Party and other puppet groups, were artificially created. In this way, political parties were abolished which, before World War II, had long represented the large majority of the nonCommunist Czech and Slovak peoples. In addition to these millions of Czechs and Slovaks, all Sudeten Germans and Magyars were disfranchised. Only by applying this method of outlawing political opponents - exactly copying Hitler's procedure in Berlin in 1933 - and of exploiting the prejudice of their willing collaborators, did the Communists succeed in 1946 in showing up as the largest political party. Now free elections, freedom of speech and press were abolished. Kangaroo courts, called people's courts, were established in order to liquidate the opponents of Communism. So-called National Committees, fashioned after the Russian local "Soviets", were set up to take over the work of administrative offices. The economy was nationalized. While Benes himself assumed the office of president, Communists were appointed to key positions at all levels and, from the beginning, were in control of police, army, and the state propaganda machine. The non-Communist ministers collaborated at every turn and supported the Communist line. Since some of these people later escaped to the West it may be of interest to mention, in addition to those who signed the Kosice program, some of the .p rominent politicians of the era of the so-called National Front: Dr. Peter Zenkl - Vice Premier; Dr. Jozef Lettrich - leader of the Red puppet Slovak Democratic Party who, after the 1946 elections when the Slovaks had failed to vote for the Communists, signed the agreement abolishing Slovakia's autonomy; Dr. Jan Papanek, Dr. Juraj Slavik, and Frantisek Nemec - who represented as ambassador abroad the Red regime of Prague; Ferdinand Peroutka. a. Socialist journalist; and Milos Vanek - one of the original bosses of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party. �SLOVAKIA 19 The Reign of Terror - Rule of Decrees A reign of terror began with the arrival of the Soviet Red Army and the regime which was to become the government of the so-called National Front. One of the first administrativ e measures provided for the hasty constructio n of concentrati on camps into which tens of thousands of Sudeten Germans were driven. The late R. R. Stokes, a former British minister, has given a vivid description of conditions in those camps which he himself had visited. Benes' inciting words; "Annihilate the Germans where you find them," broadcast from Kosice, led to a wave of cruel murder. The bloody Sunday at Aussig in July 1945, the massacres in Saaz, Brilx and Landskron, the death march of BrUnn are only some of those outrages for which the Czecho.1Slovak governmen t of that time will be held fully responsible . The Sudeten Germans were outlawed. Before being expropriated their homes were open for pillage either under the pretext of a raid for hidden weapons or merely by groups of police guards or plain Czech plunderers. In some towns orders were issued that homes of Germans must not be locked. Strict curfew was imposed on them. They were forced to wear white badges so as to make them conspicuou s. They were forbidden to use public conveyance s and the sidewalks, visit restaurants , write letters, change places of residence. They were restricted for buying groceries and shopping in stores to certain hours of the day, and special ration cards discriminat ing against them were issued. Schools and kindergartens were closed to their children. Adult Germans were called up and transported to the interior of Bohemia to provide forced labor on farms, in mines, and industry, at first without pay, later at low wages that were seldom paid. Still worse was the treatment in prisons,· where over-crowd ed cells, brutalities and disease, in addition to insufficien t rations, increased the death toll. Expulsions Were Planned We know now that the Communist s, by means of the expulsions, pursued the following objectives: First: By eliminating the German element from the �20 SLOVAKIA area, they wished to hasten the Communization of those countries. Second : In the depopulated regions, they wanted to introduce collective farms ,and state industrial enterprises fashioned after Russian Soviet examples before proceeding . with those schemes on a general scale. Third : The confiscated property was also to be used for bribery purposes, since destroying the sense of honesty turns into more pliable tools of immoral Communism. Fourth: By inciting to violence and acts of cruelty against the Germans, the Communists and their collabor ators hoped to build up hatred between the Germans and these Slavic peoples so as to make the latter wholly dependent on the alliance with Communist Russia. Fifth : The German expellees were to create social disorder and to be a hotbed of Communism in overcrowded West Germany. As to the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, it may safely be said that this was not a spontaneous reaction of the Czech people agains the German occupation of their country, but an act planned by Czech politicians in exile and carried out by the government of the so-called National Front with all possible haste before the large majority of the Czech people would have time to think twice about it. Presidential decrees were supposed to give the proceedings a cloak of legality. Quotations from some of these decrees will point toward the responsibility of the government of the so-called National Front. First: Constitutional Decree of the President of the Republic of August 2, 1945: Article 1 1. Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality who acquired German or Magyar citizenship under the regulation of the foreign occupational forces shall have lost their Czecho-Slovak citizenship by so doing. 2. The other Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality shall lose their Czecho-1Slovak citizenship on the day when this decree will come into force. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Masaryk, Nosek, Svoboda. �SLOVAKIA 21 Second: Decree of the President of the Republic of October 25, 1945: Any immovable and movable property shall be confiscated without any compensation, to the benefit of the Czecho-Slovak Republic . . . which is . . . owned: 1. By German or Magyar legal persons; or 2. by natural persons of German or Magyar nationality. Signed by the signers of the Kosice program. Third: Decree of the President of the Republic of January 21, 1946: Article 1 and without compensation and effect 1. With immediate for the purpose of the land reform such land property shall be confiscated as is owned by - (a) all persons of German or Magyar nationality without regard to their citizenship. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Nosek, Dr. Srobar, Dr. Stransky, Duris, Majer. Fourth: Law of May 8, 1946, passed by the povisional National Assembly: Article 1 Any act committed between September 30, 1938, and October 28, 1945, the object of which was to aid the struggle for liberty of the Czechs and Slovaks, or which represented due reprisals for actions of the occupation forces and their accomplices, is not illegal, even when such actions may otherwise be punishable by law. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Drtina, Svoboda. The last mentioned parliamentary act, which I have added to the decrees, provided for a general amnesty for all crimes committed against Germans, Magyars, and anti-Communist Czechs and Slovaks and thus gave ex port facto a semblance of legality to the law of the jungle. Expulsions a Violation of International Law The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the homes which they had inhabited for a thousand years violated the principle of the right to self-determination of peoples. We should remember that this right was solemnly proclaimed by our own President Woodrow Wilson, who in his Mount Vernon address of July 4, 1918, declared: �22 SLOVAKIA The settlement of every question, whether- of territory, of sover-eigty, of economic arrangement or political relationship, must be upon the basis of the free acceptance of that settlement by the peoples immediately concerned. It is well known that the U. S. Government has taken a prominent part in establishing this principle and in the development toward incorporating it into the law of nations. The expulsion of the Germans stands in direct contradiction to this great principle. The U. S. Government was also strenuously opposed to arbitrary displacement of persons during both World Wars. We protested against the transfer during World War I of Belgian workers and condemned, as a grave violation of international law, the displacement during World War II of Poles and other peoples within the then Nazi orbit. We asserted the right to resettle in their home countries, of all displaced persons. As to our own fellow citizens of Japanese descent, temporarily displaced after Pearl Harbor from their homes near the Pacific Ocean, we reaffirmed by an act of Congress the right to their homes. Let me also point out that article 9 of the United Nations Human Rights Declaration of December 10, 1948, as regards arbitrary e:xipulsion as contrary to international law and states that "no one shall be subject to arbitrary exile." Also relevant, it would seem to me, is the Convention on Genocide of December 11, 1946, which declares to be a crime, under international law, (a) killing members of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. About 300,000 Sudeten Germans, that is, a considerable part of their total number, did not survive the removal from their ancient homeland, a fact which proves that they were victims of this crime. Let me finally quote from the draft code, prepared in accordance with the resolution of November 21, 1947, of the United Nations General Assembly, to define "offenses against the peace and security of mankind" that would be �SLOVAKIA 23 "crimes under internation•al law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Article 2, paragraph 11, lists: Inhuman acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, or persecutions, committed against any civilian population on social, political, racial, religious, or cultural grounds by the authorities of a state or by private individuals acting at the instigation or with the toleration of such authorities. This adequately covers the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland as well as those from the German provinces east of the O<ler-Neisse line, and from other parts of Eastern Europe, and proves it to be - let me here repeat the words of article 1 of the penal draft code - among the "crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Voices Raised Against the Expulsions Many courageous persons have raised their voice against the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans. Even at the heyday of the so-called National Front regime, Rozsievac, a (Czech) Catholic paper in Olmtitz, dared to protest on October 31, 1945, against cruelties in internment camps and the rape of Sudeten German women; and in another newspaper, Obzory, Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, a journalist, objected to the cruelties of the expulsion. Of course, such voices were quickly suppressed and Dr. Kozeluhova, for instance, was forbidden to write another line - curiously by men who themselves are now in exile and professing to be anti-Communist. While the Sudeten Germans have stood up for the right to return to their ancient homeland, they have expressly renounced any thought of vengeance on the Czech people. The expellees publicly declared that they will support every endeavor toward a united Europe in which the peoples may live in freedom from fear and coercion. They called upon all nations and men of good will to join them in this great undertaking. Since then, the German expellees have persistently followed the policy to which their representatives had set hal¼d and seal at Stuttgart in 1950. Rejecting Communist and neutralist temptations as well ·a s appeals to �24 SLOVAKIA narrow nationalism, they are, today, perhaps the most dedicated adherents of a united Europe. But the Sudeten Germans did not rest their case with a solemn declaration of faith. They took practical steps toward an agreement, on the basis of mutual respect and a genuine search for a real solution, with their Czech and Slovak neighbors, now also in exile. In 1950, an agreement in London with the Czech National Committee, headed by Army General Lev Prchala. The agreement recognizes the right to self-determination of both nations, Czechs and Sudeten Germans. A realistic policy for Central as well as East Central Europe, that is, concerning Czecho-Slovakia and the Sudeten Germans, as well as concerning Poland, the Germans of East Prussia, and the other German provinces east of the OderN eisse Rivers can only be a policy that is both just and moral. It must be firmly based upon historical truth and the rule of international law. To assume that any government can ever develop a successful policy on the shaky structure of a wrong, and on perpetuating that wrong, is an illusion. It is my considered opinion that the German expellees should be encouraged to stand firm upon their right. It is in the best tradition of American foreign policy to denounce the wrong and to uphold the right. Moreover, wavering would be tantamount to further tightening the stranglehold on the captive peoples by the Kremlin and would thus actually support Soviet imperialism. Just as the Soviets dangled before the dizzy eyes of the Poles enticing bait of the German provinces east of the OderN eisse line, so the Czechs were being dazzled by Kremlin stooges with the rich spoils in the Sudetenland. To the same degree that the Poles accepted the German provinces, and the Czechs accepted the Sudeten properties out of the bloody hands of Stalin, they both permitted themselves to be chained to Moscow. This h•as been the fateful and deadly but logical result. Both the Czechs and Poles who think of keeping these spoils must continue to lean on Soviet Russian backing and thus render themselves subservient to the Kremlin. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 9 HON. B. CARROLL REECE THE SUDETEN GERMANS Restoration of Internation al Morality Perhaps few people in the world today are more firmly united in opposing Communism than are the 16 million Germans expelled from the German provinces east of the Odes-Neise line, the Sudetenlan d, and other parts of Europe. These sturdy people, outnumber ing the total population of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark combined, experienced in 1945 the full impact of the Red invasion of their ancient homelands. Their expulsion to Western Germany resulted in the tragic death of more than 3 million of their number. Among these 16 million German expellees were 3.3 million Sudeten Germans, the latter group equal in size to the total population of either Eire or Norway. They were expelled in 1945 and 1946 from their ancient homeland by the Communist -led Czecho-'Slovak Governmen t of the socalled National Front. About 300,000 of them died during the process of expulsion. When speaking of the Sudetenlan d, I refer to the territory comprising the border regions of Bohemia and Moravia.Silesia, that is, the border regions of the western part of present-day Czecho-Slovakia. In 1921, 3.2 million Sudeten Germans and 6.8 million Czechs were living in Bohemia and Moravia-Si lesia while, in 1935, the figures showed 3.3 million Sudeten Germans and 7.4 million Czechs. As a political entity, a state, Czecho-Slo vakia does not antedate the year of 1918 when Bohemia and MoraviaSilesia, with its Czechs and German population, were combined with Slovakia, the latter comprising 2.3 million Slovaks and 692,000 Magyars, and with Carpathian Ruthenia inhabited by 549,000 Ruthenians . Neverthele ss, Czechs and Germans have been living side by side in those first-named regions for nearly a thousand years. The Foundation of Czecho-Slovakia Led by T. G. Masaryk and Edvard Benes, Czech politicians saw in World War I the opportunity for their people to 10 SLOVAKIA secede from the Hapsburg empire and set up an independent republic. Promising the Slovaks full autonomy, Masaryk persuaded them to join the Czechs in forming one state when he concluded with the Slovak League of America the Pittsburgh Agreement of May 30, 1918. The new Czecho-Slovak Republic then came into being on October 28, 1918. At that hour the Sudeten Cermans, on their part, decided to establish the provinces of German-Bohe mia and Sudetenland, and to associate these with the new Republic of Austria. Head of the provincial government at Prague was at the time Dr. Rudolf Lodgman von Auen. He is today the president of the National Union of Sudeten German Expellees. Dr. von Lodgman had long urged a solution of the probAustria-Hung ary on lines of federalism. He advocated of lem freedom - his ancestors had fled England at the time of Elizabeth I in search of freedom - and he stood for the right to self-determina tion. But in spite of the fact that Austria-Hung ary was ostensibly dismembered so as to realize that right, firmly proclaimed by our President Woodrow Wilson, it was squarely refused to the 3.2 million Sudeten Germans who were forced against their will to be part of the new Czecho-Slova k Republic. To subdue the demands of the people, the Czechs even dispatched troops to the Sudetenland and when, in March 1919, there were public demonstration s, the Czech military fired into the crowds causing many casualties. Leading the resistance movement in those days was Josef Seliger, chairman of the Sudeten German Social Democratic Party. Headed by Dr. Benes, the Czech delegation to the Paris Peace Conference did not shrink away from using such tricks as presenting maps showing a Sudeten German area falsely reduced. The deceit was later contradicted even by the official Czecho-Slova k census figure. In an oral statement to the Big Four, Benes admitted that the Sudeten Germans, if given a free choice, would probably secede from the new republic. To compensate for denying them the right to selfdetermination Benes, in ·a written memorandum to the peace conference, went on record in favor of a Swiss type of constitution for Czecho-Slovakia. It remained an empty promise. SLOVAKIA 11 Dr. von Lodgman and the Slovak spokesman, Msgr. Andrew Hlinka, as well as leaders of the Magyars in CzechoSlovakia also managed to go to Paris to attend the peace conference. But they were kept in their hotels behind barbed wire ,and were not given a hearing. Prophetic Warning of a True American It was a man representing the United States who objected to the flagrant violation of the right to self-determination in the specific instance of the Sudeten Germans: Prof. Archibald Cary Coolidge, the well-known Harvard historian. In December 1918, he was appointed by the Secretary of State to be political observer in Austria-Hungary, assigned to the American Commission to Negotiate Peace and instructed to head a field mission to the former dual monarchy. (Professor Coolidge incidentally is a founder member of the New York Council in Foreign Relations and served as first editor of its quarterly, Foreign Affairs.) Dr. A. C. Coolidge summed up his observations in a detailed memorandum of March 10, 1919, which he submitted to the Peace Commission. He dealt with the problem of nationalities and new boundaries in all parts of the former Hapsburg monarchy and set out stating: "To grant to the Czecho-Slovaks all the territory they demand would be not only an injustice to millions of people unwilling to come under Czech rule, but it would also be dangerous and perhaps fatal to the future of the new state •.. The Bloodshed on March 3 when Czech soldiers in several towns fired on Germans crowds . . • was shed in a manner that is not easily f.orgiven .•• For the Bohemia of the future to contain withi,n its limits great numbers of deeply discon'tended inhabitants .•• will be a perilous experiment and one which can hardly promise success in the long run." Three weeks later, on April 1, 1919, the Sudeten German question was taken up at the Peace Conference meeting discussing the report of the Czecho-Slovak Commission on the frontiers between Czecho-Slovakia and Germany. It was at this meeting when our Secretary of State, Mr. Lansing, objected to including into the Czecho-Slovak State large Sudeten Germans areas and declared that The American delegates objected to the whole method of drawing frontier lines on strategic principles. And that - 12 SLOVAKIA The fixing of frontier lines with a view to their military strength was directly contrary to the whole spirit . . . of the policy of the United States as set forth in the declaration of President Wilson. Prospective Ally of France As Against Germany M. Laroche of the French delegation, upon being asked at this meeting whether the commission would approve of a plebiscite in the area, replied that a plebiscite could be proposed without extending it to the remainder of the German Bohemians, which would reduce the Czecho-Slovak state to very slender proportions. Mr. Lansing thereupon pl·ainly said that this was not a good reason to justify an injustice. However, the views of the French Foreign Minister prevailed, namely, to strengthen Czecho-Slovakia, which M. Pichon trusted "would remain an ally orf France" as against Germ-any. The United States, however, then began to withdraw from the scene of European political intrigues. The constitution of the CzechoJSlovak Republic was devised by a mostly Czech commission and not by a duly elected convention. Czech became the official language. The Sudeten Germans were not given a fair chance to participate. The facts of the undemocratic beginnings of Czecho-Slovakia should not be overlooked. The Czech land reform law of 1919 allotted 2,025,400 acres of German property in the Sudetenland to proteges of the Czech political parties. Only 7 percent of the land taken from Sudeten German owners was given to Sudeten German farmers, while 93 percent was handed over to new Czech settlers. In addition, land property expropriated in the central parts of Bohemia and Moravia-Silesia, that is, outside of the Sudetenland, amounting to -another 3,818,064 acres and owned by Germans, was also handed over to the Czechs. In the Sudetenland proper, 31 percent of the entire land area was confiscated in 1919. The Czech colonists were settled and Czech schools were built with the aim to break up the German language area. Discrimination Against the Sudeten Germans Although the Sudeten Germans represented about 30 percent of the total population of Bohemia and Moravia- SLOVAKIA 13 Silesia, they made up only 10 percent of the employees of the general civil service, 13.1 percent of the postal service, 12.8 percent of the judicial administration service, 12.4 percent of the railway employees, and only 5.4 percent of the army officer corps. The police force was almost exclusively Czech. Administrative reforms in 1927 must also be regarded as discriminatory, though a smoothly working .publicity machine was able to show the outside world the picture of what appeared to be a democracy. In the 1920 parliamentary elections the Sudeten German Parties won 74 out of the 300 available seats. Some of these parties, the so-called Activists, entered the government coalition and, since 1926, most political parties of the Sudeten Germans participated in the government coalition, thus showing their honest desire to cooperate. But they were unable to gain any ground toward reforms on federative lines. Even a late-in-the-day palliative assurance of more posts to be assigned to Sudeten German civil servants remained an empty promise. The worldwide economic crisis at the end of the 1920's imposed a he::vy burden on the Sudeten Germans. Czech bankers and -administrators gave preference to Czech enterprises. Out of 800,000 unemployed 500,000 were Sudeten Germans. In 1935, the Sudeten German Party, a union of a number of political groups, polled 1,249,530 votes and thus emerged as the largest political party in all of Czecho-Slovakia, but ·was forced to remain in opposition. Early in 1937, several younger members of those German parties that participated in the government coalition made once more a concerted effort to convince the Czechs of the urgency of thoroughgoing reforms. Hans Schlitz, of the Christian Social Party, sternly demanded equal rights, while Wenzel Jaksch, of the Social Democratic Party, bluntly asked whether or not there was still a place in the Czecho-Slovak Republic for genuine Sudeten German partnership. Incidentally, both men are today distinguished members of th German Bundestag. In the growing crisis of 1938, Lord Runciman was chosen to head a mission of mediation and, after a close study on the ground, he reported: 14 SLOVAKIA " It is hard to be ruled by an alien race . . . In the last elections in 1935 the Sudeten German Party polled more votes than any other sin_gle party . . . But they can always be outvoted; and consequently some of them feel that constitutional action is useless for them ••• Even as late as the time of my mission, I could find no readiness on the part of the Czecho-Slovak Government to remedy (the complaints) on anything like an adequate scale . • • Just as it is essential for the international position of Switzerland that her policy should be entirely neutral, so an analogous policy is necessary for ,Czecho-Slovakia - not only for her own future existence but for the peace of Europe." However, Czecho-Slovakia refused to admit its multinational status and did not strive for a position of neutrality. In spite of its vulnerability, because of the large percentage of citizens of non-Czech nationality, it allowed itself to be used as a political pawn, and since the treaty in 1935 with the Soviet Union, increasingly as a pawn in the hands of the Kremlin, thereby causing its own gradual disintegration. The Prague government treated the Slovaks in much the same way as the Sudeten Germans. About half of CzechoSlovakia's total population was tired of being bossed by the 7.4 million Czechs. No wonder that the foundation of the republic began to crumble, when the Anglo-French demarche of September 21, 1938, demanded the cession to Germany of the Sudeten region. It was soon followed by demands of Poland and Hungary for the cession of areas inhabited by their conationals, 131,000 Poles and 692,000 Magyars, and finally by the declaration of independence of the 3 million Slovaks who sought recognition as a nation. Sauce of the Goose Not To Be Sauce for the Gander From the beginning the Czechs had been showing a lack of realism, a lack of willingness to plan, in good time, for constitutional reforms. If in the years after 1918 a wise solution had earnestly been sought, events might well have taken a different course. The word "Munich" has since been linked in our mind with a short-sighted, dangerous policy vis-a-vis an aggressive dictator. Surely the right to selfdetermination should not be exercised by employing violence which would only bring about new injustice. Nevertheless, the right to self-determination is today recognized as a canon of international law. A brief glance at the map of Asia and SLOVAKIA 15 Africa will suffice to convince everybody of its potency and potentiality, of its full meaning in the realities of present-day world affairs. As to Munich, it should be remembered that neither the Czechs nor the Sudeten Germans were partners to that agreement. It was made by the four European big powers. When Hitler, in 1939, under a flimsy pretext occupied the central area of Bohemia and Moravia-'Silesia he openly violated the right to a.n independent national life of the Czech people just as the Czechs, two decades before, had violated that same right of the Sudeten Germans. To charge the Sudeten Germans with treason against the Czecho-Slovak Republic is beside the point, when the charge is made by the Czechs who themselves set the example. In opposing Austria-Hungary, Masaryk, Benes, and their adherents had solicited during World War I the support of foreign governments and had organized thousands of Czech deserters from the Austrian Army to join Czech legions on the side of the Allies. It was hard to make Sudeten Germans later believe that as to their own case "sauce of the goose was not to be sauce for the gander." The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans cannot be based on treason allegedly committed by them against the Czecho-Slovak Republic nor upon the charge of a£sociation with Hitler's policy of suppressing the Czechs. Expulsion of the Sudeten Germans Dr. Benes unfortunately seems to have blamed the Sudeten Germans for his own shortcomings and considered them instrumental in his downfall in 1938. His mind wa.3 beclouded by Germanophobia. He did not seek a just and fair solution in his dealings with those Sudeten Germans politicians who were, like he himself, exiled by the Nazi regime and living in London during World War II: I refer to Wenzel Jaksch and Richard Reitzner, both of whom now are members of the German Bundestag. According to his memoirs - Pameti - published in Prague in 1947, this is what Benes at a reception in London on January 7, 1942, told Wenzel Jaksch in an effort to have 16 SLOVAKIA him agree to deportation from Czecho-Slovakia of ,all Sudeten Germans, excepting a limited number of anti-Fascists: During the social revolution which will certainly occur we shall have to rid our country of all the German bour-geoisie, the pan.German intelligentsia and those workers whom hate turned Fascist. This would be the final solution and, so far as we are concerned, the only possible solution which we would be able to implement, namely combining our social revolution with the national revolution. I added to Jaksch and his friends: We must have the courage to speak about this openly; and especially you Social Democrats should have the cour-age to do so. This plan even contains an element of Marx. ism and Marxist dialectics in the revolutionary process which must inevitably accompany the changes in the social structure of the nation as an outcome of this great and worldwide catastrophe. After the firs,t world war . . . I foretold that the German nationalist bourgeoisie in our country would some time in the future attempt a counter-revolution and that there would be no peace between us until this bourgeoisie was subjected to a similar revolution to that which the Czechs had gone through in past centuries. Now, after the second world war, this revolution is inevitable; and the entire nationalities problem in our country will be radically solved at the same time. It is only fair to say that some Czech opposition was voiced aainst these .plans, notably from Army General Lev Prchala. Benes' Unscrupulous Play It is rather unfortunate that Benes apparently had no scruples as to how he would gain his end. For instance, in a conference on May 12, 1943, with President Roosevelt he asserted that the Russians were willing to agree to the transfer or the Sudeten Germans. Then, 17 days later, on May 29, Dr. Hubert Ripka eX!plained to Mr. Bogomolov, the Soviet ambassador in London, that the Americans had already agreed to the transfer, and that under these circumstances the Czecho-Slovak government in exile expected the Soviets to consent. On June 6, Ripka telephoned Benes, who was at the time in the United States, that Soviet Russia had just agreed to the transfer - the same agreement which Benes had used as a lever in his conference with President Roosevelt on May 12, 194·3. The Soviets were the first allies to grant to the Czech government in exile de jure recognition. Against the advice of western statesmen Benes went to Moscow and in 1943 signed a new treaty with the Soviet government. Eager to SLOVAKIA 17 show his ability at playing an important role in the arena of world politics he may have thought of himself as a man who would build the great bridge between the West and the East. As seen in retrospect, however, he seems to have been prior to the Teheran Conference more than perh,a ps any other person active in strengthening Roosevelt's ill-conceived trust in Stal~n. In this way, I regret to say, he certainly proved to be a valuable tool of the Kremlin. Toward the end of World War II, Benes returned to Prague by way of Moscow, accompanying the Red Army, as it adv,anced from the east into Czecho-Slovakia, and himself was accompanied by a Czech government group led by a Communist, Zdenek Fierlinger, who is today the president of the Czecho-Slovak parliament. At Kosice, in eastern Slovakia, Benes and his colleagues proclaimed on April 5, 1945, the so-called Kosice program according to which the country for the time being was to be ruled by presidential decrees. The program was signed by: Zdenek Fierlinger, Josef David, Klement Gottwald, Viliam Siroky - today the Prime Minister, Dr. Jan Sramek, Jan Masaryk - son of the first president of Czecho.,Slovakia - Ludvik :Svoboda, Dr. Hubert Ripka, Vaclav Nosek, Dr. V,a vro Srobar, Dr. Zdenek Nejedly, Dr. Jaroslav Stransky, Vaclav Kopecky, Bohumil Lausman, Julius Duris, Dr. Jan Pietor, Antonin Hasal, Frantisek Hala, Dr. Jan Soltesz, Dr. Adolf Prochazka, Vaclav Majer, Dr. Vladimir Clementis, Dr. Mikulas Ferjencik, and Jan Lichner. Outlawing Political Opponents Czecho-:Slovakia was now restored within the pre-Munich boundaries, except for Carpathian Ruthenia which the Soviets had seized and incorporated into the Soviet Ukraine, and which the new Czecho-Slovak government then ceded to the Soviet Union. The Slovaks were once more subjected to Czech domination. The new government announced the formation of a so-called National Front, supposedly a coalition of the Communist Party and three parties willing to collaborate with them, that is, Social Democrats, National Socialists, and People's Party. All Czech political parties of the center and the right 18 SLOVAKIA side were declared illegal, among them the National Democrats, the Artisans, and the Republican Agrarians, the the latter being the biggest political party in pre-war CzechoSlovakia. Their leaders and functionaries were jailed. All Slovak parties were likewise outlawed and, instead, new leftist parties, such as the so-called Slovak Democratic Party and other puppet groups, were artificially created. In this way, political parties were abolished which, before World War II, had long represented the large majority of the nonCommunist Czech and Slovak peoples. In addition to these millions of Czechs and Slovaks, all Sudeten Germans and Magyars were disfranchised. Only by applying this method of outlawing political opponents - exactly copying Hitler's procedure in Berlin in 1933 - and of exploiting the prejudice of their willing collaborators, did the Communists succeed in 1946 in showing up as the largest political party. Now free elections, freedom of speech and press were abolished. Kangaroo courts, called people's courts, were established in order to liquidate the opponents of Communism. So-called National Committees, fashioned after the Russian local "Soviets", were set up to take over the work of administrative offices. The economy was nationalized. While Benes himself assumed the office of president, Communists were appointed to key positions at all levels and, from the beginning, were in control of police, army, and the state propaganda machine. The non-Communist ministers collaborated at every turn and supported the Communist line. Since some of these people later escaped to the West it may be of interest to mention, in addition to those who signed the Kosice program, some of the .p rominent politicians of the era of the so-called National Front: Dr. Peter Zenkl - Vice Premier; Dr. Jozef Lettrich - leader of the Red puppet Slovak Democratic Party who, after the 1946 elections when the Slovaks had failed to vote for the Communists, signed the agreement abolishing Slovakia's autonomy; Dr. Jan Papanek, Dr. Juraj Slavik, and Frantisek Nemec - who represented as ambassador abroad the Red regime of Prague; Ferdinand Peroutka. a. Socialist journalist; and Milos Vanek - one of the original bosses of the Czecho-Slovak Communist Party. SLOVAKIA 19 The Reign of Terror - Rule of Decrees A reign of terror began with the arrival of the Soviet Red Army and the regime which was to become the government of the so-called National Front. One of the first administrativ e measures provided for the hasty constructio n of concentrati on camps into which tens of thousands of Sudeten Germans were driven. The late R. R. Stokes, a former British minister, has given a vivid description of conditions in those camps which he himself had visited. Benes' inciting words; "Annihilate the Germans where you find them," broadcast from Kosice, led to a wave of cruel murder. The bloody Sunday at Aussig in July 1945, the massacres in Saaz, Brilx and Landskron, the death march of BrUnn are only some of those outrages for which the Czecho.1Slovak governmen t of that time will be held fully responsible . The Sudeten Germans were outlawed. Before being expropriated their homes were open for pillage either under the pretext of a raid for hidden weapons or merely by groups of police guards or plain Czech plunderers. In some towns orders were issued that homes of Germans must not be locked. Strict curfew was imposed on them. They were forced to wear white badges so as to make them conspicuou s. They were forbidden to use public conveyance s and the sidewalks, visit restaurants , write letters, change places of residence. They were restricted for buying groceries and shopping in stores to certain hours of the day, and special ration cards discriminat ing against them were issued. Schools and kindergartens were closed to their children. Adult Germans were called up and transported to the interior of Bohemia to provide forced labor on farms, in mines, and industry, at first without pay, later at low wages that were seldom paid. Still worse was the treatment in prisons,· where over-crowd ed cells, brutalities and disease, in addition to insufficien t rations, increased the death toll. Expulsions Were Planned We know now that the Communist s, by means of the expulsions, pursued the following objectives: First: By eliminating the German element from the 20 SLOVAKIA area, they wished to hasten the Communization of those countries. Second : In the depopulated regions, they wanted to introduce collective farms ,and state industrial enterprises fashioned after Russian Soviet examples before proceeding . with those schemes on a general scale. Third : The confiscated property was also to be used for bribery purposes, since destroying the sense of honesty turns into more pliable tools of immoral Communism. Fourth: By inciting to violence and acts of cruelty against the Germans, the Communists and their collabor ators hoped to build up hatred between the Germans and these Slavic peoples so as to make the latter wholly dependent on the alliance with Communist Russia. Fifth : The German expellees were to create social disorder and to be a hotbed of Communism in overcrowded West Germany. As to the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans, it may safely be said that this was not a spontaneous reaction of the Czech people agains the German occupation of their country, but an act planned by Czech politicians in exile and carried out by the government of the so-called National Front with all possible haste before the large majority of the Czech people would have time to think twice about it. Presidential decrees were supposed to give the proceedings a cloak of legality. Quotations from some of these decrees will point toward the responsibility of the government of the so-called National Front. First: Constitutional Decree of the President of the Republic of August 2, 1945: Article 1 1. Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality who acquired German or Magyar citizenship under the regulation of the foreign occupational forces shall have lost their Czecho-Slovak citizenship by so doing. 2. The other Czecho-Slovak citizens of German or Magyar nationality shall lose their Czecho-1Slovak citizenship on the day when this decree will come into force. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Masaryk, Nosek, Svoboda. SLOVAKIA 21 Second: Decree of the President of the Republic of October 25, 1945: Any immovable and movable property shall be confiscated without any compensation, to the benefit of the Czecho-Slovak Republic . . . which is . . . owned: 1. By German or Magyar legal persons; or 2. by natural persons of German or Magyar nationality. Signed by the signers of the Kosice program. Third: Decree of the President of the Republic of January 21, 1946: Article 1 and without compensation and effect 1. With immediate for the purpose of the land reform such land property shall be confiscated as is owned by - (a) all persons of German or Magyar nationality without regard to their citizenship. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Nosek, Dr. Srobar, Dr. Stransky, Duris, Majer. Fourth: Law of May 8, 1946, passed by the povisional National Assembly: Article 1 Any act committed between September 30, 1938, and October 28, 1945, the object of which was to aid the struggle for liberty of the Czechs and Slovaks, or which represented due reprisals for actions of the occupation forces and their accomplices, is not illegal, even when such actions may otherwise be punishable by law. Signed by Benes, Fierlinger, Drtina, Svoboda. The last mentioned parliamentary act, which I have added to the decrees, provided for a general amnesty for all crimes committed against Germans, Magyars, and anti-Communist Czechs and Slovaks and thus gave ex port facto a semblance of legality to the law of the jungle. Expulsions a Violation of International Law The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from the homes which they had inhabited for a thousand years violated the principle of the right to self-determination of peoples. We should remember that this right was solemnly proclaimed by our own President Woodrow Wilson, who in his Mount Vernon address of July 4, 1918, declared: 22 SLOVAKIA The settlement of every question, whether- of territory, of sover-eigty, of economic arrangement or political relationship, must be upon the basis of the free acceptance of that settlement by the peoples immediately concerned. It is well known that the U. S. Government has taken a prominent part in establishing this principle and in the development toward incorporating it into the law of nations. The expulsion of the Germans stands in direct contradiction to this great principle. The U. S. Government was also strenuously opposed to arbitrary displacement of persons during both World Wars. We protested against the transfer during World War I of Belgian workers and condemned, as a grave violation of international law, the displacement during World War II of Poles and other peoples within the then Nazi orbit. We asserted the right to resettle in their home countries, of all displaced persons. As to our own fellow citizens of Japanese descent, temporarily displaced after Pearl Harbor from their homes near the Pacific Ocean, we reaffirmed by an act of Congress the right to their homes. Let me also point out that article 9 of the United Nations Human Rights Declaration of December 10, 1948, as regards arbitrary e:xipulsion as contrary to international law and states that "no one shall be subject to arbitrary exile." Also relevant, it would seem to me, is the Convention on Genocide of December 11, 1946, which declares to be a crime, under international law, (a) killing members of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. About 300,000 Sudeten Germans, that is, a considerable part of their total number, did not survive the removal from their ancient homeland, a fact which proves that they were victims of this crime. Let me finally quote from the draft code, prepared in accordance with the resolution of November 21, 1947, of the United Nations General Assembly, to define "offenses against the peace and security of mankind" that would be SLOVAKIA 23 "crimes under internation•al law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Article 2, paragraph 11, lists: Inhuman acts such as murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, or persecutions, committed against any civilian population on social, political, racial, religious, or cultural grounds by the authorities of a state or by private individuals acting at the instigation or with the toleration of such authorities. This adequately covers the expulsion of the Germans from Sudetenland as well as those from the German provinces east of the O<ler-Neisse line, and from other parts of Eastern Europe, and proves it to be - let me here repeat the words of article 1 of the penal draft code - among the "crimes under international law, for which the responsible individuals shall be punished." Voices Raised Against the Expulsions Many courageous persons have raised their voice against the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans. Even at the heyday of the so-called National Front regime, Rozsievac, a (Czech) Catholic paper in Olmtitz, dared to protest on October 31, 1945, against cruelties in internment camps and the rape of Sudeten German women; and in another newspaper, Obzory, Dr. Helena Kozeluhova, a journalist, objected to the cruelties of the expulsion. Of course, such voices were quickly suppressed and Dr. Kozeluhova, for instance, was forbidden to write another line - curiously by men who themselves are now in exile and professing to be anti-Communist. While the Sudeten Germans have stood up for the right to return to their ancient homeland, they have expressly renounced any thought of vengeance on the Czech people. The expellees publicly declared that they will support every endeavor toward a united Europe in which the peoples may live in freedom from fear and coercion. They called upon all nations and men of good will to join them in this great undertaking. Since then, the German expellees have persistently followed the policy to which their representatives had set hal¼d and seal at Stuttgart in 1950. Rejecting Communist and neutralist temptations as well ·a s appeals to 24 SLOVAKIA narrow nationalism, they are, today, perhaps the most dedicated adherents of a united Europe. But the Sudeten Germans did not rest their case with a solemn declaration of faith. They took practical steps toward an agreement, on the basis of mutual respect and a genuine search for a real solution, with their Czech and Slovak neighbors, now also in exile. In 1950, an agreement in London with the Czech National Committee, headed by Army General Lev Prchala. The agreement recognizes the right to self-determination of both nations, Czechs and Sudeten Germans. A realistic policy for Central as well as East Central Europe, that is, concerning Czecho-Slovakia and the Sudeten Germans, as well as concerning Poland, the Germans of East Prussia, and the other German provinces east of the OderN eisse Rivers can only be a policy that is both just and moral. It must be firmly based upon historical truth and the rule of international law. To assume that any government can ever develop a successful policy on the shaky structure of a wrong, and on perpetuating that wrong, is an illusion. It is my considered opinion that the German expellees should be encouraged to stand firm upon their right. It is in the best tradition of American foreign policy to denounce the wrong and to uphold the right. Moreover, wavering would be tantamount to further tightening the stranglehold on the captive peoples by the Kremlin and would thus actually support Soviet imperialism. Just as the Soviets dangled before the dizzy eyes of the Poles enticing bait of the German provinces east of the OderN eisse line, so the Czechs were being dazzled by Kremlin stooges with the rich spoils in the Sudetenland. To the same degree that the Poles accepted the German provinces, and the Czechs accepted the Sudeten properties out of the bloody hands of Stalin, they both permitted themselves to be chained to Moscow. This h•as been the fateful and deadly but logical result. Both the Czechs and Poles who think of keeping these spoils must continue to lean on Soviet Russian backing and thus render themselves subservient to the Kremlin.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Sudeten Germans Description An account of the resource Hon. B. Carroll Reece Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 9-24 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Reece, B. Carroll (Brazilla Carroll), 1889-1961 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/b7e40668037125cd08284d687b4a5b03.pdf 7d2507fd213c03c36b5e9a765f5bd5c5 PDF Text Text SLO VA KIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) WHY fflE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT Dr. John A. Bafa Whatever has been written aibout this subject has practically aliways been fhwored, distorted with excuses, malevolence, derisfon, anger, shame, embitter.moot, and aippeasemen.t, a<Ccording to politi'Cal interest and viewpoint and attempts to coiver up. Moot of the time this smelled of wrong doing, misfortune, a new White Mountain. Never, however, was their any trace of a;clmowledging how and wihy something hruppened and w:ho was to 'blame for its h8lplpening. Dr. John A. Bat'a is a member of the famous Czech shoemakers, who, like so many others who had dared to criticize the ruinous policy of Dr. Edward Benes, even though belatedly, were persecuted by Benes and his followers even in exile. This is a translation of the original Czech article "Proc jsme the journal nebojovali" that was published in "BOHEMIA" Oct. 30, 1957. of Czech Democratic Federalists - 'Dhat was a terrible, historical defeat of our statehood without a fig.ht and the world thinks that we fled from the b8Jttle. What has been written Uip to this time by the Czecho..,SlovaJks about this has only attempted to, excuse or rupologize for the ultimatum of the Western Powers at Munich in 1938: the Western Powers were guilty; the Russians were guilty for not coming to he1p us; Hitler was guHty; etc . And the world keeps on chuckling at our naivite. HumaJnly this is naturaL Everyone would rather pay himself indu'lgently even when he is not altogether certain that he deserves a boot. We have been extremely welltrained to cry about and bewail White Mountain; we can �2 SLOVAKIA ma.Ike a goat 'b leat a!bout it. But this bleating cannot silence our conscience, gnawing at our mind, whielh aSiks quietly: "Whom do you want to fool, ch'lllCikle-head ?" King Mida'S was an example of a man w:ho was afraid to loo'k truth in tlhe face. He had do,nikey ears and an a,stronomicaUy hi,gh hat to cover them. When he gathered enough strength to look at his ears, they disappeared. He was a whole man. Now, if we had the courage of Midas to looik upon realities under the barik o.f truth and related events to otJher examples in the world, perhaps it wolllld daiwn upon us why we did not fight in 1938. It would bec~me apparent that we ourselves were at fault, we the citizens of that lost State, which was the Czecho-;Sfovalk Republic and which we alfowed to collapse. We did not lose the State in October, 1938; we lost it b,efore that time. Octoiber, 1938, was only the date of the thraishilllg we deserved, a'S wa,s perhaps a:lso all that followed it. We did not have an adequate conception regarding nation and state. Somehow we had an idea that the series ad: political fetishes and partisan laJbles, according to which we ran - and still .run - here and there, made a nation of us. We seemed to think - allld still thinlk - that an equal and secret right of ballot and democracy, which we sa;w someplace, but did not understand ;properly amd with it elected irresiponsihly an irresiponsible leader, that this, too, made us a nation. And that our elected leaders wo1u ld at once ,b ecome stateS1II1en and men ,be:cause they wo,re striped ,p ants and acquired a few titles. Because we, the citizens and voters, did not thin1k, catastrophe OiVertook us. We had an idea, but not the knowledge or ,c onviction of what ,was needed to ma;ke a nation of us and a solid, organic unit of our ,state. In the meantime, however, our politicans, diplomats, and statesmen did what they pleased, and ,p articularly did they .run away from responsibilities into dernogogy, lying, and false promises; the interests of the Repulblic and nation were bartered away; obligations and oaths were forgotten, and the Constitution was spat upon; they used their positions to serve their own per,sonal �SLOVAKIA 3 interests and whims and used the nation and state lilke rags. In twenty-five years, the Repulblic was bartered away twice by these paliticams-statesm en with titles and striped pants. First to the Nazis, then to the Communists. In both cases this happened against our will. The caiuse of this is the same as that for our not fightinig in 1938: in responsirble positions we did have persons of the male sex, hut not men. None of us can j:ustify for ourselves o,r before any judicious person the fact that we did not fight. The nation was armed to the teeth; it had an army of a million men, excellently trained and for decades inculcated with love for its nation and filled with a .will to fight and a willingness to sacrifice. And yet, the nation did not fight as it wanted to and knew it had to so that it could preseiwe its freedom and indeipendence which it had eiked out after 300 years of dependence and bondage under which it almost ,p erished. Some of our people get angry when they read or hear the e~ression "ollir nation caipitulated." They come back with the retort that not the nation, but the leaders capitulated. I do not agree. There was only one leader: the president, the ~wpreme commamder of an arnny of a million men, an army splendidly equipped, trained, and ready fo,r war. We elected him directly or indirectly to leadershi!p. We are, therefore, also responsibile for him. To turn away from this responsilbility is senseless or cowardly. JOlhn Masaryk told me in the spring of 1940 that the aJII11bassadors off Fra.nce and Britian litera:Uy dragged Dr. Benes from bed at three o'clock in the morning and forced him to sign the capitulation rby an ultimatum. That started an argument. I could not understamd how a commander of an army of million men could be forced to caipitulation by some two froc'ked uncles and thereiby surrender the army, equipment, and state to enemies and the nation to slavery. John Masaryk retorted that the question did not concern shoes with which I was familiar. I still contended that a statesman could not be forced to do anytjhing. He could be killed, 01Verthrown by a revolution, deposed, kidnapped. �4 SLOVAKIA tortured, that he could cO!IIla:rut suicide, but that he could not be forced. We have an example, I added: Master John Hus. John Masaryk snapped hack that what I was saying sma;ciked af Fascism, that only that ',grazl Mussolini' said that a nation that does not ,s uffer to sacrifice for the independence and freedom of its country is not worthy of it. I told him tlhat was the way I saiw it and that I was convinced that even his father, TGM, would sooner agree in this matter with Mussolini than with him and Benes. From that time on I did not get al()IIl!g with Jo:hn Masaryk and was blac>k1b alled by Benes and his government in London. During the war we wrote each other several times, but, knowing Benes, I knew that he was planning revell!ge. On June 6, 1940, I was placed on the English "Blacklist" - t-o this day I do not know why - with indications that Benes's London "goveTnment" had itis hands in the matter. And after Dr. Benes's v,i sit to the White House, I was also ,p laced on the American "BJadklist" without any investigation. To people in his circle Dr. Benes remarked that I had spoken improperly with him in 193'8. I spoke with him as man to, man. Periha,ps the fact that I told him that he ought to beluwe more liike a man was regarded an improipI'liety. As in 19'38, so I aJlso contend today that we had no right to avoid war when the defense of our independence was concerned - like TGM and Mussolini did, if you want to put it tJhat way. Up to this time, however,. there was always something indistinct that prevented me from writing my view pu'blioly, the view that turned John Masaryk against me. But that indistictn~ has now disappeared due to a strrungely simple cause: in .A!llg1ust, 1957, an Argentine steamer went do!Wil in La Plata and eighty travelers drowned. It sainlk - and then it dawned on me. Lea;ders, caiptains among people, have their honor which they treasure more than life itself. The ca;rptai:n g~ down wi-th his sinlking shi{p. It is the morale of men who understand responsirbility with fatal seriousness a,nd courage. In our nation we had no shlp captains so that we �SLOVAKIA 5 might compare their behavior when disaster strikes the shl,p they are in ohar,ge of. But we did have in oru,r history a series of ca.ptains of the ship of state. And behold, our state captains comprehended the respons,ilbilities and manliness of leadership just as honestly as, those ship captains. The famous "Iron and Gold King," the Czech Pfemysl OtaJkar ]I, offered his life on the eive oif the battle on Moravslke Pole to save the honor of the nation and the army. At that sad time his life was indispensalble to the life of the nation, but he died in battle. He was betrayed by Milota of Dedic, a member of the Benesov clan. The victor Rudolph Habsbur,g had his courageous riva,1 b.umed with honors and scornfully exiled the traitor who had come to pay him homage. And he did not shatter the Ozooh empire as he had threatened. Famous b:lind King John did not run from battle when the French, wiho had called on him for help, fled from the battlefield. He gave the Czechs an example of coUJra:ge and defiance of death in battle with his memoralble utterance: "Let us hope that it will never hruppen that a Czech king shaJll flee f,rom battle!" By his fortitude he prepared the way to the emperor's crown for his .s on Charles ·w. The English cro,w n prince honored him for his braivery and to this very day bears on his coat of arms the three famous feathers of the braive Czech King John. In 193'8, from contacts with our generals, I was convinced that our army was better equipped and trained and possessed a better fighting spirit than Hitler's army. This fact was confirmed in Nureniber,g before the International Court even by Hitler's Chief of Starff, General Halder. He ~aid that his predecessor, General Beclk, resilgned his position in July, 1938, in protest against war with OzechoSlovaJkia which Hitler had planned. General Halder had said that he, lilke the majority of German commanders, was rugainst wa,r even if it wa,s only with independent Olecho~Slovakia. General Beck proclaimed that even such a war would haive boon fatal for Germany. Halder added that, when Beck's resignatio.n did not hruve any effect on Hitler, the German generals planned to overthrow Hitler �6 SLOVAKIA on the eve o:f the war. But the putJsch had to be speedily called off when Dr. Edward Benes crupitulated for CzechoSlorvaJkia. Today wlhen a;li oif this is known, sOlme people will want to reproach and malign me for the indecency of attaclking a dead man. But I do not want to be a wise thinker after the cure. We must rerne:rnlb,er, hrowever, that all we, the peOiple of the Czecho-Slovak ReipU!blic, learned oillly now, all this was 'knoiWil a!OCUTately and in detail by our Suipreme Commander and President, Dr. Edward Benes, already in July, Arugust, and September, 1938, and also by the line of generals, poJiticans, diplomats, and high state officials. In his positiion Benes was bound to know this; he had at his disposal gigantic, highly effective, and costly means to know aibout it. In Paris, in 1939, an officer of the "DelllXieme Bureau" visited me and expressed his amazement over the accuracy of reports of the Czecho-.Slo>vak Intelligence SeTIVice. So, Dr. Ediwa;rd Benes knew that the German generals looked upon war with Czecho-1Slorvalkia as a step that would be fatal to Germany. If, therefore, despite this knowledge Dr. Benes let himself "be forced" to capitulation, he committed treaso!Il. In the solemn oath taken when he assumed the duties of president, the President and Supreme Commander promised solemnly before the nation and Almighty God that he shall seiwe only and exclusively the .s tate and the entire nation. He promised to sacrifice his life, if necessary, and without hesitation erven the life of half the nation in defense of the state and freedom. When Benes was sworn in as President, there were present several huruked leading politicans, soldiers, offi.cialis, diplomats, ministers. Where were all these people when Dr. Benes signed the ca,pituiation and thu~ oommitted perjury and higlh trea,s on? There can be no doubt that they had the duty to prevent such a crupitulation and, if necessary, even to kill or overthrow the man guilty of hi:gh treas()IIl. But what did the .people airound him do? Nothing! And worse. Many of them even escorted him into exile. They bowed profoundly before the man guilty of high �SLOVAKIA 7 treason, adhered to him, supported and helrped him to install himself as exile-president amd to return to our home as .p resident again orf the State he had betrayed to the Communists and "liberated" into CO'Jnmuni.sm. We see that u,p to the present time trnitor Benes is stilJ. honored, glorified, and .p raised by the .v ery same gentlemen as a national hero and martyr. Let us look at these events with the eyes o;f normal people in the wrold, whether they be westerns or easterners. Even i;f they not provolke us from our let:Jhwgy out of reg3!rd for us, they nevertheless think terrible things aJbout us. Let us take any other country, for example, little Finland cramped somewhere in the nor.th and directly under the heel of the most birutal power. Can you im8!gine a Finn singing such a capitulation ond not being cut down the moment he did it? Do not aslk who was sUJpposed to 'kill him. 'Ilhere were hundreds of people who had the manly duty to kill the scoundrel and trMtor, since for decades they were in a po'sision that charged them to do so, even if their manly honor did not. in heaiven's name, will those forces never be awakened that would want to see the entire extent of the deceitful g.a me of the knaive and coward, whom the nation that was pmnlk and lulled to sleep with sociali,S!m placed on the throne of Ozech k,i ngs so that it might b,e betrayed by him? Why does not our exile, as well as our nation at home, walke u,p and use the broom of shame on that band of traitors who must have 'k nown and .stiH know everything that J write about and yet brazenly sing a song of cowardice and treason as if it were our sacred national ~nthem? Let us imagine ho,w diffe.rent it could have been if the nation wouJ.d have - as it should have - rid itself of J3enes's command in time and demonstrated to the world jhow the descendants of the di'Vi.ne worriors know how to fight for thek country. It is .possi1ble that in the end our army would have been beaten, but not before months of terrible fighting. And who can say how many other coun- �8 SLOVAKIA tries would have thrust themselives upon Hitler's army to !finish it already in 1939-19'40 and not in 194'5? The German commander,s should have overthrown Hitler without Benes's capitulation; then World War would not ha-ve happened at all. Ami the Germans without Hitler would have been - as they are today - all of them, not divided, in the western camp. In a fight for its independence, Czecho-SlovaJkia would have gained a blessing, a baptism by fire, and would haive taJken its place among the first states of Europe. It would haJVe finished its fa.rst test of statehood with complete success, a test which •now still awaits us. As it is, instead of being in the forefront as a free nation among the free, our state is an unwilling scamp or against the West and our nation an unwilling scamp or dog's head of <:ommunist imperialism. Well, we know that role the "Psohla,vi'c" (dog's heads) played, and the fate that a,waits them from the Laminge~. We must ma,ke wp our minds as to what we really jWant. Do we want political parties, a party, or State? Do we want a party to whom the State and nation would be a rag, as it is today of the Communist Party? We 'know that a certain grouping of parties led the State and nation into the thraldom of a Nazi protectorate. A grouping of parties, all promotmg socialism, led it into the sla,very of a Communist protectorate. Iif it is not clear to us that the State is aJbove ,p arty and that loyalty to a State stands high albove loya,lty to any party, then there is no sense in thinking and dreaming aJbout any kind of liberation, because in such a case we cannot attain it. That would be a Sisyphean effort, which has already twice disappointed us. As long as we shall elect a leader, we must hold a stricter relation to him than to anyone else. We must afford him the possi!bility to lead and to show himself a man and we must see to it that he also fulfills hls responsibility. ,I f not, we must overthrow or even kill him! After an, are we or are we not the descendants of the glorious warriors pf God, the SOlllS and brothers of the famous Ozecho- SlorvaJk legionnaires? Let us forget political partisanshlip. The ,nation and the State are aJbove any and all parties! � SLO VA KIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) WHY fflE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT Dr. John A. Bafa Whatever has been written aibout this subject has practically aliways been fhwored, distorted with excuses, malevolence, derisfon, anger, shame, embitter.moot, and aippeasemen.t, a<Ccording to politi'Cal interest and viewpoint and attempts to coiver up. Moot of the time this smelled of wrong doing, misfortune, a new White Mountain. Never, however, was their any trace of a;clmowledging how and wihy something hruppened and w:ho was to 'blame for its h8lplpening. Dr. John A. Bat'a is a member of the famous Czech shoemakers, who, like so many others who had dared to criticize the ruinous policy of Dr. Edward Benes, even though belatedly, were persecuted by Benes and his followers even in exile. This is a translation of the original Czech article "Proc jsme the journal nebojovali" that was published in "BOHEMIA" Oct. 30, 1957. of Czech Democratic Federalists - 'Dhat was a terrible, historical defeat of our statehood without a fig.ht and the world thinks that we fled from the b8Jttle. What has been written Uip to this time by the Czecho..,SlovaJks about this has only attempted to, excuse or rupologize for the ultimatum of the Western Powers at Munich in 1938: the Western Powers were guilty; the Russians were guilty for not coming to he1p us; Hitler was guHty; etc . And the world keeps on chuckling at our naivite. HumaJnly this is naturaL Everyone would rather pay himself indu'lgently even when he is not altogether certain that he deserves a boot. We have been extremely welltrained to cry about and bewail White Mountain; we can �2 SLOVAKIA ma.Ike a goat 'b leat a!bout it. But this bleating cannot silence our conscience, gnawing at our mind, whielh aSiks quietly: "Whom do you want to fool, ch'lllCikle-head ?" King Mida'S was an example of a man w:ho was afraid to loo'k truth in tlhe face. He had do,nikey ears and an a,stronomicaUy hi,gh hat to cover them. When he gathered enough strength to look at his ears, they disappeared. He was a whole man. Now, if we had the courage of Midas to looik upon realities under the barik o.f truth and related events to otJher examples in the world, perhaps it wolllld daiwn upon us why we did not fight in 1938. It would bec~me apparent that we ourselves were at fault, we the citizens of that lost State, which was the Czecho-;Sfovalk Republic and which we alfowed to collapse. We did not lose the State in October, 1938; we lost it b,efore that time. Octoiber, 1938, was only the date of the thraishilllg we deserved, a'S wa,s perhaps a:lso all that followed it. We did not have an adequate conception regarding nation and state. Somehow we had an idea that the series ad: political fetishes and partisan laJbles, according to which we ran - and still .run - here and there, made a nation of us. We seemed to think - allld still thinlk - that an equal and secret right of ballot and democracy, which we sa;w someplace, but did not understand ;properly amd with it elected irresiponsihly an irresiponsible leader, that this, too, made us a nation. And that our elected leaders wo1u ld at once ,b ecome stateS1II1en and men ,be:cause they wo,re striped ,p ants and acquired a few titles. Because we, the citizens and voters, did not thin1k, catastrophe OiVertook us. We had an idea, but not the knowledge or ,c onviction of what ,was needed to ma;ke a nation of us and a solid, organic unit of our ,state. In the meantime, however, our politicans, diplomats, and statesmen did what they pleased, and ,p articularly did they .run away from responsibilities into dernogogy, lying, and false promises; the interests of the Repulblic and nation were bartered away; obligations and oaths were forgotten, and the Constitution was spat upon; they used their positions to serve their own per,sonal �SLOVAKIA 3 interests and whims and used the nation and state lilke rags. In twenty-five years, the Repulblic was bartered away twice by these paliticams-statesm en with titles and striped pants. First to the Nazis, then to the Communists. In both cases this happened against our will. The caiuse of this is the same as that for our not fightinig in 1938: in responsirble positions we did have persons of the male sex, hut not men. None of us can j:ustify for ourselves o,r before any judicious person the fact that we did not fight. The nation was armed to the teeth; it had an army of a million men, excellently trained and for decades inculcated with love for its nation and filled with a .will to fight and a willingness to sacrifice. And yet, the nation did not fight as it wanted to and knew it had to so that it could preseiwe its freedom and indeipendence which it had eiked out after 300 years of dependence and bondage under which it almost ,p erished. Some of our people get angry when they read or hear the e~ression "ollir nation caipitulated." They come back with the retort that not the nation, but the leaders capitulated. I do not agree. There was only one leader: the president, the ~wpreme commamder of an arnny of a million men, an army splendidly equipped, trained, and ready fo,r war. We elected him directly or indirectly to leadershi!p. We are, therefore, also responsibile for him. To turn away from this responsilbility is senseless or cowardly. JOlhn Masaryk told me in the spring of 1940 that the aJII11bassadors off Fra.nce and Britian litera:Uy dragged Dr. Benes from bed at three o'clock in the morning and forced him to sign the capitulation rby an ultimatum. That started an argument. I could not understamd how a commander of an army of million men could be forced to caipitulation by some two froc'ked uncles and thereiby surrender the army, equipment, and state to enemies and the nation to slavery. John Masaryk retorted that the question did not concern shoes with which I was familiar. I still contended that a statesman could not be forced to do anytjhing. He could be killed, 01Verthrown by a revolution, deposed, kidnapped. �4 SLOVAKIA tortured, that he could cO!IIla:rut suicide, but that he could not be forced. We have an example, I added: Master John Hus. John Masaryk snapped hack that what I was saying sma;ciked af Fascism, that only that ',grazl Mussolini' said that a nation that does not ,s uffer to sacrifice for the independence and freedom of its country is not worthy of it. I told him tlhat was the way I saiw it and that I was convinced that even his father, TGM, would sooner agree in this matter with Mussolini than with him and Benes. From that time on I did not get al()IIl!g with Jo:hn Masaryk and was blac>k1b alled by Benes and his government in London. During the war we wrote each other several times, but, knowing Benes, I knew that he was planning revell!ge. On June 6, 1940, I was placed on the English "Blacklist" - t-o this day I do not know why - with indications that Benes's London "goveTnment" had itis hands in the matter. And after Dr. Benes's v,i sit to the White House, I was also ,p laced on the American "BJadklist" without any investigation. To people in his circle Dr. Benes remarked that I had spoken improperly with him in 193'8. I spoke with him as man to, man. Periha,ps the fact that I told him that he ought to beluwe more liike a man was regarded an improipI'liety. As in 19'38, so I aJlso contend today that we had no right to avoid war when the defense of our independence was concerned - like TGM and Mussolini did, if you want to put it tJhat way. Up to this time, however,. there was always something indistinct that prevented me from writing my view pu'blioly, the view that turned John Masaryk against me. But that indistictn~ has now disappeared due to a strrungely simple cause: in .A!llg1ust, 1957, an Argentine steamer went do!Wil in La Plata and eighty travelers drowned. It sainlk - and then it dawned on me. Lea;ders, caiptains among people, have their honor which they treasure more than life itself. The ca;rptai:n g~ down wi-th his sinlking shi{p. It is the morale of men who understand responsirbility with fatal seriousness a,nd courage. In our nation we had no shlp captains so that we �SLOVAKIA 5 might compare their behavior when disaster strikes the shl,p they are in ohar,ge of. But we did have in oru,r history a series of ca.ptains of the ship of state. And behold, our state captains comprehended the respons,ilbilities and manliness of leadership just as honestly as, those ship captains. The famous "Iron and Gold King," the Czech Pfemysl OtaJkar ]I, offered his life on the eive oif the battle on Moravslke Pole to save the honor of the nation and the army. At that sad time his life was indispensalble to the life of the nation, but he died in battle. He was betrayed by Milota of Dedic, a member of the Benesov clan. The victor Rudolph Habsbur,g had his courageous riva,1 b.umed with honors and scornfully exiled the traitor who had come to pay him homage. And he did not shatter the Ozooh empire as he had threatened. Famous b:lind King John did not run from battle when the French, wiho had called on him for help, fled from the battlefield. He gave the Czechs an example of coUJra:ge and defiance of death in battle with his memoralble utterance: "Let us hope that it will never hruppen that a Czech king shaJll flee f,rom battle!" By his fortitude he prepared the way to the emperor's crown for his .s on Charles ·w. The English cro,w n prince honored him for his braivery and to this very day bears on his coat of arms the three famous feathers of the braive Czech King John. In 193'8, from contacts with our generals, I was convinced that our army was better equipped and trained and possessed a better fighting spirit than Hitler's army. This fact was confirmed in Nureniber,g before the International Court even by Hitler's Chief of Starff, General Halder. He ~aid that his predecessor, General Beclk, resilgned his position in July, 1938, in protest against war with OzechoSlovaJkia which Hitler had planned. General Halder had said that he, lilke the majority of German commanders, was rugainst wa,r even if it wa,s only with independent Olecho~Slovakia. General Beck proclaimed that even such a war would haive boon fatal for Germany. Halder added that, when Beck's resignatio.n did not hruve any effect on Hitler, the German generals planned to overthrow Hitler �6 SLOVAKIA on the eve o:f the war. But the putJsch had to be speedily called off when Dr. Edward Benes crupitulated for CzechoSlorvaJkia. Today wlhen a;li oif this is known, sOlme people will want to reproach and malign me for the indecency of attaclking a dead man. But I do not want to be a wise thinker after the cure. We must rerne:rnlb,er, hrowever, that all we, the peOiple of the Czecho-Slovak ReipU!blic, learned oillly now, all this was 'knoiWil a!OCUTately and in detail by our Suipreme Commander and President, Dr. Edward Benes, already in July, Arugust, and September, 1938, and also by the line of generals, poJiticans, diplomats, and high state officials. In his positiion Benes was bound to know this; he had at his disposal gigantic, highly effective, and costly means to know aibout it. In Paris, in 1939, an officer of the "DelllXieme Bureau" visited me and expressed his amazement over the accuracy of reports of the Czecho-.Slo>vak Intelligence SeTIVice. So, Dr. Ediwa;rd Benes knew that the German generals looked upon war with Czecho-1Slorvalkia as a step that would be fatal to Germany. If, therefore, despite this knowledge Dr. Benes let himself "be forced" to capitulation, he committed treaso!Il. In the solemn oath taken when he assumed the duties of president, the President and Supreme Commander promised solemnly before the nation and Almighty God that he shall seiwe only and exclusively the .s tate and the entire nation. He promised to sacrifice his life, if necessary, and without hesitation erven the life of half the nation in defense of the state and freedom. When Benes was sworn in as President, there were present several huruked leading politicans, soldiers, offi.cialis, diplomats, ministers. Where were all these people when Dr. Benes signed the ca,pituiation and thu~ oommitted perjury and higlh trea,s on? There can be no doubt that they had the duty to prevent such a crupitulation and, if necessary, even to kill or overthrow the man guilty of hi:gh treas()IIl. But what did the .people airound him do? Nothing! And worse. Many of them even escorted him into exile. They bowed profoundly before the man guilty of high �SLOVAKIA 7 treason, adhered to him, supported and helrped him to install himself as exile-president amd to return to our home as .p resident again orf the State he had betrayed to the Communists and "liberated" into CO'Jnmuni.sm. We see that u,p to the present time trnitor Benes is stilJ. honored, glorified, and .p raised by the .v ery same gentlemen as a national hero and martyr. Let us look at these events with the eyes o;f normal people in the wrold, whether they be westerns or easterners. Even i;f they not provolke us from our let:Jhwgy out of reg3!rd for us, they nevertheless think terrible things aJbout us. Let us take any other country, for example, little Finland cramped somewhere in the nor.th and directly under the heel of the most birutal power. Can you im8!gine a Finn singing such a capitulation ond not being cut down the moment he did it? Do not aslk who was sUJpposed to 'kill him. 'Ilhere were hundreds of people who had the manly duty to kill the scoundrel and trMtor, since for decades they were in a po'sision that charged them to do so, even if their manly honor did not. in heaiven's name, will those forces never be awakened that would want to see the entire extent of the deceitful g.a me of the knaive and coward, whom the nation that was pmnlk and lulled to sleep with sociali,S!m placed on the throne of Ozech k,i ngs so that it might b,e betrayed by him? Why does not our exile, as well as our nation at home, walke u,p and use the broom of shame on that band of traitors who must have 'k nown and .stiH know everything that J write about and yet brazenly sing a song of cowardice and treason as if it were our sacred national ~nthem? Let us imagine ho,w diffe.rent it could have been if the nation wouJ.d have - as it should have - rid itself of J3enes's command in time and demonstrated to the world jhow the descendants of the di'Vi.ne worriors know how to fight for thek country. It is .possi1ble that in the end our army would have been beaten, but not before months of terrible fighting. And who can say how many other coun- �8 SLOVAKIA tries would have thrust themselives upon Hitler's army to !finish it already in 1939-19'40 and not in 194'5? The German commander,s should have overthrown Hitler without Benes's capitulation; then World War would not ha-ve happened at all. Ami the Germans without Hitler would have been - as they are today - all of them, not divided, in the western camp. In a fight for its independence, Czecho-SlovaJkia would have gained a blessing, a baptism by fire, and would haive taJken its place among the first states of Europe. It would haJVe finished its fa.rst test of statehood with complete success, a test which •now still awaits us. As it is, instead of being in the forefront as a free nation among the free, our state is an unwilling scamp or against the West and our nation an unwilling scamp or dog's head of <:ommunist imperialism. Well, we know that role the "Psohla,vi'c" (dog's heads) played, and the fate that a,waits them from the Laminge~. We must ma,ke wp our minds as to what we really jWant. Do we want political parties, a party, or State? Do we want a party to whom the State and nation would be a rag, as it is today of the Communist Party? We 'know that a certain grouping of parties led the State and nation into the thraldom of a Nazi protectorate. A grouping of parties, all promotmg socialism, led it into the sla,very of a Communist protectorate. Iif it is not clear to us that the State is aJbove ,p arty and that loyalty to a State stands high albove loya,lty to any party, then there is no sense in thinking and dreaming aJbout any kind of liberation, because in such a case we cannot attain it. That would be a Sisyphean effort, which has already twice disappointed us. As long as we shall elect a leader, we must hold a stricter relation to him than to anyone else. We must afford him the possi!bility to lead and to show himself a man and we must see to it that he also fulfills hls responsibility. ,I f not, we must overthrow or even kill him! After an, are we or are we not the descendants of the glorious warriors pf God, the SOlllS and brothers of the famous Ozecho- SlorvaJk legionnaires? Let us forget political partisanshlip. The ,nation and the State are aJbove any and all parties! � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLO VA KIA Published by the Slovak League of America VOL. VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) WHY fflE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT Dr. John A. Bafa Whatever has been written aibout this subject has practically aliways been fhwored, distorted with excuses, malevolence, derisfon, anger, shame, embitter.moot, and aippeasemen.t, a<Ccording to politi'Cal interest and viewpoint and attempts to coiver up. Moot of the time this smelled of wrong doing, misfortune, a new White Mountain. Never, however, was their any trace of a;clmowledging how and wihy something hruppened and w:ho was to 'blame for its h8lplpening. Dr. John A. Bat'a is a member of the famous Czech shoemakers, who, like so many others who had dared to criticize the ruinous policy of Dr. Edward Benes, even though belatedly, were persecuted by Benes and his followers even in exile. This is a translation of the original Czech article "Proc jsme the journal nebojovali" that was published in "BOHEMIA" Oct. 30, 1957. of Czech Democratic Federalists - 'Dhat was a terrible, historical defeat of our statehood without a fig.ht and the world thinks that we fled from the b8Jttle. What has been written Uip to this time by the Czecho..,SlovaJks about this has only attempted to, excuse or rupologize for the ultimatum of the Western Powers at Munich in 1938: the Western Powers were guilty; the Russians were guilty for not coming to he1p us; Hitler was guHty; etc . And the world keeps on chuckling at our naivite. HumaJnly this is naturaL Everyone would rather pay himself indu'lgently even when he is not altogether certain that he deserves a boot. We have been extremely welltrained to cry about and bewail White Mountain; we can 2 SLOVAKIA ma.Ike a goat 'b leat a!bout it. But this bleating cannot silence our conscience, gnawing at our mind, whielh aSiks quietly: "Whom do you want to fool, ch'lllCikle-head ?" King Mida'S was an example of a man w:ho was afraid to loo'k truth in tlhe face. He had do,nikey ears and an a,stronomicaUy hi,gh hat to cover them. When he gathered enough strength to look at his ears, they disappeared. He was a whole man. Now, if we had the courage of Midas to looik upon realities under the barik o.f truth and related events to otJher examples in the world, perhaps it wolllld daiwn upon us why we did not fight in 1938. It would bec~me apparent that we ourselves were at fault, we the citizens of that lost State, which was the Czecho-;Sfovalk Republic and which we alfowed to collapse. We did not lose the State in October, 1938; we lost it b,efore that time. Octoiber, 1938, was only the date of the thraishilllg we deserved, a'S wa,s perhaps a:lso all that followed it. We did not have an adequate conception regarding nation and state. Somehow we had an idea that the series ad: political fetishes and partisan laJbles, according to which we ran - and still .run - here and there, made a nation of us. We seemed to think - allld still thinlk - that an equal and secret right of ballot and democracy, which we sa;w someplace, but did not understand ;properly amd with it elected irresiponsihly an irresiponsible leader, that this, too, made us a nation. And that our elected leaders wo1u ld at once ,b ecome stateS1II1en and men ,be:cause they wo,re striped ,p ants and acquired a few titles. Because we, the citizens and voters, did not thin1k, catastrophe OiVertook us. We had an idea, but not the knowledge or ,c onviction of what ,was needed to ma;ke a nation of us and a solid, organic unit of our ,state. In the meantime, however, our politicans, diplomats, and statesmen did what they pleased, and ,p articularly did they .run away from responsibilities into dernogogy, lying, and false promises; the interests of the Repulblic and nation were bartered away; obligations and oaths were forgotten, and the Constitution was spat upon; they used their positions to serve their own per,sonal SLOVAKIA 3 interests and whims and used the nation and state lilke rags. In twenty-five years, the Repulblic was bartered away twice by these paliticams-statesm en with titles and striped pants. First to the Nazis, then to the Communists. In both cases this happened against our will. The caiuse of this is the same as that for our not fightinig in 1938: in responsirble positions we did have persons of the male sex, hut not men. None of us can j:ustify for ourselves o,r before any judicious person the fact that we did not fight. The nation was armed to the teeth; it had an army of a million men, excellently trained and for decades inculcated with love for its nation and filled with a .will to fight and a willingness to sacrifice. And yet, the nation did not fight as it wanted to and knew it had to so that it could preseiwe its freedom and indeipendence which it had eiked out after 300 years of dependence and bondage under which it almost ,p erished. Some of our people get angry when they read or hear the e~ression "ollir nation caipitulated." They come back with the retort that not the nation, but the leaders capitulated. I do not agree. There was only one leader: the president, the ~wpreme commamder of an arnny of a million men, an army splendidly equipped, trained, and ready fo,r war. We elected him directly or indirectly to leadershi!p. We are, therefore, also responsibile for him. To turn away from this responsilbility is senseless or cowardly. JOlhn Masaryk told me in the spring of 1940 that the aJII11bassadors off Fra.nce and Britian litera:Uy dragged Dr. Benes from bed at three o'clock in the morning and forced him to sign the capitulation rby an ultimatum. That started an argument. I could not understamd how a commander of an army of million men could be forced to caipitulation by some two froc'ked uncles and thereiby surrender the army, equipment, and state to enemies and the nation to slavery. John Masaryk retorted that the question did not concern shoes with which I was familiar. I still contended that a statesman could not be forced to do anytjhing. He could be killed, 01Verthrown by a revolution, deposed, kidnapped. 4 SLOVAKIA tortured, that he could cO!IIla:rut suicide, but that he could not be forced. We have an example, I added: Master John Hus. John Masaryk snapped hack that what I was saying sma;ciked af Fascism, that only that ',grazl Mussolini' said that a nation that does not ,s uffer to sacrifice for the independence and freedom of its country is not worthy of it. I told him tlhat was the way I saiw it and that I was convinced that even his father, TGM, would sooner agree in this matter with Mussolini than with him and Benes. From that time on I did not get al()IIl!g with Jo:hn Masaryk and was blac>k1b alled by Benes and his government in London. During the war we wrote each other several times, but, knowing Benes, I knew that he was planning revell!ge. On June 6, 1940, I was placed on the English "Blacklist" - t-o this day I do not know why - with indications that Benes's London "goveTnment" had itis hands in the matter. And after Dr. Benes's v,i sit to the White House, I was also ,p laced on the American "BJadklist" without any investigation. To people in his circle Dr. Benes remarked that I had spoken improperly with him in 193'8. I spoke with him as man to, man. Periha,ps the fact that I told him that he ought to beluwe more liike a man was regarded an improipI'liety. As in 19'38, so I aJlso contend today that we had no right to avoid war when the defense of our independence was concerned - like TGM and Mussolini did, if you want to put it tJhat way. Up to this time, however,. there was always something indistinct that prevented me from writing my view pu'blioly, the view that turned John Masaryk against me. But that indistictn~ has now disappeared due to a strrungely simple cause: in .A!llg1ust, 1957, an Argentine steamer went do!Wil in La Plata and eighty travelers drowned. It sainlk - and then it dawned on me. Lea;ders, caiptains among people, have their honor which they treasure more than life itself. The ca;rptai:n g~ down wi-th his sinlking shi{p. It is the morale of men who understand responsirbility with fatal seriousness a,nd courage. In our nation we had no shlp captains so that we SLOVAKIA 5 might compare their behavior when disaster strikes the shl,p they are in ohar,ge of. But we did have in oru,r history a series of ca.ptains of the ship of state. And behold, our state captains comprehended the respons,ilbilities and manliness of leadership just as honestly as, those ship captains. The famous "Iron and Gold King," the Czech Pfemysl OtaJkar ]I, offered his life on the eive oif the battle on Moravslke Pole to save the honor of the nation and the army. At that sad time his life was indispensalble to the life of the nation, but he died in battle. He was betrayed by Milota of Dedic, a member of the Benesov clan. The victor Rudolph Habsbur,g had his courageous riva,1 b.umed with honors and scornfully exiled the traitor who had come to pay him homage. And he did not shatter the Ozooh empire as he had threatened. Famous b:lind King John did not run from battle when the French, wiho had called on him for help, fled from the battlefield. He gave the Czechs an example of coUJra:ge and defiance of death in battle with his memoralble utterance: "Let us hope that it will never hruppen that a Czech king shaJll flee f,rom battle!" By his fortitude he prepared the way to the emperor's crown for his .s on Charles ·w. The English cro,w n prince honored him for his braivery and to this very day bears on his coat of arms the three famous feathers of the braive Czech King John. In 193'8, from contacts with our generals, I was convinced that our army was better equipped and trained and possessed a better fighting spirit than Hitler's army. This fact was confirmed in Nureniber,g before the International Court even by Hitler's Chief of Starff, General Halder. He ~aid that his predecessor, General Beclk, resilgned his position in July, 1938, in protest against war with OzechoSlovaJkia which Hitler had planned. General Halder had said that he, lilke the majority of German commanders, was rugainst wa,r even if it wa,s only with independent Olecho~Slovakia. General Beck proclaimed that even such a war would haive boon fatal for Germany. Halder added that, when Beck's resignatio.n did not hruve any effect on Hitler, the German generals planned to overthrow Hitler 6 SLOVAKIA on the eve o:f the war. But the putJsch had to be speedily called off when Dr. Edward Benes crupitulated for CzechoSlorvaJkia. Today wlhen a;li oif this is known, sOlme people will want to reproach and malign me for the indecency of attaclking a dead man. But I do not want to be a wise thinker after the cure. We must rerne:rnlb,er, hrowever, that all we, the peOiple of the Czecho-Slovak ReipU!blic, learned oillly now, all this was 'knoiWil a!OCUTately and in detail by our Suipreme Commander and President, Dr. Edward Benes, already in July, Arugust, and September, 1938, and also by the line of generals, poJiticans, diplomats, and high state officials. In his positiion Benes was bound to know this; he had at his disposal gigantic, highly effective, and costly means to know aibout it. In Paris, in 1939, an officer of the "DelllXieme Bureau" visited me and expressed his amazement over the accuracy of reports of the Czecho-.Slo>vak Intelligence SeTIVice. So, Dr. Ediwa;rd Benes knew that the German generals looked upon war with Czecho-1Slorvalkia as a step that would be fatal to Germany. If, therefore, despite this knowledge Dr. Benes let himself "be forced" to capitulation, he committed treaso!Il. In the solemn oath taken when he assumed the duties of president, the President and Supreme Commander promised solemnly before the nation and Almighty God that he shall seiwe only and exclusively the .s tate and the entire nation. He promised to sacrifice his life, if necessary, and without hesitation erven the life of half the nation in defense of the state and freedom. When Benes was sworn in as President, there were present several huruked leading politicans, soldiers, offi.cialis, diplomats, ministers. Where were all these people when Dr. Benes signed the ca,pituiation and thu~ oommitted perjury and higlh trea,s on? There can be no doubt that they had the duty to prevent such a crupitulation and, if necessary, even to kill or overthrow the man guilty of hi:gh treas()IIl. But what did the .people airound him do? Nothing! And worse. Many of them even escorted him into exile. They bowed profoundly before the man guilty of high SLOVAKIA 7 treason, adhered to him, supported and helrped him to install himself as exile-president amd to return to our home as .p resident again orf the State he had betrayed to the Communists and "liberated" into CO'Jnmuni.sm. We see that u,p to the present time trnitor Benes is stilJ. honored, glorified, and .p raised by the .v ery same gentlemen as a national hero and martyr. Let us look at these events with the eyes o;f normal people in the wrold, whether they be westerns or easterners. Even i;f they not provolke us from our let:Jhwgy out of reg3!rd for us, they nevertheless think terrible things aJbout us. Let us take any other country, for example, little Finland cramped somewhere in the nor.th and directly under the heel of the most birutal power. Can you im8!gine a Finn singing such a capitulation ond not being cut down the moment he did it? Do not aslk who was sUJpposed to 'kill him. 'Ilhere were hundreds of people who had the manly duty to kill the scoundrel and trMtor, since for decades they were in a po'sision that charged them to do so, even if their manly honor did not. in heaiven's name, will those forces never be awakened that would want to see the entire extent of the deceitful g.a me of the knaive and coward, whom the nation that was pmnlk and lulled to sleep with sociali,S!m placed on the throne of Ozech k,i ngs so that it might b,e betrayed by him? Why does not our exile, as well as our nation at home, walke u,p and use the broom of shame on that band of traitors who must have 'k nown and .stiH know everything that J write about and yet brazenly sing a song of cowardice and treason as if it were our sacred national ~nthem? Let us imagine ho,w diffe.rent it could have been if the nation wouJ.d have - as it should have - rid itself of J3enes's command in time and demonstrated to the world jhow the descendants of the di'Vi.ne worriors know how to fight for thek country. It is .possi1ble that in the end our army would have been beaten, but not before months of terrible fighting. And who can say how many other coun- 8 SLOVAKIA tries would have thrust themselives upon Hitler's army to !finish it already in 1939-19'40 and not in 194'5? The German commander,s should have overthrown Hitler without Benes's capitulation; then World War would not ha-ve happened at all. Ami the Germans without Hitler would have been - as they are today - all of them, not divided, in the western camp. In a fight for its independence, Czecho-SlovaJkia would have gained a blessing, a baptism by fire, and would haive taJken its place among the first states of Europe. It would haJVe finished its fa.rst test of statehood with complete success, a test which •now still awaits us. As it is, instead of being in the forefront as a free nation among the free, our state is an unwilling scamp or against the West and our nation an unwilling scamp or dog's head of <:ommunist imperialism. Well, we know that role the "Psohla,vi'c" (dog's heads) played, and the fate that a,waits them from the Laminge~. We must ma,ke wp our minds as to what we really jWant. Do we want political parties, a party, or State? Do we want a party to whom the State and nation would be a rag, as it is today of the Communist Party? We 'know that a certain grouping of parties led the State and nation into the thraldom of a Nazi protectorate. A grouping of parties, all promotmg socialism, led it into the sla,very of a Communist protectorate. Iif it is not clear to us that the State is aJbove ,p arty and that loyalty to a State stands high albove loya,lty to any party, then there is no sense in thinking and dreaming aJbout any kind of liberation, because in such a case we cannot attain it. That would be a Sisyphean effort, which has already twice disappointed us. As long as we shall elect a leader, we must hold a stricter relation to him than to anyone else. We must afford him the possi!bility to lead and to show himself a man and we must see to it that he also fulfills hls responsibility. ,I f not, we must overthrow or even kill him! After an, are we or are we not the descendants of the glorious warriors pf God, the SOlllS and brothers of the famous Ozecho- SlorvaJk legionnaires? Let us forget political partisanshlip. The ,nation and the State are aJbove any and all parties!  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Why the Czechs Did Not Fight Description An account of the resource Dr. John A. Baťa Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), December 1958 pp. 1-8 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Baťa, John A. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 name https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/daa076f4001d5e0e38b897e8b44b7939.pdf 31676bcc8dcc227fe07a34ddfaf5c979 PDF Text Text VOL . VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) IN THIS ISSUE: WHY THE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT HON. B. CARROLL REESE: THE SUDETEN GERMANS SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK N.ATIONALISl\-1 THE SLOVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS CASTLES OF SLOVAE.IA: KRASNA HORKA SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH THE WEST RICHARD WEISHAR : . THE ROOTS OF COMMUNISM IN THE C>SR. ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 46, 51, 68, 80 • • • Edited and compi led by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA ~-~NSER 'LIBRARY _ , -: ! . L~RSVI.LLE STATE COLLEGE .ILLERSVILLE, -PA 17551 �RECOMMENDE D BOOKS: THIS IS SLOVAKIA, Hrusovsky; $1.00. THE SLOVAKS, Yurchak; paper cover $2.00; cloth $3.00. SKETCHES FROM SLOVAK HISTORY, Skultety; $1.00 (paper); $2.00 (cloth cover). THE DELIVERANCE OF SISTER CECILIA, $3.75. THE CHURCH OF SILE CE IN SLOVAKIA, Zubek; $3.50. FALSE FREEDOM, Delaney; $i.oo. SLOVAKIA'S ROAD TO STATEHOOD, Woytko; $1.50. ·'CZECHOSLOVAKIA " - History Made to Order, Hrobak; 50c. UNCONQUERABLES, Pauco; $3.50 ANTHOLOGY OF SLOVAK POETRY, Kramoris; $2.00. ♦ ♦ ♦ SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The main purpose of SLOVAKIA is to pr omote a better under· standing and appreciation of t he Slovak nation and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. $1.00 per annum in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. SLOVAKIA P. 0 . Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JED N OTA PRESS Mi ddletown , Pa. � VOL . VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) IN THIS ISSUE: WHY THE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT HON. B. CARROLL REESE: THE SUDETEN GERMANS SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK N.ATIONALISl\-1 THE SLOVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS CASTLES OF SLOVAE.IA: KRASNA HORKA SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH THE WEST RICHARD WEISHAR : . THE ROOTS OF COMMUNISM IN THE C>SR. ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 46, 51, 68, 80 • • • Edited and compi led by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA ~-~NSER 'LIBRARY _ , -: ! . L~RSVI.LLE STATE COLLEGE .ILLERSVILLE, -PA 17551 �RECOMMENDE D BOOKS: THIS IS SLOVAKIA, Hrusovsky; $1.00. THE SLOVAKS, Yurchak; paper cover $2.00; cloth $3.00. SKETCHES FROM SLOVAK HISTORY, Skultety; $1.00 (paper); $2.00 (cloth cover). THE DELIVERANCE OF SISTER CECILIA, $3.75. THE CHURCH OF SILE CE IN SLOVAKIA, Zubek; $3.50. FALSE FREEDOM, Delaney; $i.oo. SLOVAKIA'S ROAD TO STATEHOOD, Woytko; $1.50. ·'CZECHOSLOVAKIA " - History Made to Order, Hrobak; 50c. UNCONQUERABLES, Pauco; $3.50 ANTHOLOGY OF SLOVAK POETRY, Kramoris; $2.00. ♦ ♦ ♦ SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The main purpose of SLOVAKIA is to pr omote a better under· standing and appreciation of t he Slovak nation and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. $1.00 per annum in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. SLOVAKIA P. 0 . Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JED N OTA PRESS Mi ddletown , Pa. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document VOL . VIII DECEMBER, 1958 NO. 3 (28) IN THIS ISSUE: WHY THE CZECHS DID NOT FIGHT HON. B. CARROLL REESE: THE SUDETEN GERMANS SLOVAK NATIONALISM: FEDERATIVE TENDENCIES OF SLOVAK N.ATIONALISl\-1 THE SLOVAKS AND THEIR NEIGHBORS CASTLES OF SLOVAE.IA: KRASNA HORKA SLOVAKIA'S LIFELINE WITH THE WEST RICHARD WEISHAR : . THE ROOTS OF COMMUNISM IN THE C>SR. ANDREW HLINKA AND PRAGUE THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 46, 51, 68, 80 • • • Edited and compi led by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA ~-~NSER 'LIBRARY _ , -: ! . L~RSVI.LLE STATE COLLEGE .ILLERSVILLE, -PA 17551 RECOMMENDE D BOOKS: THIS IS SLOVAKIA, Hrusovsky; $1.00. THE SLOVAKS, Yurchak; paper cover $2.00; cloth $3.00. SKETCHES FROM SLOVAK HISTORY, Skultety; $1.00 (paper); $2.00 (cloth cover). THE DELIVERANCE OF SISTER CECILIA, $3.75. THE CHURCH OF SILE CE IN SLOVAKIA, Zubek; $3.50. FALSE FREEDOM, Delaney; $i.oo. SLOVAKIA'S ROAD TO STATEHOOD, Woytko; $1.50. ·'CZECHOSLOVAKIA " - History Made to Order, Hrobak; 50c. UNCONQUERABLES, Pauco; $3.50 ANTHOLOGY OF SLOVAK POETRY, Kramoris; $2.00. ♦ ♦ ♦ SLOVAKIA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The main purpose of SLOVAKIA is to pr omote a better under· standing and appreciation of t he Slovak nation and its long, hard struggle for freedom and independence. $1.00 per annum in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. SLOVAKIA P. 0 . Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JED N OTA PRESS Mi ddletown , Pa.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 3 (28) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/0ed3ffb9a95a7811650d2078b427ad87.pdf 44cebf2161e6ba0ad838816bee2ef4c9 PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) A n drew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Pete r P. H l etko 61 Woodland Avenu e C::.rapbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warre~ville, Ill. Steph en Msgr. F. J. Dubosh , P.A. Dubi e l 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio El izab et h Andrejko P:·esident 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Phil i p A. Hrobak P. n. Box 150 :YJ:iddletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents M icha el J. Vargovi c Rev. John W . Kri spinsky 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Julia Kraj covic H elen K ocan 1648 W . 18th Street 2 hicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Cu l en Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fall at NaLioual President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer St ephen J. Tkach M i lan V . Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic1,go 38, Ill. :-,, ational President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE An n a Sota~ National President Ladi es Pennsylvania S lovak Catholic Union Pa u l P. Ja mriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsb\lrgh 10, Pa. Josept, G. Prusa Joh n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril . ational Presiden t Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE N SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEONOTA '.\1iddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Clevelan d, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N. J. SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio· Ch icago , lll SVORNOST OSAONE H 1-ASY Chicag o. Ill Whitaker l'a SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �SLOVAKIA: Ruins of the Topolcany Castle, Nitra County � Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) A n drew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Pete r P. H l etko 61 Woodland Avenu e C::.rapbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warre~ville, Ill. Steph en Msgr. F. J. Dubosh , P.A. Dubi e l 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio El izab et h Andrejko P:·esident 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Phil i p A. Hrobak P. n. Box 150 :YJ:iddletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents M icha el J. Vargovi c Rev. John W . Kri spinsky 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Julia Kraj covic H elen K ocan 1648 W . 18th Street 2 hicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Cu l en Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fall at NaLioual President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer St ephen J. Tkach M i lan V . Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic1,go 38, Ill. :-,, ational President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE An n a Sota~ National President Ladi es Pennsylvania S lovak Catholic Union Pa u l P. Ja mriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsb\lrgh 10, Pa. Josept, G. Prusa Joh n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril . ational Presiden t Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE N SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEONOTA '.\1iddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Clevelan d, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N. J. SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio· Ch icago , lll SVORNOST OSAONE H 1-ASY Chicag o. Ill Whitaker l'a SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. �SLOVAKIA: Ruins of the Topolcany Castle, Nitra County � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) A n drew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Pete r P. H l etko 61 Woodland Avenu e C::.rapbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warre~ville, Ill. Steph en Msgr. F. J. Dubosh , P.A. Dubi e l 12210 Detroit Avenu e Lakewood, Ohio 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio El izab et h Andrejko P:·esident 551 Grove Avenue Johnstown, Pa. Phil i p A. Hrobak P. n. Box 150 :YJ:iddletown, Pa. ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents M icha el J. Vargovi c Rev. John W . Kri spinsky 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio National President First Catholic Slovak Union Julia Kraj covic H elen K ocan 1648 W . 18th Street 2 hicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Cu l en Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fall at NaLioual President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer St ephen J. Tkach M i lan V . Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic1,go 38, Ill. :-,, ational President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE An n a Sota~ National President Ladi es Pennsylvania S lovak Catholic Union Pa u l P. Ja mriska 810 Montooth Street Pittsb\lrgh 10, Pa. Josept, G. Prusa Joh n 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril . ational Presiden t Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVE N SKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEONOTA '.\1iddletown, Pa. Scranton, Pa. Clevelan d, Ohio BRATSTVO Wilkes-Barre, Pa. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N. J. SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Cleveland, Ohio· Ch icago , lll SVORNOST OSAONE H 1-ASY Chicag o. Ill Whitaker l'a SLOVAK V AMERIKE Whiting, Ind. SLOVAKIA: Ruins of the Topolcany Castle, Nitra County  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27) Description An account of the resource includes photo of Ruins of the Topolčany Castle, Nitra County Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/0085549364f4ab9f07fc2b8fbbab86db.pdf b417fb83e147b748ef4979f0e379c128 PDF Text Text 56 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) In the areas which were quite populated, the country was divided into regions (zupy), according to the pattern of Great Moravia. A representative of the king, administering a region, was called a regional administrator (zupan; ispan). The zupan was not only administrator in political and economic affairs, but in judicial matters as well. He was the judge, who presided over all litigations, and the commander of the army which the region was obliged to muster for the king in time of war. The Slovaks used to refer to these regions also as "stolice" (seats). The oldest regional seats in Slovakia originated from the territories of Slovak tribal principalities. The center of a region was the castle in which the zupan resided. Churches and rectories, to which all settlements belonged, were part and parcel of the regional castles. The regional seats thus became the centers of Church and State administrations. In those times the feudal system prevailed. The entire system rested. on the basis of land. According to the theory of the time, all lands belonged to the emperor or king. The king could make grants of land-fiefs or feuds, from which we derive feudalism - to his followers. Such a grant was called a feudal tenure. A lord (magnate or magistrate) could also be a vassal of another lord by virtue of such a grant of land, and kings holding lands from other kings were also vassals to those kings. A lord (vel'moz) had the right to subdivide his land among other vassals on the same basis as that on which he had received it from the king. A lord obtaining land from another had to go through a ceremony known as homage. Kneeling before the grantor, and placing his hands between the hands of the lord, he swore aloud that he would be his lord's man (homme), that he would devote himself to him and render him such services as were necessary and stipulated. After the oath was given and accepted, the lord granted the lands by investiture. �SLOVAKIA 57 In taking the oath, a vassal promised never to disclose his lord's secrets and to acquaint his lord with all information about his enemies. If the lord was unhorsed in battle, the vassal was obliged to give his own horse to his lord. A vassal was bound to uphold his lord's honor and reputation at all times. When necessary, the vassal was obliged to go to battle with his lord and, in proportion to the amount of land granted, to raise the required number of men to serve for a stipulated period, which meant that the fighting could be waged only near home. The vassal agreed to serve as magistrate and to assist the lord in the government of his domain and in the maintenanc e of order. Of course, the relation of rights and duties of lords and vassals was reciprocal. A fief could not be taken back arbitrarily. The lord promised to protect his vassal, deal with him justly and safeguard his rights and privileges. The regulations described above pertained to the higher classes - the nobility, the fighting class in the feudal system. But a similar system prevailed in the parceling out of land by the lord to his working-cl ass tenants. In this case, however, the grants were known as "servile tenures." After a lord received his grant of land from the king, he had to have it cultivated. This work was done by the working classes known as serfs. Those who received "servile tenures" later on became the landed genry (zemianstv o), while the others remained landless serfs. The holders of "servile tenures" paid for their land in labor or in produce, giving a portion of their annual crops. Upon these the lord depended for his support, and in his relation to them he had duties to perform as well as rights to exact. Most of the lowest peasants, the landless serfs, were inalienably attached to the land, tied up forever to the manor within which they were born. The citizens of some villages were servants of the king's court and, hence, were called courtiers (dvornici). These villages even today are named "Dvorniky." Forest wardens (hajnici) took care of the king's forests, raised and trained his hounds and falcons. Towns and villages named Hajniky, Psary, Sokolany, Sokolce, Sokolova, Sokolovce, harbored these forest wardens. Fishermen lived in �58 SLOVAKIA the village of Ryba.re. Artisans who worked for the king's court or the royal castle named the towns they inhabited after their trades (Stitare, Hrnciarovce, Tesare, Kovacova, etc.). Among the inhabitants of the villages, which already in 1075 belonged to the monastery of St. Benedict-Abovethe-Hron, even goldsmiths (zlatnici) are mentioned. The people who inhabited the territory of Slovak:a during the 10th-12th centuries were descendants of the inhabitants of Great Moravia. That they were Slovaks is attested to by the geographical names of the entire Slovak territory. After a time, when the Magyars began to settle in Slovakia, the Slovak names were adopted by them in the form used by the Slovaks. But even personal names of the inhabitants of Slovakia, preserved in old documents, tell us that Slovakia was inhabited by Slovaks continuously from about the fifth century. These personal names come to us either from ancient pagan times or are the Slovak forms of Latin Christian names. In those times, the Slovaks used such names most frequently: Bogat, Bogdan, Bogomier, Bogomil, Bogorad, Bohumir, Bohurad, Bohuta, Bolerad, Boleslav, Domagost, Domoslav, Dragos, Drazko, Ivan, Ivanka, Milovan, Milvan, Mladen, Milgost, Milota, Mojtech, Mojta, Mutimir, Premlad, Pribyla, Preslav, Radovan, Radvan, Radon, Rados, Stoj(i)slav, Sebeslav, Tvrdos, Vid(a), Vojislav, Vojtech, Vladislav, Zdislav. The Slovak names Beno, Benko, Benus, Benata are derived from the Latin "Benedictus." Many geographical names originated from these personal names: Bohunice from Bohun, Boleraz from Bolerad, Budatin from Budata, Radosina from Radosa, Radvan from Radovan, Mojtin from Mojta, Tvrdosin from Tvrdos. Besides the orig,i nal Slovak inhabitants who settled in Slovakia, the Magyars began to settle near the lower ends of Slovak rivers and even established several settlements in the valleys farther north, where, in time, they were assimilated by the older Slovak inhabitants. Besides the Magyars, only scattered groups of foreign warriors settled along the Slovak frontier, where they served as sentinels. The only memento of their stay in Slovakia has been preserved in the names of the several settlements they occupied. For- �SLOVAKIA 59 eign merchants, especially Germans and Jews, settled below the most famous castles, such as Bratislava and Nitra, but only as guests whom the king allowed to peddle foreign goods. It was thus that the first market settlements originated beneath the most ancient castles of Slovakia. THE ROLE OF THE CHURCH The Church played a preeminent role in the cultural life of Slovakia from the earliest times. From the beginning of the eleventh century practically the entire area of Slovakia was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Archbishopric of Ostrihom. From the end of the eleventh century a part of eastern Slovakia was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Jager (Eger; Erlau), and from the beginning of the twelfth century a part of northwest Slovakia with the central Vah area became the territory of the revived Bishopric of Nitra. The spiritual needs of the population were taken care of by the parishes connected with the castles, and especially by the parishes of the regional castles. Later, in place of these large castle parishes, there originated archdiaconates which had jurisdiction over several parishes. Monasteries had an extraordinary significance. Besides propagating Christianity, they sought to improve the economic and cultural conditions of their respective communities. The monks cleared forests, drained marshes, regulated the flow of streams, and changed unfertile soil into fertile fields. It was thus that new settlements sprang up in the vicinity of the monasteries. Near the monasteries imposing churches were erected which the monks ornamented with paintings and statues. The monasteries were, therefore, the first workshops of creative art in Slovakia. The oldest Slovak monasteries belonged to the Benedictine Order. Among these is the abbey of St. Hippolytus on Mount Zobor, whose origin goes back to the Great Moravian Empire. During the reign of King St. Stephen, this abbey became the heir to the properties of the Slovak principality of Nitra. St. Benedict's Abbey, near the Hron river, played a significant role in the settlement of the Hron region and in its economic and cultural development. It was founded by the Slovak feudal lord Gejza in 1075. Towards �60 SLOVAKIA the end of the 11th century another Slovak Benedictine monastery was founded in Diakovcie, in southern Slovakia, which belonged to the abbey on Mount Pannonia. In the twelfth century prepositures were established in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis. The first monastery of the Order of the Premonstratensians was founded by Lord Lampert in 1135 A.D. in Bzovik. The Cistercians settled in Lipovnik, near Roznava, in 1141 A.D., and later in Bardejov and Stiavnik. In the first half of the 13th century, the mendicant order of St. Francis came to the land of the Slovaks and built its first monasteries in Bratislava, Nitra and Trnava. Christian churches were being built in Slovakia since the ninth century. Because these ancient churches, connected with castles and monasteries, were made of wood, few traces of them remain today. In many places, however, cemeteries which date back to the 11th and 12th centuries, have been preserved. They have evidences that even churches once stood on the premises. In those days church architecture in Bavaria and Italy was Romanesque. In the 12th century small stone structures in that style were constructed also in Slovakia. The oldest Romanesque churches that have withstood the assault of the ages in Slovakia are found in Drazovcie, near Nitra, in Pominovci~, near Puchov, and in Kliz-Hradiste, not far from Topol'cany. Larger churches were erected near monasteries, and their foundations may be found to this day under newer top-structures which were added during the succeeding centuries. In southern Slovakia the Italian influence was prevalent, as might be seen from the extant Romanesque churches in Bin, not far from Komarno, and in Diakovcie. In many places at least the remains of Romanesque structures have been preserved and these now form parts of churches which were built after a later pattern. The Cathedral in Spisska Kapitula and in Nitra are examples of such structures. Romanesque paintings have been preserved in Zegra, Spis county. An interesting relic of Romanesque architecture are the rotundas found in Skalica and Dechtice. The Romanesque style was followed in Slo- �SLOVAKIA 61 vakia up to the middle of the 13th century, · at which time a new form of architecture replaced it. THE TURKS IliVADE SLOVAKIA In the twelfth century Slovakia enjoyed years of relatively peaceful development. The increasing population shifted upstream from the densely populated plains into the hills of central Slovakia, where conditions were almost ideal for animal husbandry. ln the lowlands and basins of northern Slovakia forests were cleared, new tracts of land were made arable and new settlements were founded. New monastic institutions establishing their monasteries on border-lands of Slovakia effectively aided the settlement of the hilly regions. Germans also settled in these wooded regions of Slovakia. The number of settlements increased and new churches were. built, so that Slovakia progressed not only economically, but also culturally. In the thirteenth century, however, a terrible catastrophe interrupted this peaceful development when the terrible Turks invaded Slovakia. The Turks belong to the group of Mongolian nations. Turkish tribes lived in central Asia, where they created a large empire in the beginning of the thirteenth century, the heart of which was near the Bajkal Sea. The le_a der of the Turks was the notorious and brutal warrior Temudzin, later known as Genghis Khan, "the Scourge of God." In a short time the Turks conquered all neighboring Mongolian nations and extended their power to China and India, so that a large part of Asia was ,under their domination. Later they set out to subjugate Europe. On. the north of the Caucasus region, they defeated the Kumani who sought the aid of Russian princes. ln 1223 A.D. they attacked the Russians and crushed them near the Kalka river. Shortly thereafter the Turkish armies came up all the way to the Carpathians and prepared to invade Poland and Hungary under the leadership of Khan Batu. The Turks engaged in animal husbandry, but spent most of their lives in warfare. To get accustomed to the hardships of military life, they lived very simply. Their food was frugal, their clothing was made of skins of animals, and they cared little for personal cleanliness. Only the nobility lived in luxury and splendor. Their women and �62 SLOVAKIA children usually accompanied them on their military expeditions. The Turks were not very talkative. The Turks waged war on ponies which excelled in endurance and speed. Courage and cruelty were the trademarks of the Turkish army. Any soldier guilty of a breach of discipline, or retreating in battle, or of showing mercy to a foe, was executed summarily. They slaughtered their conquered foe mercilessly; only women and healthy young men were taken into capbvity as slaves. Captives, placed in the vanguard, had to engage the enemy before the regular Turkish army went into the skirmish. The country through which they passed became a barren wasteland, because they burned all villages and towns, massacred their inhabitants, and carried off all portable booty. They were armed with long arrows, curved scimitars, javelins, leather helmets and shields. They were so well trained that even in full gallop they could release an arrow or javelin with deadly accuracy. The Kumani in southern Russia, attacked by the Turks, fled to the west and begged the king of Hungary to permit them to settle in his kingdom. They numbered about 40,000 families. The king acquiesced, because he thought they could greatly assist him against the Turks. However, at that time conditions in Hungary were rather unsettled. During the reign of Andrew II (1205-1235 A.D.), who permitted many foreigners to settle in Hungary, many disorders took place. The feudal magnates took advantage of the situation by appropriating royal property. Belo, the oldest son of the King, became the leader of the feudal magnates, because he saw that his father's weakness was the cause of the weakness of the entire country. In 1222 A.D. the King was compelled to issue the Golden Bull in which he guaranteed the nobility various rights. When Belo IV (1235-1270) succeeded to the throne upon the death of his father, conditions in Hungary were such that he was forced to break the power of the feudal barons and recover the lands which they had appropriated. Relations between the nobility and the King were tense and the tension increased all the more when danger from the outside threatened the country. And at that time, the Turks stood before the gates of Hungary. �SLOVAKIA 63 The Turkish armies were divided into several units. One division under Peta invaded Poland, burned Cracow, and defeated Henry the Pius near Lehnica in Silesia. The second poured through the Carpathian passes into Hungary in 1241 A.D. Upon learning that Khan Batu at the head of a great force broke through the Verek Pass and was coming into the interior to take revenge on the ingdom for harboring the Kumani, King Belo issued a command to all nobles to mobilize their forces and hasten to the royal camp. But the nobility even then underestimated the gravity of the situation, gave the King trouble and accused the Kumani as the cause of the Turkish invasion. Finally, when the King collected enough men for his army, he set out to meet the invaders, who in the meantime had forded the Slam\ (Salty) river. At midnight, April 11, 1241, the Turks encircled Bela's camp and then utterly defeated his army. Many nobles and bishops, among them also the Bishop of Nitra, fell in battle. Only small detachments succeeded in hacking their way through the Turks and saving themselves by flight. Belo IV himself was in grave danger, but his most loyal magnates covered him well and enabled him to escape into the hills nearby. The King, escorted by several riders, rode through Saris, Spis and Liptov and came to Turiec. After resting a while at the Nitra castle, he fled to Austria, leaving the country to the mercy of the savage Turks. Hungary was defenseless and the Turks pillaged the country mercilessly. One division of the invaders tore deeply into Slovakia, ravaged Zemplin and Saris, and came as far as Spis. To saive themselves from destruction, the inhabitants of Spis fled into the inaccessible forests and took refuge on a huge, protruding cliff, known since that day as the Rock of Refuge. Another division devastated Gerner, Novohrad and Hont, and penetrated deeply into the Hron region. On the western and southern slopes of Stina, above Banska Stiavnica, is an extensive meadow, which even today is called the Turkish Meadow. Western iand southern Slovakra did not ascape the catastrophe either. The Turkish force led by Peta, which invaded Silesia, turned south, rode through Moravia and the �64 SLOVAKIA Vlar Pass into Slovakia. The inhabitants of the Vah region fled to the forests to escape the savage hordes of Peta. The strongholds of Trencin, Nitra, Bratisla.va and Komarno defended themselves heroically. Ancient Slovak churches became the victims of Turkish devastation, and a large part of the Slovak population pel'ished at the hands of the savage, bloodthirsty Turks. In the winter of 1241-1242, the Turks crossed the frozen Danube river near 0strihom and conquered and pillaged the Transdanubian territory. Belo IV took refuge on the Dalmatian islands. At that time Khan Batu received word from Asia of the death of the Great Khan 0gotaj. Being anxious to make his claim to the vacant throne, Batu hastened home with his entire force. In this way Slovakia was freed from the unbearable tyranny of the Turks. But what the Tur.k;s failed to destroy became the spoils of the feudal barons who tore into Slovak regions to complete the work of destruction. Upon emerging from their. hiding places in the inaccessible mountains, the inhabitants of Slovaki,a found their viUfl,ges, homes and churches i~ ashes. M4sery, want and disease reigned everywhere. But the Slovak nation outlived even that calamity and put its shoulders to the task of rebuilding its homes and churches to s~feguard its national existence in its homeland. (To be continued) fl. l -f • 'f , 'T • • • WHO SAID IT? "Consider the situation of the twent-y--Odd non-western nations which are nexlt door to tlhe SOIViet world. These exposed: nrutions fe1t that they have been ipUt in the exipendable class, condeimned in perpeiDrni.ty to be the ramparts against whiich tJhe ang,ry waves of So'Vie't cOIIIlmunism will constantly hlurl themselives. . . . They cannot he enthusi astic about polides whitch wouiltl merely perpetuate so hrezardous ailld uncomfortruble a !Position. Today they liive close to '.deSipair because the United States, th~ historic lea:der of the forces of freedom, seems dedicated to the negative policy of containment and stalemate." - (John 'Foster Dulles, A POLICY OF BOLDNESS, May 19, 1952). 1 � 56 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) In the areas which were quite populated, the country was divided into regions (zupy), according to the pattern of Great Moravia. A representative of the king, administering a region, was called a regional administrator (zupan; ispan). The zupan was not only administrator in political and economic affairs, but in judicial matters as well. He was the judge, who presided over all litigations, and the commander of the army which the region was obliged to muster for the king in time of war. The Slovaks used to refer to these regions also as "stolice" (seats). The oldest regional seats in Slovakia originated from the territories of Slovak tribal principalities. The center of a region was the castle in which the zupan resided. Churches and rectories, to which all settlements belonged, were part and parcel of the regional castles. The regional seats thus became the centers of Church and State administrations. In those times the feudal system prevailed. The entire system rested. on the basis of land. According to the theory of the time, all lands belonged to the emperor or king. The king could make grants of land-fiefs or feuds, from which we derive feudalism - to his followers. Such a grant was called a feudal tenure. A lord (magnate or magistrate) could also be a vassal of another lord by virtue of such a grant of land, and kings holding lands from other kings were also vassals to those kings. A lord (vel'moz) had the right to subdivide his land among other vassals on the same basis as that on which he had received it from the king. A lord obtaining land from another had to go through a ceremony known as homage. Kneeling before the grantor, and placing his hands between the hands of the lord, he swore aloud that he would be his lord's man (homme), that he would devote himself to him and render him such services as were necessary and stipulated. After the oath was given and accepted, the lord granted the lands by investiture. �SLOVAKIA 57 In taking the oath, a vassal promised never to disclose his lord's secrets and to acquaint his lord with all information about his enemies. If the lord was unhorsed in battle, the vassal was obliged to give his own horse to his lord. A vassal was bound to uphold his lord's honor and reputation at all times. When necessary, the vassal was obliged to go to battle with his lord and, in proportion to the amount of land granted, to raise the required number of men to serve for a stipulated period, which meant that the fighting could be waged only near home. The vassal agreed to serve as magistrate and to assist the lord in the government of his domain and in the maintenanc e of order. Of course, the relation of rights and duties of lords and vassals was reciprocal. A fief could not be taken back arbitrarily. The lord promised to protect his vassal, deal with him justly and safeguard his rights and privileges. The regulations described above pertained to the higher classes - the nobility, the fighting class in the feudal system. But a similar system prevailed in the parceling out of land by the lord to his working-cl ass tenants. In this case, however, the grants were known as "servile tenures." After a lord received his grant of land from the king, he had to have it cultivated. This work was done by the working classes known as serfs. Those who received "servile tenures" later on became the landed genry (zemianstv o), while the others remained landless serfs. The holders of "servile tenures" paid for their land in labor or in produce, giving a portion of their annual crops. Upon these the lord depended for his support, and in his relation to them he had duties to perform as well as rights to exact. Most of the lowest peasants, the landless serfs, were inalienably attached to the land, tied up forever to the manor within which they were born. The citizens of some villages were servants of the king's court and, hence, were called courtiers (dvornici). These villages even today are named "Dvorniky." Forest wardens (hajnici) took care of the king's forests, raised and trained his hounds and falcons. Towns and villages named Hajniky, Psary, Sokolany, Sokolce, Sokolova, Sokolovce, harbored these forest wardens. Fishermen lived in �58 SLOVAKIA the village of Ryba.re. Artisans who worked for the king's court or the royal castle named the towns they inhabited after their trades (Stitare, Hrnciarovce, Tesare, Kovacova, etc.). Among the inhabitants of the villages, which already in 1075 belonged to the monastery of St. Benedict-Abovethe-Hron, even goldsmiths (zlatnici) are mentioned. The people who inhabited the territory of Slovak:a during the 10th-12th centuries were descendants of the inhabitants of Great Moravia. That they were Slovaks is attested to by the geographical names of the entire Slovak territory. After a time, when the Magyars began to settle in Slovakia, the Slovak names were adopted by them in the form used by the Slovaks. But even personal names of the inhabitants of Slovakia, preserved in old documents, tell us that Slovakia was inhabited by Slovaks continuously from about the fifth century. These personal names come to us either from ancient pagan times or are the Slovak forms of Latin Christian names. In those times, the Slovaks used such names most frequently: Bogat, Bogdan, Bogomier, Bogomil, Bogorad, Bohumir, Bohurad, Bohuta, Bolerad, Boleslav, Domagost, Domoslav, Dragos, Drazko, Ivan, Ivanka, Milovan, Milvan, Mladen, Milgost, Milota, Mojtech, Mojta, Mutimir, Premlad, Pribyla, Preslav, Radovan, Radvan, Radon, Rados, Stoj(i)slav, Sebeslav, Tvrdos, Vid(a), Vojislav, Vojtech, Vladislav, Zdislav. The Slovak names Beno, Benko, Benus, Benata are derived from the Latin "Benedictus." Many geographical names originated from these personal names: Bohunice from Bohun, Boleraz from Bolerad, Budatin from Budata, Radosina from Radosa, Radvan from Radovan, Mojtin from Mojta, Tvrdosin from Tvrdos. Besides the orig,i nal Slovak inhabitants who settled in Slovakia, the Magyars began to settle near the lower ends of Slovak rivers and even established several settlements in the valleys farther north, where, in time, they were assimilated by the older Slovak inhabitants. Besides the Magyars, only scattered groups of foreign warriors settled along the Slovak frontier, where they served as sentinels. The only memento of their stay in Slovakia has been preserved in the names of the several settlements they occupied. For- �SLOVAKIA 59 eign merchants, especially Germans and Jews, settled below the most famous castles, such as Bratislava and Nitra, but only as guests whom the king allowed to peddle foreign goods. It was thus that the first market settlements originated beneath the most ancient castles of Slovakia. THE ROLE OF THE CHURCH The Church played a preeminent role in the cultural life of Slovakia from the earliest times. From the beginning of the eleventh century practically the entire area of Slovakia was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Archbishopric of Ostrihom. From the end of the eleventh century a part of eastern Slovakia was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Jager (Eger; Erlau), and from the beginning of the twelfth century a part of northwest Slovakia with the central Vah area became the territory of the revived Bishopric of Nitra. The spiritual needs of the population were taken care of by the parishes connected with the castles, and especially by the parishes of the regional castles. Later, in place of these large castle parishes, there originated archdiaconates which had jurisdiction over several parishes. Monasteries had an extraordinary significance. Besides propagating Christianity, they sought to improve the economic and cultural conditions of their respective communities. The monks cleared forests, drained marshes, regulated the flow of streams, and changed unfertile soil into fertile fields. It was thus that new settlements sprang up in the vicinity of the monasteries. Near the monasteries imposing churches were erected which the monks ornamented with paintings and statues. The monasteries were, therefore, the first workshops of creative art in Slovakia. The oldest Slovak monasteries belonged to the Benedictine Order. Among these is the abbey of St. Hippolytus on Mount Zobor, whose origin goes back to the Great Moravian Empire. During the reign of King St. Stephen, this abbey became the heir to the properties of the Slovak principality of Nitra. St. Benedict's Abbey, near the Hron river, played a significant role in the settlement of the Hron region and in its economic and cultural development. It was founded by the Slovak feudal lord Gejza in 1075. Towards �60 SLOVAKIA the end of the 11th century another Slovak Benedictine monastery was founded in Diakovcie, in southern Slovakia, which belonged to the abbey on Mount Pannonia. In the twelfth century prepositures were established in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis. The first monastery of the Order of the Premonstratensians was founded by Lord Lampert in 1135 A.D. in Bzovik. The Cistercians settled in Lipovnik, near Roznava, in 1141 A.D., and later in Bardejov and Stiavnik. In the first half of the 13th century, the mendicant order of St. Francis came to the land of the Slovaks and built its first monasteries in Bratislava, Nitra and Trnava. Christian churches were being built in Slovakia since the ninth century. Because these ancient churches, connected with castles and monasteries, were made of wood, few traces of them remain today. In many places, however, cemeteries which date back to the 11th and 12th centuries, have been preserved. They have evidences that even churches once stood on the premises. In those days church architecture in Bavaria and Italy was Romanesque. In the 12th century small stone structures in that style were constructed also in Slovakia. The oldest Romanesque churches that have withstood the assault of the ages in Slovakia are found in Drazovcie, near Nitra, in Pominovci~, near Puchov, and in Kliz-Hradiste, not far from Topol'cany. Larger churches were erected near monasteries, and their foundations may be found to this day under newer top-structures which were added during the succeeding centuries. In southern Slovakia the Italian influence was prevalent, as might be seen from the extant Romanesque churches in Bin, not far from Komarno, and in Diakovcie. In many places at least the remains of Romanesque structures have been preserved and these now form parts of churches which were built after a later pattern. The Cathedral in Spisska Kapitula and in Nitra are examples of such structures. Romanesque paintings have been preserved in Zegra, Spis county. An interesting relic of Romanesque architecture are the rotundas found in Skalica and Dechtice. The Romanesque style was followed in Slo- �SLOVAKIA 61 vakia up to the middle of the 13th century, · at which time a new form of architecture replaced it. THE TURKS IliVADE SLOVAKIA In the twelfth century Slovakia enjoyed years of relatively peaceful development. The increasing population shifted upstream from the densely populated plains into the hills of central Slovakia, where conditions were almost ideal for animal husbandry. ln the lowlands and basins of northern Slovakia forests were cleared, new tracts of land were made arable and new settlements were founded. New monastic institutions establishing their monasteries on border-lands of Slovakia effectively aided the settlement of the hilly regions. Germans also settled in these wooded regions of Slovakia. The number of settlements increased and new churches were. built, so that Slovakia progressed not only economically, but also culturally. In the thirteenth century, however, a terrible catastrophe interrupted this peaceful development when the terrible Turks invaded Slovakia. The Turks belong to the group of Mongolian nations. Turkish tribes lived in central Asia, where they created a large empire in the beginning of the thirteenth century, the heart of which was near the Bajkal Sea. The le_a der of the Turks was the notorious and brutal warrior Temudzin, later known as Genghis Khan, "the Scourge of God." In a short time the Turks conquered all neighboring Mongolian nations and extended their power to China and India, so that a large part of Asia was ,under their domination. Later they set out to subjugate Europe. On. the north of the Caucasus region, they defeated the Kumani who sought the aid of Russian princes. ln 1223 A.D. they attacked the Russians and crushed them near the Kalka river. Shortly thereafter the Turkish armies came up all the way to the Carpathians and prepared to invade Poland and Hungary under the leadership of Khan Batu. The Turks engaged in animal husbandry, but spent most of their lives in warfare. To get accustomed to the hardships of military life, they lived very simply. Their food was frugal, their clothing was made of skins of animals, and they cared little for personal cleanliness. Only the nobility lived in luxury and splendor. Their women and �62 SLOVAKIA children usually accompanied them on their military expeditions. The Turks were not very talkative. The Turks waged war on ponies which excelled in endurance and speed. Courage and cruelty were the trademarks of the Turkish army. Any soldier guilty of a breach of discipline, or retreating in battle, or of showing mercy to a foe, was executed summarily. They slaughtered their conquered foe mercilessly; only women and healthy young men were taken into capbvity as slaves. Captives, placed in the vanguard, had to engage the enemy before the regular Turkish army went into the skirmish. The country through which they passed became a barren wasteland, because they burned all villages and towns, massacred their inhabitants, and carried off all portable booty. They were armed with long arrows, curved scimitars, javelins, leather helmets and shields. They were so well trained that even in full gallop they could release an arrow or javelin with deadly accuracy. The Kumani in southern Russia, attacked by the Turks, fled to the west and begged the king of Hungary to permit them to settle in his kingdom. They numbered about 40,000 families. The king acquiesced, because he thought they could greatly assist him against the Turks. However, at that time conditions in Hungary were rather unsettled. During the reign of Andrew II (1205-1235 A.D.), who permitted many foreigners to settle in Hungary, many disorders took place. The feudal magnates took advantage of the situation by appropriating royal property. Belo, the oldest son of the King, became the leader of the feudal magnates, because he saw that his father's weakness was the cause of the weakness of the entire country. In 1222 A.D. the King was compelled to issue the Golden Bull in which he guaranteed the nobility various rights. When Belo IV (1235-1270) succeeded to the throne upon the death of his father, conditions in Hungary were such that he was forced to break the power of the feudal barons and recover the lands which they had appropriated. Relations between the nobility and the King were tense and the tension increased all the more when danger from the outside threatened the country. And at that time, the Turks stood before the gates of Hungary. �SLOVAKIA 63 The Turkish armies were divided into several units. One division under Peta invaded Poland, burned Cracow, and defeated Henry the Pius near Lehnica in Silesia. The second poured through the Carpathian passes into Hungary in 1241 A.D. Upon learning that Khan Batu at the head of a great force broke through the Verek Pass and was coming into the interior to take revenge on the ingdom for harboring the Kumani, King Belo issued a command to all nobles to mobilize their forces and hasten to the royal camp. But the nobility even then underestimated the gravity of the situation, gave the King trouble and accused the Kumani as the cause of the Turkish invasion. Finally, when the King collected enough men for his army, he set out to meet the invaders, who in the meantime had forded the Slam\ (Salty) river. At midnight, April 11, 1241, the Turks encircled Bela's camp and then utterly defeated his army. Many nobles and bishops, among them also the Bishop of Nitra, fell in battle. Only small detachments succeeded in hacking their way through the Turks and saving themselves by flight. Belo IV himself was in grave danger, but his most loyal magnates covered him well and enabled him to escape into the hills nearby. The King, escorted by several riders, rode through Saris, Spis and Liptov and came to Turiec. After resting a while at the Nitra castle, he fled to Austria, leaving the country to the mercy of the savage Turks. Hungary was defenseless and the Turks pillaged the country mercilessly. One division of the invaders tore deeply into Slovakia, ravaged Zemplin and Saris, and came as far as Spis. To saive themselves from destruction, the inhabitants of Spis fled into the inaccessible forests and took refuge on a huge, protruding cliff, known since that day as the Rock of Refuge. Another division devastated Gerner, Novohrad and Hont, and penetrated deeply into the Hron region. On the western and southern slopes of Stina, above Banska Stiavnica, is an extensive meadow, which even today is called the Turkish Meadow. Western iand southern Slovakra did not ascape the catastrophe either. The Turkish force led by Peta, which invaded Silesia, turned south, rode through Moravia and the �64 SLOVAKIA Vlar Pass into Slovakia. The inhabitants of the Vah region fled to the forests to escape the savage hordes of Peta. The strongholds of Trencin, Nitra, Bratisla.va and Komarno defended themselves heroically. Ancient Slovak churches became the victims of Turkish devastation, and a large part of the Slovak population pel'ished at the hands of the savage, bloodthirsty Turks. In the winter of 1241-1242, the Turks crossed the frozen Danube river near 0strihom and conquered and pillaged the Transdanubian territory. Belo IV took refuge on the Dalmatian islands. At that time Khan Batu received word from Asia of the death of the Great Khan 0gotaj. Being anxious to make his claim to the vacant throne, Batu hastened home with his entire force. In this way Slovakia was freed from the unbearable tyranny of the Turks. But what the Tur.k;s failed to destroy became the spoils of the feudal barons who tore into Slovak regions to complete the work of destruction. Upon emerging from their. hiding places in the inaccessible mountains, the inhabitants of Slovaki,a found their viUfl,ges, homes and churches i~ ashes. M4sery, want and disease reigned everywhere. But the Slovak nation outlived even that calamity and put its shoulders to the task of rebuilding its homes and churches to s~feguard its national existence in its homeland. (To be continued) fl. l -f • 'f , 'T • • • WHO SAID IT? "Consider the situation of the twent-y--Odd non-western nations which are nexlt door to tlhe SOIViet world. These exposed: nrutions fe1t that they have been ipUt in the exipendable class, condeimned in perpeiDrni.ty to be the ramparts against whiich tJhe ang,ry waves of So'Vie't cOIIIlmunism will constantly hlurl themselives. . . . They cannot he enthusi astic about polides whitch wouiltl merely perpetuate so hrezardous ailld uncomfortruble a !Position. Today they liive close to '.deSipair because the United States, th~ historic lea:der of the forces of freedom, seems dedicated to the negative policy of containment and stalemate." - (John 'Foster Dulles, A POLICY OF BOLDNESS, May 19, 1952). 1 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 56 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) In the areas which were quite populated, the country was divided into regions (zupy), according to the pattern of Great Moravia. A representative of the king, administering a region, was called a regional administrator (zupan; ispan). The zupan was not only administrator in political and economic affairs, but in judicial matters as well. He was the judge, who presided over all litigations, and the commander of the army which the region was obliged to muster for the king in time of war. The Slovaks used to refer to these regions also as "stolice" (seats). The oldest regional seats in Slovakia originated from the territories of Slovak tribal principalities. The center of a region was the castle in which the zupan resided. Churches and rectories, to which all settlements belonged, were part and parcel of the regional castles. The regional seats thus became the centers of Church and State administrations. In those times the feudal system prevailed. The entire system rested. on the basis of land. According to the theory of the time, all lands belonged to the emperor or king. The king could make grants of land-fiefs or feuds, from which we derive feudalism - to his followers. Such a grant was called a feudal tenure. A lord (magnate or magistrate) could also be a vassal of another lord by virtue of such a grant of land, and kings holding lands from other kings were also vassals to those kings. A lord (vel'moz) had the right to subdivide his land among other vassals on the same basis as that on which he had received it from the king. A lord obtaining land from another had to go through a ceremony known as homage. Kneeling before the grantor, and placing his hands between the hands of the lord, he swore aloud that he would be his lord's man (homme), that he would devote himself to him and render him such services as were necessary and stipulated. After the oath was given and accepted, the lord granted the lands by investiture. SLOVAKIA 57 In taking the oath, a vassal promised never to disclose his lord's secrets and to acquaint his lord with all information about his enemies. If the lord was unhorsed in battle, the vassal was obliged to give his own horse to his lord. A vassal was bound to uphold his lord's honor and reputation at all times. When necessary, the vassal was obliged to go to battle with his lord and, in proportion to the amount of land granted, to raise the required number of men to serve for a stipulated period, which meant that the fighting could be waged only near home. The vassal agreed to serve as magistrate and to assist the lord in the government of his domain and in the maintenanc e of order. Of course, the relation of rights and duties of lords and vassals was reciprocal. A fief could not be taken back arbitrarily. The lord promised to protect his vassal, deal with him justly and safeguard his rights and privileges. The regulations described above pertained to the higher classes - the nobility, the fighting class in the feudal system. But a similar system prevailed in the parceling out of land by the lord to his working-cl ass tenants. In this case, however, the grants were known as "servile tenures." After a lord received his grant of land from the king, he had to have it cultivated. This work was done by the working classes known as serfs. Those who received "servile tenures" later on became the landed genry (zemianstv o), while the others remained landless serfs. The holders of "servile tenures" paid for their land in labor or in produce, giving a portion of their annual crops. Upon these the lord depended for his support, and in his relation to them he had duties to perform as well as rights to exact. Most of the lowest peasants, the landless serfs, were inalienably attached to the land, tied up forever to the manor within which they were born. The citizens of some villages were servants of the king's court and, hence, were called courtiers (dvornici). These villages even today are named "Dvorniky." Forest wardens (hajnici) took care of the king's forests, raised and trained his hounds and falcons. Towns and villages named Hajniky, Psary, Sokolany, Sokolce, Sokolova, Sokolovce, harbored these forest wardens. Fishermen lived in 58 SLOVAKIA the village of Ryba.re. Artisans who worked for the king's court or the royal castle named the towns they inhabited after their trades (Stitare, Hrnciarovce, Tesare, Kovacova, etc.). Among the inhabitants of the villages, which already in 1075 belonged to the monastery of St. Benedict-Abovethe-Hron, even goldsmiths (zlatnici) are mentioned. The people who inhabited the territory of Slovak:a during the 10th-12th centuries were descendants of the inhabitants of Great Moravia. That they were Slovaks is attested to by the geographical names of the entire Slovak territory. After a time, when the Magyars began to settle in Slovakia, the Slovak names were adopted by them in the form used by the Slovaks. But even personal names of the inhabitants of Slovakia, preserved in old documents, tell us that Slovakia was inhabited by Slovaks continuously from about the fifth century. These personal names come to us either from ancient pagan times or are the Slovak forms of Latin Christian names. In those times, the Slovaks used such names most frequently: Bogat, Bogdan, Bogomier, Bogomil, Bogorad, Bohumir, Bohurad, Bohuta, Bolerad, Boleslav, Domagost, Domoslav, Dragos, Drazko, Ivan, Ivanka, Milovan, Milvan, Mladen, Milgost, Milota, Mojtech, Mojta, Mutimir, Premlad, Pribyla, Preslav, Radovan, Radvan, Radon, Rados, Stoj(i)slav, Sebeslav, Tvrdos, Vid(a), Vojislav, Vojtech, Vladislav, Zdislav. The Slovak names Beno, Benko, Benus, Benata are derived from the Latin "Benedictus." Many geographical names originated from these personal names: Bohunice from Bohun, Boleraz from Bolerad, Budatin from Budata, Radosina from Radosa, Radvan from Radovan, Mojtin from Mojta, Tvrdosin from Tvrdos. Besides the orig,i nal Slovak inhabitants who settled in Slovakia, the Magyars began to settle near the lower ends of Slovak rivers and even established several settlements in the valleys farther north, where, in time, they were assimilated by the older Slovak inhabitants. Besides the Magyars, only scattered groups of foreign warriors settled along the Slovak frontier, where they served as sentinels. The only memento of their stay in Slovakia has been preserved in the names of the several settlements they occupied. For- SLOVAKIA 59 eign merchants, especially Germans and Jews, settled below the most famous castles, such as Bratislava and Nitra, but only as guests whom the king allowed to peddle foreign goods. It was thus that the first market settlements originated beneath the most ancient castles of Slovakia. THE ROLE OF THE CHURCH The Church played a preeminent role in the cultural life of Slovakia from the earliest times. From the beginning of the eleventh century practically the entire area of Slovakia was under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Archbishopric of Ostrihom. From the end of the eleventh century a part of eastern Slovakia was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Jager (Eger; Erlau), and from the beginning of the twelfth century a part of northwest Slovakia with the central Vah area became the territory of the revived Bishopric of Nitra. The spiritual needs of the population were taken care of by the parishes connected with the castles, and especially by the parishes of the regional castles. Later, in place of these large castle parishes, there originated archdiaconates which had jurisdiction over several parishes. Monasteries had an extraordinary significance. Besides propagating Christianity, they sought to improve the economic and cultural conditions of their respective communities. The monks cleared forests, drained marshes, regulated the flow of streams, and changed unfertile soil into fertile fields. It was thus that new settlements sprang up in the vicinity of the monasteries. Near the monasteries imposing churches were erected which the monks ornamented with paintings and statues. The monasteries were, therefore, the first workshops of creative art in Slovakia. The oldest Slovak monasteries belonged to the Benedictine Order. Among these is the abbey of St. Hippolytus on Mount Zobor, whose origin goes back to the Great Moravian Empire. During the reign of King St. Stephen, this abbey became the heir to the properties of the Slovak principality of Nitra. St. Benedict's Abbey, near the Hron river, played a significant role in the settlement of the Hron region and in its economic and cultural development. It was founded by the Slovak feudal lord Gejza in 1075. Towards 60 SLOVAKIA the end of the 11th century another Slovak Benedictine monastery was founded in Diakovcie, in southern Slovakia, which belonged to the abbey on Mount Pannonia. In the twelfth century prepositures were established in Bratislava, Nitra and Spis. The first monastery of the Order of the Premonstratensians was founded by Lord Lampert in 1135 A.D. in Bzovik. The Cistercians settled in Lipovnik, near Roznava, in 1141 A.D., and later in Bardejov and Stiavnik. In the first half of the 13th century, the mendicant order of St. Francis came to the land of the Slovaks and built its first monasteries in Bratislava, Nitra and Trnava. Christian churches were being built in Slovakia since the ninth century. Because these ancient churches, connected with castles and monasteries, were made of wood, few traces of them remain today. In many places, however, cemeteries which date back to the 11th and 12th centuries, have been preserved. They have evidences that even churches once stood on the premises. In those days church architecture in Bavaria and Italy was Romanesque. In the 12th century small stone structures in that style were constructed also in Slovakia. The oldest Romanesque churches that have withstood the assault of the ages in Slovakia are found in Drazovcie, near Nitra, in Pominovci~, near Puchov, and in Kliz-Hradiste, not far from Topol'cany. Larger churches were erected near monasteries, and their foundations may be found to this day under newer top-structures which were added during the succeeding centuries. In southern Slovakia the Italian influence was prevalent, as might be seen from the extant Romanesque churches in Bin, not far from Komarno, and in Diakovcie. In many places at least the remains of Romanesque structures have been preserved and these now form parts of churches which were built after a later pattern. The Cathedral in Spisska Kapitula and in Nitra are examples of such structures. Romanesque paintings have been preserved in Zegra, Spis county. An interesting relic of Romanesque architecture are the rotundas found in Skalica and Dechtice. The Romanesque style was followed in Slo- SLOVAKIA 61 vakia up to the middle of the 13th century, · at which time a new form of architecture replaced it. THE TURKS IliVADE SLOVAKIA In the twelfth century Slovakia enjoyed years of relatively peaceful development. The increasing population shifted upstream from the densely populated plains into the hills of central Slovakia, where conditions were almost ideal for animal husbandry. ln the lowlands and basins of northern Slovakia forests were cleared, new tracts of land were made arable and new settlements were founded. New monastic institutions establishing their monasteries on border-lands of Slovakia effectively aided the settlement of the hilly regions. Germans also settled in these wooded regions of Slovakia. The number of settlements increased and new churches were. built, so that Slovakia progressed not only economically, but also culturally. In the thirteenth century, however, a terrible catastrophe interrupted this peaceful development when the terrible Turks invaded Slovakia. The Turks belong to the group of Mongolian nations. Turkish tribes lived in central Asia, where they created a large empire in the beginning of the thirteenth century, the heart of which was near the Bajkal Sea. The le_a der of the Turks was the notorious and brutal warrior Temudzin, later known as Genghis Khan, "the Scourge of God." In a short time the Turks conquered all neighboring Mongolian nations and extended their power to China and India, so that a large part of Asia was ,under their domination. Later they set out to subjugate Europe. On. the north of the Caucasus region, they defeated the Kumani who sought the aid of Russian princes. ln 1223 A.D. they attacked the Russians and crushed them near the Kalka river. Shortly thereafter the Turkish armies came up all the way to the Carpathians and prepared to invade Poland and Hungary under the leadership of Khan Batu. The Turks engaged in animal husbandry, but spent most of their lives in warfare. To get accustomed to the hardships of military life, they lived very simply. Their food was frugal, their clothing was made of skins of animals, and they cared little for personal cleanliness. Only the nobility lived in luxury and splendor. Their women and 62 SLOVAKIA children usually accompanied them on their military expeditions. The Turks were not very talkative. The Turks waged war on ponies which excelled in endurance and speed. Courage and cruelty were the trademarks of the Turkish army. Any soldier guilty of a breach of discipline, or retreating in battle, or of showing mercy to a foe, was executed summarily. They slaughtered their conquered foe mercilessly; only women and healthy young men were taken into capbvity as slaves. Captives, placed in the vanguard, had to engage the enemy before the regular Turkish army went into the skirmish. The country through which they passed became a barren wasteland, because they burned all villages and towns, massacred their inhabitants, and carried off all portable booty. They were armed with long arrows, curved scimitars, javelins, leather helmets and shields. They were so well trained that even in full gallop they could release an arrow or javelin with deadly accuracy. The Kumani in southern Russia, attacked by the Turks, fled to the west and begged the king of Hungary to permit them to settle in his kingdom. They numbered about 40,000 families. The king acquiesced, because he thought they could greatly assist him against the Turks. However, at that time conditions in Hungary were rather unsettled. During the reign of Andrew II (1205-1235 A.D.), who permitted many foreigners to settle in Hungary, many disorders took place. The feudal magnates took advantage of the situation by appropriating royal property. Belo, the oldest son of the King, became the leader of the feudal magnates, because he saw that his father's weakness was the cause of the weakness of the entire country. In 1222 A.D. the King was compelled to issue the Golden Bull in which he guaranteed the nobility various rights. When Belo IV (1235-1270) succeeded to the throne upon the death of his father, conditions in Hungary were such that he was forced to break the power of the feudal barons and recover the lands which they had appropriated. Relations between the nobility and the King were tense and the tension increased all the more when danger from the outside threatened the country. And at that time, the Turks stood before the gates of Hungary. SLOVAKIA 63 The Turkish armies were divided into several units. One division under Peta invaded Poland, burned Cracow, and defeated Henry the Pius near Lehnica in Silesia. The second poured through the Carpathian passes into Hungary in 1241 A.D. Upon learning that Khan Batu at the head of a great force broke through the Verek Pass and was coming into the interior to take revenge on the ingdom for harboring the Kumani, King Belo issued a command to all nobles to mobilize their forces and hasten to the royal camp. But the nobility even then underestimated the gravity of the situation, gave the King trouble and accused the Kumani as the cause of the Turkish invasion. Finally, when the King collected enough men for his army, he set out to meet the invaders, who in the meantime had forded the Slam\ (Salty) river. At midnight, April 11, 1241, the Turks encircled Bela's camp and then utterly defeated his army. Many nobles and bishops, among them also the Bishop of Nitra, fell in battle. Only small detachments succeeded in hacking their way through the Turks and saving themselves by flight. Belo IV himself was in grave danger, but his most loyal magnates covered him well and enabled him to escape into the hills nearby. The King, escorted by several riders, rode through Saris, Spis and Liptov and came to Turiec. After resting a while at the Nitra castle, he fled to Austria, leaving the country to the mercy of the savage Turks. Hungary was defenseless and the Turks pillaged the country mercilessly. One division of the invaders tore deeply into Slovakia, ravaged Zemplin and Saris, and came as far as Spis. To saive themselves from destruction, the inhabitants of Spis fled into the inaccessible forests and took refuge on a huge, protruding cliff, known since that day as the Rock of Refuge. Another division devastated Gerner, Novohrad and Hont, and penetrated deeply into the Hron region. On the western and southern slopes of Stina, above Banska Stiavnica, is an extensive meadow, which even today is called the Turkish Meadow. Western iand southern Slovakra did not ascape the catastrophe either. The Turkish force led by Peta, which invaded Silesia, turned south, rode through Moravia and the 64 SLOVAKIA Vlar Pass into Slovakia. The inhabitants of the Vah region fled to the forests to escape the savage hordes of Peta. The strongholds of Trencin, Nitra, Bratisla.va and Komarno defended themselves heroically. Ancient Slovak churches became the victims of Turkish devastation, and a large part of the Slovak population pel'ished at the hands of the savage, bloodthirsty Turks. In the winter of 1241-1242, the Turks crossed the frozen Danube river near 0strihom and conquered and pillaged the Transdanubian territory. Belo IV took refuge on the Dalmatian islands. At that time Khan Batu received word from Asia of the death of the Great Khan 0gotaj. Being anxious to make his claim to the vacant throne, Batu hastened home with his entire force. In this way Slovakia was freed from the unbearable tyranny of the Turks. But what the Tur.k;s failed to destroy became the spoils of the feudal barons who tore into Slovak regions to complete the work of destruction. Upon emerging from their. hiding places in the inaccessible mountains, the inhabitants of Slovaki,a found their viUfl,ges, homes and churches i~ ashes. M4sery, want and disease reigned everywhere. But the Slovak nation outlived even that calamity and put its shoulders to the task of rebuilding its homes and churches to s~feguard its national existence in its homeland. (To be continued) fl. l -f • 'f , 'T • • • WHO SAID IT? "Consider the situation of the twent-y--Odd non-western nations which are nexlt door to tlhe SOIViet world. These exposed: nrutions fe1t that they have been ipUt in the exipendable class, condeimned in perpeiDrni.ty to be the ramparts against whiich tJhe ang,ry waves of So'Vie't cOIIIlmunism will constantly hlurl themselives. . . . They cannot he enthusi astic about polides whitch wouiltl merely perpetuate so hrezardous ailld uncomfortruble a !Position. Today they liive close to '.deSipair because the United States, th~ historic lea:der of the forces of freedom, seems dedicated to the negative policy of containment and stalemate." - (John 'Foster Dulles, A POLICY OF BOLDNESS, May 19, 1952). 1  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The History of Slovakia (6/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), June 1958 pp. 56-64 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/278">Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), pp. 60-64</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/260">Vol. 8, No. 3 (28), pp. 69-80</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/0320081ee2ff2025916682b59c012c94.pdf 2dafcfc71dce2c68e8997c530f0965f7 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA SWVAK EMIGRATION Constantine Culen 49 I ,J I 1 n ' At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the middle and lo;wer noibility held 70 % of the land in Slovakia. 'Dhe laind from which the Slovalk people was supposed rto maJke a liviing, the urlbarial land, a;mounted to only about 11 % of the total, ,b ut JI' even tlhis land did not b,e long to it. From what the land, yielded, the SlovaJk had to pay his taxes to feudal lords to wlhom the land ,b elonged according to the Ja,ws of that time - and to the so1Verign, w'ho tried to secure ,t he mil>it>a:ry defense of his realm from the taxes of the poorest people. Disease and constant warfary, of the rebellious nOlbility decimated t:Jhe tp0pu:lation. The nobility ruppropril}ted depopulated arets, even where some people ~till rerp.ained, usually -the more. productive areas. ,Slovakia lost its productiive force and gained an uniprodudive no~ bility. ' At that time one-half of the privileged class of the wlhole of Hungary lived in t3lovaki~; in BratisJa,v a County every tent'b ,p erson was a nobleman. The same situation preivailed in t,he counties of Turiec and Zemplin. This class reaUy did live a parasitic life; it was without initiative and considered it an insult to wor,k · it lived a wild life from the swea1:t. and blo9d of the po~rest people. According to I. A:csady, eminent Magyar author, the nolbility toolk away 167 1000 "Pressburg measures" of land from the peasants from 1700 to 1720. We can aippreciate wlhat that meant if we realize that five ,s uch measures a1lowed a livelihood for one family. In twenty years, therefore, mOTe than 33,000 Slovak families lost their means af livelihood; and ~bout 200,000 people were deipriived. of bread and ah existence! In five years (from 171·5 to 17'20) , 1,240 fawlies of Uptov County and 2,000 families of SaTis County were reduced to beggary oy the mY.b1eis. In the times when the rest of Europe was liberating itself from feudal regimes, Slovakia had to provide for 53 %<of the pTtvileged porpulaition of Hungary frro1m tJhe means that were not even sufficient for the .tnost primi- �50 SLOVAKIA tiive living of the serfs themselves. Practically every decade of the eigihteenth century is ma:z,ked with the death of tens ,o.f thousands of people firom hunger and pestilence. 'Dhe inhabitants fled from the villages, fathers of families abandoned their wives and children, and thousands oif acr~ of land .r ema,i ned uncuit1vated. Ba:ttalions oif gendarmes inteIWened, but to no avail. The oppressed and miseraJbJe people 'kept pouring to the south, to the more fertile land, wlhence reports had spread aibout a better and more free life on the desolat-ru but Twk-albandoned "Dolna zem" (lorwer coutry). Orv,e r 1,000 farrnilies left Liptov from 1715 to 1717; Orav;a County, among tlhe most populated of that time, lost almost onethivd of its 1peo1ple, Spis one-fifth, while in Saris the peasants aJbandoned three villa,ges completely and nine others almost comipletely. Thousands of peQple poured into south ern HungaTy from the counties of Zemplin and Albauj. In 1703, the first Slovaks had already settled in BOTos Jeno in Arad County; in 171'5, SlovaJk,s .built up Slovenska Caba, Endrod in 1'718, Sarvas i,n 1722, Slovensky Komlos in 1746, an:d communities in Bekes County; In 1747, the communities of Mokra and Menyhaza in Arad County, etc. Of course, with this first migiration the misery in .SlovaJkia did not diminish. Division of the land remained unchanged, because not even Theresian registers, nay, not even the agrarian reforms of 1836, brought any relief. A neglig~ble percentage of land was in the hands of peasants and strong population increases only aggraJVated the situation. From the second half o.f the eighteenth century until the liberation of the serfs in 1848, Slo,v ak blood continued to fl'orw to the south and strengthened t'he settlements of the Dolna ,zem. From there it flowed to Backia and Banat, then c·o ursed its way farther to the east into Transylvania, to the west into Croatia and Slavonia, and along the Darnulbe all the way to Bulgaria. Marie-Therese colonized Novo Selo and Padina with Slovaks in 1762; the Royal Ex-chequer settled them in Palota, Canada County, in 1768, while Joseph I plaiced them, in 17813, in Ba/lmvar, Ternes County, and also in 1 �SJ,OVAKIA 51 Elbendorf, KTasoiva County. In 1805, Francis I settled Slovaks together with Germans in Sairca, Torontala County; in 1807, in Butin, Arad County; in 1810, in the .communities o£ Sana:d and Baton.a o,n the Military Border (Vojenska hrani,ca); :from 1843 to 1845, the Ex-chequer settled them in. the communities of .AJ1'berti and NadlaJk, Canada County, where Slovruks had already settled previous to that time. It is not an easy task to trace accUTately just when and hoiw many Slovruks emigrated from their homeland to foreign lands to seek freedom and bread, b;ut the fact that already in 1880 one-qua:r,ter million SlovaJks of Hungary lived outside of Slovak national territory remains an eternal aiccusation against Hungary feudalism. Up to the yea,r 1880, Slovruk emigration a!p.peairs to be the first collective protest against the feudalistic economic regime. Mter that yeaT, a new psychological motive ruppears on the scene. The time of the economic conjuncture of the New W~ld and the time to enrich oneself had arrived. 'Dhe oppfessed ,p eople maJkes a grand effort to rid itself od' its bondage. 'the docile SlcwaJks be<::ame fully awaire of their own strength, 'perseverance and honesty, and believe that they can malke out better in foreign lands than at home. What economic improlent could the Slovak meland, but the popue ~ t at home? People left their lation kept on increasing. At ho , where bwo thirds of the cleared land, only a part of. hich belonged to the people, became so atomized because of the heritage laiws that one-fourth of all the agricultural units were less than one measure? The Slova;ks saw no hope of better economic conditions at that time. The low productivity of the soil, the competition of Magyar farm products, the lack of industry and commerce, philoxera which destroyed all the winelands of eastern SlovaJkia, increasing local and state taxes, poor distribution and increasing price of vital necessities, high interest rates and constant exiploitation held the small huslban man in a permanent crisis. But the land barons were not concerned with the plight of the small husbandmen; they would not �52 SLOVAKIA let go pf any part of their lands. This was all contrasted with the rosy ;pi:ot,ure of America, whJrch soon came to be ca1led ".tlh e promised lamd." T,he desiTe for national freedom and the hunger for cheap land soon had hundreds of thousands of Slwalks m8Jking their way, legally or illegally, to the ; 'New World." Slovaks began to emigrate in greater numbers to America in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. From 1879 to· 18 91, Slova.ks from Zemplin County numbered 23,940; only 6,718 of them returned after a time, so that wer 17,000 of the first Slorva!k pioneers remained in America. .A'ccording to population staltistics of that time, the cooorties of AJb.auj, Zemplin, Saris, and Spis, together had a population of 888,678. But a census of the people rervealed that there were only 810,393 peorple in those countries. More than 75,000 Slovaks from these countris had alrady emigrated to America! By that time there were also 5,000 Slovaks in America from the counties of Gerner and Liptov, the total in America then being 80,000. Letters from Slovaiks in the "New World" to relahves and friends in the "home count·r,y" soon had more thousands of Slovaiks crossing the ocean to America. In the beginning, the Hungarian gorvernment, controlled by the Magyars, did nothing to stop the emigration to America and other lands. Later on, however, when the emigration mavement reached catastrophic prQPortions. the government tried to stop the trend by building urp industry in the hilly regions, but this did not remedy the situation. There was no comparison between America and Hungary when it caime to the question of getting "real" money for wo:rlkin1g. Petty and insignificant social reforms proclaimed by the Hungarian g nvernments, most of them never realized, did not influence the Slovaks. After all, thei-r brethren had tasted of real freedom in America ! Up to the first World War, Slorva:kia lost some 22,000 people annually ; they emigrated in the best yea·r s of theiir productive life and formed the most valuable and enter,prising class of the population. Uip to the year 1890, ars we saw a!bove, an average of 9,000 Slovaks left their homeland annually. In the years �SLOVAKIA 53 following this average increased raipidly. In 1869, there were 1,997 ,0-96 persons in twe1ve Slorvalk counties; but in 1'890, 31 years later, there were 2,240,044 in the same counties, indicating an increase of only 12.2 % (242,948), even though birtihs exceeded deaths by 27.5 % ! Obviously tJhe differenice between the natural and the actual increase, 307,81'3 persons, was already beyond the boTders of SlovaJkia in 1900. The Hungarian pu'b,lic paid no attention to this great movement. It was generally said that it was due to the "itch to tra vel aJbroad" and wa;s convinced t!hat every Slovalk emigrant, after a time, would return to his homeland. Of course, it is true thait Slo,vaJks returned home in greater numbers tha,n Germans and MaJgyars, but the numlber of returnees was. insignificant in comparision to the number of those who settled down permanently in America. In 1900, 14,170 persons emigrnted from SlolV'aJkia; in 1901 - 19,302 ; in 1902 - 18,760; in 1903 - 17,063; in 1·904 - 17,477 ; but in 1905 - 38,770! In the latter year, 4,038 SlovaJks returned to SlovaJkia, but 34,732 remained in America. What Euro,p ean states lost more population by emigration in those same years? From 1905 to 1910, 117,188 Slovalks left thek homeland and 39,965 of them returned: in five years 77,223 more Slovruks settled beyond the ocean. In that first decade of the present century, the migrational stream swallowed up ,t he natural increaise in the counties of Tu:riec, Hont, and Orava: three times that of Gerner and Zemplin counties: five times that of the counties of Uzhorod and Albauj: and 12-13 times that of Spis and Saris counties. From 1910 on, the number of emigrants frOIIn Slovakia constantly decreases, indicating a decline of conjunctuTe and tighter immigration regulations. From 1,910 to the beginning of World War I, only an average of 10,760 persons emigrated from Slova;kia annually, while more than 4,000 of them returned annually. DuriTllg tlhat period Slovakia lost 33,788 ~ons and daughters. By recaipitulating the figuTes given aJb01Ve, we learn that from 1880, the year when emigration from Slovakia began in greater numbers, to the outbreak of World War I, 1 �54 SLOVAKIA S,lQ/Vaooia lost more than 550,000 pe0iple through emigration. That more than that numlber actually left Slovakia during that time (,w e must rookon with those who emigrated illegally to America and, hence, did not figure satisticatly) is ,pr01ven by the 1921 census, accord,ing to which there were more than 619,000 Slovaks of the first and second generations in America. From 1 901 to 1910, Hungarian immigrants sent postal money orders in the amount of 1,248,81'8.7-40 crowns. During that tilme a total of 1,236,000 persons emigrated frOIIll Hungary; 18 % of that total - 228,000 persons - was Slovalk. Hence, we can saifely sa;y that Slovalkis sent their relatives at least l.'8 % of the total a,mount of crowns, that is, 223,'5127,000 crowns, or an average 22,352,000 crowns aru:JJually during that period. Adually, however, we know that si,gnifiicamtly more than this amount helped out SlovaJk economy, because many Slovalks sent money through b,an!ks and aill those who returned brought it with them, but we do nn have any record of this amount. With American doUws the SlovaJks at home paid their debts, bought new land from the great landowners, built stone and brick houses, boug:ht agricultural implements, and began to invest in various industrial entenprises. The family at home was better orfif economicaHy and wages began to increase. What the Slovaiks had learned in America they put to good use in Slov,aJkia after their return, raiising the sodal level particularly orf the poorest people o:f eastern Slo,vakia. With the progress of time, however, the spiritual effects prOlVed to be even more significant than the econolffilic effects. The late Dr. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slo,va:k historian, pointed this out when he wrote: "ISlovaik emigraints that left t 1heir homeland, often without national consciousness, became conscious of their ethnic 01rigin in a foreign world, in a new environment, and far from their homeland, aind they cultivated and deepened their Slov·a k national soUdarity wherever they had an QPportunity to do so. It so happened that Slo.vruk emi,g rants far beyond the ocean or in pre-wa,r Russia were more strongly conscious of tJheir nationality and possessed a profounder SlovaJk feeling than the Slovaks at home who lagged in their 1 �SLOVAKIA 55 national development, or succumbed to Magyarization, influenced as they were by the MaJgyarization politics of the Hungarian government. The results of the contacts between Slo,vaik Amedca and Slovald.a became a,parent in various fields and in vairioUJs manners, and the Magyar government evaluated them well, seing in the national awrukening of eastern Slovaik,ia the influence of .American emigrants from Saris and Zemplin, and tried to paralyze this inf1uence by all pos•silble means. "The hundreds of thousands of American Slo,valks attentitvely followed the development of national life in SlovaJkia, intenvened in this development a:nd moraHy and materially aided every Slovak underta:king whioh aimed to gain national freedom for their countrymen. We would be very ungrateful and unjust, if we should underestimate th!.s participation of the American Slova'k s in the histori-cal development of the SloivaJk nation." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are a chosen generation to which it has been granted to fulfill a unique historical task: to rid our country of Germans, in other words, the eternal danger to peace in our land and in Europe ... What was done and supported by laws i:n our country was the entering upon a path which the nation has chosen and along which it shall develop. There is no turning back from this path, even if some one would desire to do so. Obviously we ourselves do not wish to do so. We have begun a gigantic task which must be successful. For its success all of us are responsible to future generations." (Dr. Peter Zenkl, SVOBODNE SLOVO, Jan. 1, 1946) . • • "At this fateful ti-me, when the Red Army and the armies of the United States and other United Nations are fighting on German sohl, we can look forward with even greater confidence to the early defeat of the Nazi aggressors and the attaiinment oif our common goail - a durruble and just peace and a continuance of close coHruboration between a!1l the United Nations." - F. D. Roosevelt's caJblegrrum, Noiv. 6, 1944, to the SovieJt President on the occasion of the 27ith amtiJVersary orf the fOU!lldling of the USSR. � SLOVAKIA SWVAK EMIGRATION Constantine Culen 49 I ,J I 1 n ' At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the middle and lo;wer noibility held 70 % of the land in Slovakia. 'Dhe laind from which the Slovalk people was supposed rto maJke a liviing, the urlbarial land, a;mounted to only about 11 % of the total, ,b ut JI' even tlhis land did not b,e long to it. From what the land, yielded, the SlovaJk had to pay his taxes to feudal lords to wlhom the land ,b elonged according to the Ja,ws of that time - and to the so1Verign, w'ho tried to secure ,t he mil>it>a:ry defense of his realm from the taxes of the poorest people. Disease and constant warfary, of the rebellious nOlbility decimated t:Jhe tp0pu:lation. The nobility ruppropril}ted depopulated arets, even where some people ~till rerp.ained, usually -the more. productive areas. ,Slovakia lost its productiive force and gained an uniprodudive no~ bility. ' At that time one-half of the privileged class of the wlhole of Hungary lived in t3lovaki~; in BratisJa,v a County every tent'b ,p erson was a nobleman. The same situation preivailed in t,he counties of Turiec and Zemplin. This class reaUy did live a parasitic life; it was without initiative and considered it an insult to wor,k · it lived a wild life from the swea1:t. and blo9d of the po~rest people. According to I. A:csady, eminent Magyar author, the nolbility toolk away 167 1000 "Pressburg measures" of land from the peasants from 1700 to 1720. We can aippreciate wlhat that meant if we realize that five ,s uch measures a1lowed a livelihood for one family. In twenty years, therefore, mOTe than 33,000 Slovak families lost their means af livelihood; and ~bout 200,000 people were deipriived. of bread and ah existence! In five years (from 171·5 to 17'20) , 1,240 fawlies of Uptov County and 2,000 families of SaTis County were reduced to beggary oy the mY.b1eis. In the times when the rest of Europe was liberating itself from feudal regimes, Slovakia had to provide for 53 %<of the pTtvileged porpulaition of Hungary frro1m tJhe means that were not even sufficient for the .tnost primi- �50 SLOVAKIA tiive living of the serfs themselves. Practically every decade of the eigihteenth century is ma:z,ked with the death of tens ,o.f thousands of people firom hunger and pestilence. 'Dhe inhabitants fled from the villages, fathers of families abandoned their wives and children, and thousands oif acr~ of land .r ema,i ned uncuit1vated. Ba:ttalions oif gendarmes inteIWened, but to no avail. The oppressed and miseraJbJe people 'kept pouring to the south, to the more fertile land, wlhence reports had spread aibout a better and more free life on the desolat-ru but Twk-albandoned "Dolna zem" (lorwer coutry). Orv,e r 1,000 farrnilies left Liptov from 1715 to 1717; Orav;a County, among tlhe most populated of that time, lost almost onethivd of its 1peo1ple, Spis one-fifth, while in Saris the peasants aJbandoned three villa,ges completely and nine others almost comipletely. Thousands of peQple poured into south ern HungaTy from the counties of Zemplin and Albauj. In 1703, the first Slovaks had already settled in BOTos Jeno in Arad County; in 171'5, SlovaJk,s .built up Slovenska Caba, Endrod in 1'718, Sarvas i,n 1722, Slovensky Komlos in 1746, an:d communities in Bekes County; In 1747, the communities of Mokra and Menyhaza in Arad County, etc. Of course, with this first migiration the misery in .SlovaJkia did not diminish. Division of the land remained unchanged, because not even Theresian registers, nay, not even the agrarian reforms of 1836, brought any relief. A neglig~ble percentage of land was in the hands of peasants and strong population increases only aggraJVated the situation. From the second half o.f the eighteenth century until the liberation of the serfs in 1848, Slo,v ak blood continued to fl'orw to the south and strengthened t'he settlements of the Dolna ,zem. From there it flowed to Backia and Banat, then c·o ursed its way farther to the east into Transylvania, to the west into Croatia and Slavonia, and along the Darnulbe all the way to Bulgaria. Marie-Therese colonized Novo Selo and Padina with Slovaks in 1762; the Royal Ex-chequer settled them in Palota, Canada County, in 1768, while Joseph I plaiced them, in 17813, in Ba/lmvar, Ternes County, and also in 1 �SJ,OVAKIA 51 Elbendorf, KTasoiva County. In 1805, Francis I settled Slovaks together with Germans in Sairca, Torontala County; in 1807, in Butin, Arad County; in 1810, in the .communities o£ Sana:d and Baton.a o,n the Military Border (Vojenska hrani,ca); :from 1843 to 1845, the Ex-chequer settled them in. the communities of .AJ1'berti and NadlaJk, Canada County, where Slovruks had already settled previous to that time. It is not an easy task to trace accUTately just when and hoiw many Slovruks emigrated from their homeland to foreign lands to seek freedom and bread, b;ut the fact that already in 1880 one-qua:r,ter million SlovaJks of Hungary lived outside of Slovak national territory remains an eternal aiccusation against Hungary feudalism. Up to the yea,r 1880, Slovruk emigration a!p.peairs to be the first collective protest against the feudalistic economic regime. Mter that yeaT, a new psychological motive ruppears on the scene. The time of the economic conjuncture of the New W~ld and the time to enrich oneself had arrived. 'Dhe oppfessed ,p eople maJkes a grand effort to rid itself od' its bondage. 'the docile SlcwaJks be<::ame fully awaire of their own strength, 'perseverance and honesty, and believe that they can malke out better in foreign lands than at home. What economic improlent could the Slovak meland, but the popue ~ t at home? People left their lation kept on increasing. At ho , where bwo thirds of the cleared land, only a part of. hich belonged to the people, became so atomized because of the heritage laiws that one-fourth of all the agricultural units were less than one measure? The Slova;ks saw no hope of better economic conditions at that time. The low productivity of the soil, the competition of Magyar farm products, the lack of industry and commerce, philoxera which destroyed all the winelands of eastern SlovaJkia, increasing local and state taxes, poor distribution and increasing price of vital necessities, high interest rates and constant exiploitation held the small huslban man in a permanent crisis. But the land barons were not concerned with the plight of the small husbandmen; they would not �52 SLOVAKIA let go pf any part of their lands. This was all contrasted with the rosy ;pi:ot,ure of America, whJrch soon came to be ca1led ".tlh e promised lamd." T,he desiTe for national freedom and the hunger for cheap land soon had hundreds of thousands of Slwalks m8Jking their way, legally or illegally, to the ; 'New World." Slovaks began to emigrate in greater numbers to America in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. From 1879 to· 18 91, Slova.ks from Zemplin County numbered 23,940; only 6,718 of them returned after a time, so that wer 17,000 of the first Slorva!k pioneers remained in America. .A'ccording to population staltistics of that time, the cooorties of AJb.auj, Zemplin, Saris, and Spis, together had a population of 888,678. But a census of the people rervealed that there were only 810,393 peorple in those countries. More than 75,000 Slovaks from these countris had alrady emigrated to America! By that time there were also 5,000 Slovaks in America from the counties of Gerner and Liptov, the total in America then being 80,000. Letters from Slovaiks in the "New World" to relahves and friends in the "home count·r,y" soon had more thousands of Slovaiks crossing the ocean to America. In the beginning, the Hungarian gorvernment, controlled by the Magyars, did nothing to stop the emigration to America and other lands. Later on, however, when the emigration mavement reached catastrophic prQPortions. the government tried to stop the trend by building urp industry in the hilly regions, but this did not remedy the situation. There was no comparison between America and Hungary when it caime to the question of getting "real" money for wo:rlkin1g. Petty and insignificant social reforms proclaimed by the Hungarian g nvernments, most of them never realized, did not influence the Slovaks. After all, thei-r brethren had tasted of real freedom in America ! Up to the first World War, Slorva:kia lost some 22,000 people annually ; they emigrated in the best yea·r s of theiir productive life and formed the most valuable and enter,prising class of the population. Uip to the year 1890, ars we saw a!bove, an average of 9,000 Slovaks left their homeland annually. In the years �SLOVAKIA 53 following this average increased raipidly. In 1869, there were 1,997 ,0-96 persons in twe1ve Slorvalk counties; but in 1'890, 31 years later, there were 2,240,044 in the same counties, indicating an increase of only 12.2 % (242,948), even though birtihs exceeded deaths by 27.5 % ! Obviously tJhe differenice between the natural and the actual increase, 307,81'3 persons, was already beyond the boTders of SlovaJkia in 1900. The Hungarian pu'b,lic paid no attention to this great movement. It was generally said that it was due to the "itch to tra vel aJbroad" and wa;s convinced t!hat every Slovalk emigrant, after a time, would return to his homeland. Of course, it is true thait Slo,vaJks returned home in greater numbers tha,n Germans and MaJgyars, but the numlber of returnees was. insignificant in comparision to the number of those who settled down permanently in America. In 1900, 14,170 persons emigrnted from SlolV'aJkia; in 1901 - 19,302 ; in 1902 - 18,760; in 1903 - 17,063; in 1·904 - 17,477 ; but in 1905 - 38,770! In the latter year, 4,038 SlovaJks returned to SlovaJkia, but 34,732 remained in America. What Euro,p ean states lost more population by emigration in those same years? From 1905 to 1910, 117,188 Slovalks left thek homeland and 39,965 of them returned: in five years 77,223 more Slovruks settled beyond the ocean. In that first decade of the present century, the migrational stream swallowed up ,t he natural increaise in the counties of Tu:riec, Hont, and Orava: three times that of Gerner and Zemplin counties: five times that of the counties of Uzhorod and Albauj: and 12-13 times that of Spis and Saris counties. From 1910 on, the number of emigrants frOIIn Slovakia constantly decreases, indicating a decline of conjunctuTe and tighter immigration regulations. From 1,910 to the beginning of World War I, only an average of 10,760 persons emigrated from Slova;kia annually, while more than 4,000 of them returned annually. DuriTllg tlhat period Slovakia lost 33,788 ~ons and daughters. By recaipitulating the figuTes given aJb01Ve, we learn that from 1880, the year when emigration from Slovakia began in greater numbers, to the outbreak of World War I, 1 �54 SLOVAKIA S,lQ/Vaooia lost more than 550,000 pe0iple through emigration. That more than that numlber actually left Slovakia during that time (,w e must rookon with those who emigrated illegally to America and, hence, did not figure satisticatly) is ,pr01ven by the 1921 census, accord,ing to which there were more than 619,000 Slovaks of the first and second generations in America. From 1 901 to 1910, Hungarian immigrants sent postal money orders in the amount of 1,248,81'8.7-40 crowns. During that tilme a total of 1,236,000 persons emigrated frOIIll Hungary; 18 % of that total - 228,000 persons - was Slovalk. Hence, we can saifely sa;y that Slovalkis sent their relatives at least l.'8 % of the total a,mount of crowns, that is, 223,'5127,000 crowns, or an average 22,352,000 crowns aru:JJually during that period. Adually, however, we know that si,gnifiicamtly more than this amount helped out SlovaJk economy, because many Slovalks sent money through b,an!ks and aill those who returned brought it with them, but we do nn have any record of this amount. With American doUws the SlovaJks at home paid their debts, bought new land from the great landowners, built stone and brick houses, boug:ht agricultural implements, and began to invest in various industrial entenprises. The family at home was better orfif economicaHy and wages began to increase. What the Slovaiks had learned in America they put to good use in Slov,aJkia after their return, raiising the sodal level particularly orf the poorest people o:f eastern Slo,vakia. With the progress of time, however, the spiritual effects prOlVed to be even more significant than the econolffilic effects. The late Dr. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slo,va:k historian, pointed this out when he wrote: "ISlovaik emigraints that left t 1heir homeland, often without national consciousness, became conscious of their ethnic 01rigin in a foreign world, in a new environment, and far from their homeland, aind they cultivated and deepened their Slov·a k national soUdarity wherever they had an QPportunity to do so. It so happened that Slo.vruk emi,g rants far beyond the ocean or in pre-wa,r Russia were more strongly conscious of tJheir nationality and possessed a profounder SlovaJk feeling than the Slovaks at home who lagged in their 1 �SLOVAKIA 55 national development, or succumbed to Magyarization, influenced as they were by the MaJgyarization politics of the Hungarian government. The results of the contacts between Slo,vaik Amedca and Slovald.a became a,parent in various fields and in vairioUJs manners, and the Magyar government evaluated them well, seing in the national awrukening of eastern Slovaik,ia the influence of .American emigrants from Saris and Zemplin, and tried to paralyze this inf1uence by all pos•silble means. "The hundreds of thousands of American Slo,valks attentitvely followed the development of national life in SlovaJkia, intenvened in this development a:nd moraHy and materially aided every Slovak underta:king whioh aimed to gain national freedom for their countrymen. We would be very ungrateful and unjust, if we should underestimate th!.s participation of the American Slova'k s in the histori-cal development of the SloivaJk nation." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are a chosen generation to which it has been granted to fulfill a unique historical task: to rid our country of Germans, in other words, the eternal danger to peace in our land and in Europe ... What was done and supported by laws i:n our country was the entering upon a path which the nation has chosen and along which it shall develop. There is no turning back from this path, even if some one would desire to do so. Obviously we ourselves do not wish to do so. We have begun a gigantic task which must be successful. For its success all of us are responsible to future generations." (Dr. Peter Zenkl, SVOBODNE SLOVO, Jan. 1, 1946) . • • "At this fateful ti-me, when the Red Army and the armies of the United States and other United Nations are fighting on German sohl, we can look forward with even greater confidence to the early defeat of the Nazi aggressors and the attaiinment oif our common goail - a durruble and just peace and a continuance of close coHruboration between a!1l the United Nations." - F. D. Roosevelt's caJblegrrum, Noiv. 6, 1944, to the SovieJt President on the occasion of the 27ith amtiJVersary orf the fOU!lldling of the USSR. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA SWVAK EMIGRATION Constantine Culen 49 I ,J I 1 n ' At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the middle and lo;wer noibility held 70 % of the land in Slovakia. 'Dhe laind from which the Slovalk people was supposed rto maJke a liviing, the urlbarial land, a;mounted to only about 11 % of the total, ,b ut JI' even tlhis land did not b,e long to it. From what the land, yielded, the SlovaJk had to pay his taxes to feudal lords to wlhom the land ,b elonged according to the Ja,ws of that time - and to the so1Verign, w'ho tried to secure ,t he mil>it>a:ry defense of his realm from the taxes of the poorest people. Disease and constant warfary, of the rebellious nOlbility decimated t:Jhe tp0pu:lation. The nobility ruppropril}ted depopulated arets, even where some people ~till rerp.ained, usually -the more. productive areas. ,Slovakia lost its productiive force and gained an uniprodudive no~ bility. ' At that time one-half of the privileged class of the wlhole of Hungary lived in t3lovaki~; in BratisJa,v a County every tent'b ,p erson was a nobleman. The same situation preivailed in t,he counties of Turiec and Zemplin. This class reaUy did live a parasitic life; it was without initiative and considered it an insult to wor,k · it lived a wild life from the swea1:t. and blo9d of the po~rest people. According to I. A:csady, eminent Magyar author, the nolbility toolk away 167 1000 "Pressburg measures" of land from the peasants from 1700 to 1720. We can aippreciate wlhat that meant if we realize that five ,s uch measures a1lowed a livelihood for one family. In twenty years, therefore, mOTe than 33,000 Slovak families lost their means af livelihood; and ~bout 200,000 people were deipriived. of bread and ah existence! In five years (from 171·5 to 17'20) , 1,240 fawlies of Uptov County and 2,000 families of SaTis County were reduced to beggary oy the mY.b1eis. In the times when the rest of Europe was liberating itself from feudal regimes, Slovakia had to provide for 53 %<of the pTtvileged porpulaition of Hungary frro1m tJhe means that were not even sufficient for the .tnost primi- 50 SLOVAKIA tiive living of the serfs themselves. Practically every decade of the eigihteenth century is ma:z,ked with the death of tens ,o.f thousands of people firom hunger and pestilence. 'Dhe inhabitants fled from the villages, fathers of families abandoned their wives and children, and thousands oif acr~ of land .r ema,i ned uncuit1vated. Ba:ttalions oif gendarmes inteIWened, but to no avail. The oppressed and miseraJbJe people 'kept pouring to the south, to the more fertile land, wlhence reports had spread aibout a better and more free life on the desolat-ru but Twk-albandoned "Dolna zem" (lorwer coutry). Orv,e r 1,000 farrnilies left Liptov from 1715 to 1717; Orav;a County, among tlhe most populated of that time, lost almost onethivd of its 1peo1ple, Spis one-fifth, while in Saris the peasants aJbandoned three villa,ges completely and nine others almost comipletely. Thousands of peQple poured into south ern HungaTy from the counties of Zemplin and Albauj. In 1703, the first Slovaks had already settled in BOTos Jeno in Arad County; in 171'5, SlovaJk,s .built up Slovenska Caba, Endrod in 1'718, Sarvas i,n 1722, Slovensky Komlos in 1746, an:d communities in Bekes County; In 1747, the communities of Mokra and Menyhaza in Arad County, etc. Of course, with this first migiration the misery in .SlovaJkia did not diminish. Division of the land remained unchanged, because not even Theresian registers, nay, not even the agrarian reforms of 1836, brought any relief. A neglig~ble percentage of land was in the hands of peasants and strong population increases only aggraJVated the situation. From the second half o.f the eighteenth century until the liberation of the serfs in 1848, Slo,v ak blood continued to fl'orw to the south and strengthened t'he settlements of the Dolna ,zem. From there it flowed to Backia and Banat, then c·o ursed its way farther to the east into Transylvania, to the west into Croatia and Slavonia, and along the Darnulbe all the way to Bulgaria. Marie-Therese colonized Novo Selo and Padina with Slovaks in 1762; the Royal Ex-chequer settled them in Palota, Canada County, in 1768, while Joseph I plaiced them, in 17813, in Ba/lmvar, Ternes County, and also in 1 SJ,OVAKIA 51 Elbendorf, KTasoiva County. In 1805, Francis I settled Slovaks together with Germans in Sairca, Torontala County; in 1807, in Butin, Arad County; in 1810, in the .communities o£ Sana:d and Baton.a o,n the Military Border (Vojenska hrani,ca); :from 1843 to 1845, the Ex-chequer settled them in. the communities of .AJ1'berti and NadlaJk, Canada County, where Slovruks had already settled previous to that time. It is not an easy task to trace accUTately just when and hoiw many Slovruks emigrated from their homeland to foreign lands to seek freedom and bread, b;ut the fact that already in 1880 one-qua:r,ter million SlovaJks of Hungary lived outside of Slovak national territory remains an eternal aiccusation against Hungary feudalism. Up to the yea,r 1880, Slovruk emigration a!p.peairs to be the first collective protest against the feudalistic economic regime. Mter that yeaT, a new psychological motive ruppears on the scene. The time of the economic conjuncture of the New W~ld and the time to enrich oneself had arrived. 'Dhe oppfessed ,p eople maJkes a grand effort to rid itself od' its bondage. 'the docile SlcwaJks be<::ame fully awaire of their own strength, 'perseverance and honesty, and believe that they can malke out better in foreign lands than at home. What economic improlent could the Slovak meland, but the popue ~ t at home? People left their lation kept on increasing. At ho , where bwo thirds of the cleared land, only a part of. hich belonged to the people, became so atomized because of the heritage laiws that one-fourth of all the agricultural units were less than one measure? The Slova;ks saw no hope of better economic conditions at that time. The low productivity of the soil, the competition of Magyar farm products, the lack of industry and commerce, philoxera which destroyed all the winelands of eastern SlovaJkia, increasing local and state taxes, poor distribution and increasing price of vital necessities, high interest rates and constant exiploitation held the small huslban man in a permanent crisis. But the land barons were not concerned with the plight of the small husbandmen; they would not 52 SLOVAKIA let go pf any part of their lands. This was all contrasted with the rosy ;pi:ot,ure of America, whJrch soon came to be ca1led ".tlh e promised lamd." T,he desiTe for national freedom and the hunger for cheap land soon had hundreds of thousands of Slwalks m8Jking their way, legally or illegally, to the ; 'New World." Slovaks began to emigrate in greater numbers to America in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. From 1879 to· 18 91, Slova.ks from Zemplin County numbered 23,940; only 6,718 of them returned after a time, so that wer 17,000 of the first Slorva!k pioneers remained in America. .A'ccording to population staltistics of that time, the cooorties of AJb.auj, Zemplin, Saris, and Spis, together had a population of 888,678. But a census of the people rervealed that there were only 810,393 peorple in those countries. More than 75,000 Slovaks from these countris had alrady emigrated to America! By that time there were also 5,000 Slovaks in America from the counties of Gerner and Liptov, the total in America then being 80,000. Letters from Slovaiks in the "New World" to relahves and friends in the "home count·r,y" soon had more thousands of Slovaiks crossing the ocean to America. In the beginning, the Hungarian gorvernment, controlled by the Magyars, did nothing to stop the emigration to America and other lands. Later on, however, when the emigration mavement reached catastrophic prQPortions. the government tried to stop the trend by building urp industry in the hilly regions, but this did not remedy the situation. There was no comparison between America and Hungary when it caime to the question of getting "real" money for wo:rlkin1g. Petty and insignificant social reforms proclaimed by the Hungarian g nvernments, most of them never realized, did not influence the Slovaks. After all, thei-r brethren had tasted of real freedom in America ! Up to the first World War, Slorva:kia lost some 22,000 people annually ; they emigrated in the best yea·r s of theiir productive life and formed the most valuable and enter,prising class of the population. Uip to the year 1890, ars we saw a!bove, an average of 9,000 Slovaks left their homeland annually. In the years SLOVAKIA 53 following this average increased raipidly. In 1869, there were 1,997 ,0-96 persons in twe1ve Slorvalk counties; but in 1'890, 31 years later, there were 2,240,044 in the same counties, indicating an increase of only 12.2 % (242,948), even though birtihs exceeded deaths by 27.5 % ! Obviously tJhe differenice between the natural and the actual increase, 307,81'3 persons, was already beyond the boTders of SlovaJkia in 1900. The Hungarian pu'b,lic paid no attention to this great movement. It was generally said that it was due to the "itch to tra vel aJbroad" and wa;s convinced t!hat every Slovalk emigrant, after a time, would return to his homeland. Of course, it is true thait Slo,vaJks returned home in greater numbers tha,n Germans and MaJgyars, but the numlber of returnees was. insignificant in comparision to the number of those who settled down permanently in America. In 1900, 14,170 persons emigrnted from SlolV'aJkia; in 1901 - 19,302 ; in 1902 - 18,760; in 1903 - 17,063; in 1·904 - 17,477 ; but in 1905 - 38,770! In the latter year, 4,038 SlovaJks returned to SlovaJkia, but 34,732 remained in America. What Euro,p ean states lost more population by emigration in those same years? From 1905 to 1910, 117,188 Slovalks left thek homeland and 39,965 of them returned: in five years 77,223 more Slovruks settled beyond the ocean. In that first decade of the present century, the migrational stream swallowed up ,t he natural increaise in the counties of Tu:riec, Hont, and Orava: three times that of Gerner and Zemplin counties: five times that of the counties of Uzhorod and Albauj: and 12-13 times that of Spis and Saris counties. From 1910 on, the number of emigrants frOIIn Slovakia constantly decreases, indicating a decline of conjunctuTe and tighter immigration regulations. From 1,910 to the beginning of World War I, only an average of 10,760 persons emigrated from Slova;kia annually, while more than 4,000 of them returned annually. DuriTllg tlhat period Slovakia lost 33,788 ~ons and daughters. By recaipitulating the figuTes given aJb01Ve, we learn that from 1880, the year when emigration from Slovakia began in greater numbers, to the outbreak of World War I, 1 54 SLOVAKIA S,lQ/Vaooia lost more than 550,000 pe0iple through emigration. That more than that numlber actually left Slovakia during that time (,w e must rookon with those who emigrated illegally to America and, hence, did not figure satisticatly) is ,pr01ven by the 1921 census, accord,ing to which there were more than 619,000 Slovaks of the first and second generations in America. From 1 901 to 1910, Hungarian immigrants sent postal money orders in the amount of 1,248,81'8.7-40 crowns. During that tilme a total of 1,236,000 persons emigrated frOIIll Hungary; 18 % of that total - 228,000 persons - was Slovalk. Hence, we can saifely sa;y that Slovalkis sent their relatives at least l.'8 % of the total a,mount of crowns, that is, 223,'5127,000 crowns, or an average 22,352,000 crowns aru:JJually during that period. Adually, however, we know that si,gnifiicamtly more than this amount helped out SlovaJk economy, because many Slovalks sent money through b,an!ks and aill those who returned brought it with them, but we do nn have any record of this amount. With American doUws the SlovaJks at home paid their debts, bought new land from the great landowners, built stone and brick houses, boug:ht agricultural implements, and began to invest in various industrial entenprises. The family at home was better orfif economicaHy and wages began to increase. What the Slovaiks had learned in America they put to good use in Slov,aJkia after their return, raiising the sodal level particularly orf the poorest people o:f eastern Slo,vakia. With the progress of time, however, the spiritual effects prOlVed to be even more significant than the econolffilic effects. The late Dr. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slo,va:k historian, pointed this out when he wrote: "ISlovaik emigraints that left t 1heir homeland, often without national consciousness, became conscious of their ethnic 01rigin in a foreign world, in a new environment, and far from their homeland, aind they cultivated and deepened their Slov·a k national soUdarity wherever they had an QPportunity to do so. It so happened that Slo.vruk emi,g rants far beyond the ocean or in pre-wa,r Russia were more strongly conscious of tJheir nationality and possessed a profounder SlovaJk feeling than the Slovaks at home who lagged in their 1 SLOVAKIA 55 national development, or succumbed to Magyarization, influenced as they were by the MaJgyarization politics of the Hungarian government. The results of the contacts between Slo,vaik Amedca and Slovald.a became a,parent in various fields and in vairioUJs manners, and the Magyar government evaluated them well, seing in the national awrukening of eastern Slovaik,ia the influence of .American emigrants from Saris and Zemplin, and tried to paralyze this inf1uence by all pos•silble means. "The hundreds of thousands of American Slo,valks attentitvely followed the development of national life in SlovaJkia, intenvened in this development a:nd moraHy and materially aided every Slovak underta:king whioh aimed to gain national freedom for their countrymen. We would be very ungrateful and unjust, if we should underestimate th!.s participation of the American Slova'k s in the histori-cal development of the SloivaJk nation." • • • WHO SAID IT? "We are a chosen generation to which it has been granted to fulfill a unique historical task: to rid our country of Germans, in other words, the eternal danger to peace in our land and in Europe ... What was done and supported by laws i:n our country was the entering upon a path which the nation has chosen and along which it shall develop. There is no turning back from this path, even if some one would desire to do so. Obviously we ourselves do not wish to do so. We have begun a gigantic task which must be successful. For its success all of us are responsible to future generations." (Dr. Peter Zenkl, SVOBODNE SLOVO, Jan. 1, 1946) . • • "At this fateful ti-me, when the Red Army and the armies of the United States and other United Nations are fighting on German sohl, we can look forward with even greater confidence to the early defeat of the Nazi aggressors and the attaiinment oif our common goail - a durruble and just peace and a continuance of close coHruboration between a!1l the United Nations." - F. D. Roosevelt's caJblegrrum, Noiv. 6, 1944, to the SovieJt President on the occasion of the 27ith amtiJVersary orf the fOU!lldling of the USSR.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovak Emigration Description An account of the resource Constantine Čulen Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), June 1958 pp. 49-55 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Čulen, Konštantín, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/0268b310794cea2a5333798ce11728df.pdf 410663f290902852eacdfbea2d657236 PDF Text Text 30 SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" Dr. Henrich Bartek The et}'lffiology of the name Slovan has not been thusfar clarified satisfactorily. A more accurate definition of the origin and first homeland of the Slovans (Slavs) would be of extraordinary significance, ,p articularly if it were ipossilble to define more precisely in what area the ancient predecessors of the Slovans acquired their name. Thereiby at lea;st the aJpproximate determination of the time the name Slovan originated could become the b.asis for a more profound knowledge of the ancient history of the Slovanic peoples. The solution of the etymology of the word Slovan is, aibove all else, a linguistic problem and, therefore, we must analyze it first of aH a:ccording to the methods of this discipline, so that the remaining scientific departments, such as archeology, ethnography, and history would only have to support the lingll!istic deductions. Until the present time, in popular scientific, but also in many .scientific treatises, there are circulated many different views aJbout the origin of the name Slovan, some of which have been adhered to for long centuries. Before the thirteenth century, for example, the name Slovan was conected with the word Slava (glory). This etymology found and still finds swpport especially in the Russian form Slavjanin (Slahvyahneen), and its qualifying derivative slavjanskij (s'1a1hvyahnskee), whose root, it is said, confoI'.ms with the root of the word slava (slahvah). In the first half of the nineteenth century, this etymology was poipulari'z ed by the Slovak John Kollar in the poetical composition "Slavy dcera," as well as by his romanticscientific dissertations which he wrote as a professor of Slovanic (,SlaJV) archeology at the University of Vienna. This pqpular etymology was a.nd still is very much favored because it caters to the self-conscio,uisness of the Slovans. Nevertheless, the founder of Slavistics, the Czech scholar Joseph Dobrovsky, and the founder of Slova:nic archeology, the eminent SlaV'hStios savant of Slovwk origin, �SLOVAKIA 31 Paul J. SaJ'ari!k, became aware of the untenability of the current explanation of the term Slovan. a:nd concluded that it wrus derived from slovo (1word). Arccortling to the first etymology, the popolar conc-e pt, Slovan would mean "gloriosus," while acco,r ding to the second, it would mean ''v,~rbosus.'' Dolbrovsky and Safarilk correctly deduced it from the root slov in exiplaining the term Slovan, because they probalbly considered the for,m from the r-o ot slav as secondary. But a,g ain,s t their etymology sipeaJks the fact that in the most ancient grou,p of S101Vanic words with the suffix jan, the names of inhaJbitants were formed from names that indioated concrete oibjects. The word slovo, however is a tyipical aJbstract thing and, therefore, cannot be the basis of the term indicating inhaibitants, which become the common national name of the Slorvanic peoples. Many other etymologies orf the name Slovan are not even considered because -o f their .p ha,n tastic nature. In 1-954, the well-1known Polish scholar of Slavistics, Thaddeus LehrSplruwinski, stated in the book which he wrote with Wl. Kuras zkiewicz and F1r. Slawsky (Przeglad i charakterystyka ja;zykow slowianskich): "Whence originated this term is not as yet sufficiently clrurified; most likely at first it indd!cated the peoiple who d,welled near some water (river or lake) that was named Slowa or Slowo (the Polish for Slova, Slovo). This e:,cpression existed at one time in the looguage of the ancient 'Slovanic peoples and related nations, and the suffix -anie ( -enie), w hkh we find in the term Slovanie (Slovienie), normally indicates the dwellers of territories (comp. Wislanie, Podhalanie, Krako· wianie, etc.) . Lehr-Splawinski evidently inclines here, with a reservation, to the ex,pla:nation offered in 1921 by the remarikalble Polish .p hilologist, Joihn Romvadowski (in the Magazine of Phlfo:logical and Lingustical Studies, dedicated to A. Belie), where he expressed the hypothesis that in the ancient Slovanic language there must have existed a river by the name of Slova or Slava, or a lake called Slovo. Rozwadowslci presupposed he was here concerned with the Indo-European root 'kleu- which meant, he said, "to pour 1 �32 SLOVAKIA over, to clean" ( oblievat:, cistit:). To support his thesis he presented in his dissertation also these Slovanic names for rivers : Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Slavec, N eslovka. Rozwadowski's explanation is ,possibly the lbest from the standpoint of linguisti!cs, because he derives the name Slovan from concrete river names. Nevertheless, in our Olpinion, difficulties arise from the significance of the root slov- ("o!blievaf, cistif), as well as from the circumstance that he did not define according to which assumed river, called Slova, the S:lovans got their name. Bes~des that the names he mentions as coming from the roots slov- and slav- indicate streams of every different characteristics, so that one cannot exiplain them from the meaning of the root kleu/,s lov ("oblievaf, ocistif). At times we are concerned with small streams and rivers which pour over and clean nothing; at other times with a great stream (for example, Slavuta is the Slovanic archaic term of the Dnieper), whose character is i:n deep contrast with the small mountain streams that bear the names derived from the root slov- or slav-. If we should compare the terrain in which they flow, as well as the characteristics of a whole series of b,roOO{s and rirvers which the Slovans called by the name Bystrica, or Bystra, Bystrec, and other similar names, we would easily ascertain that their names generally indicate a most ex;pressive characteristic of these streams, that is, thcir raJpid, that is, "bystry" flow. We cannot claim a similar common characteristic, however, for the streams which haive the name Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Neslovka, etc., if we follow Rozwadowski's meaning of the root slov-. At least the common, very expressive characteristic of these streams is not evident according to the etymology proposed by Rozwadowski, because the meaning of the root kleu-/slov- assumed by him does not sufficiently warrant this characteristic property, according to which in the distant past these streams of various kinds could be called according to the names formed from the root slov- or slav.Words With the Roots "Slov- and "Slav-" Slovanic (Slavic) languages, we meet with a the In twofold sound of the national name of the Slovans. They 1 �SLOVAKIA 33 are the names formed from the root slov-, as well as those formed from the root slav-, for example: Slowian (Polish), Slovan (Slovak and Czech), and (the Russian) Slavjanin, slavjanskij with the accent on the "-ja-." Slovenec, Slovenka (Slovene); and (in Slovak) Slovak, Slovenka, as well as the name Slovan, the name used up to the present time by the inhabitants near the Irmensky Lake in northern Russia (south of Ladoga Lake, and the name Slovinci, the name used by the adherents of the tribe that lives in the neighborhood of the Polish Kashubi on the coast of the Baltic Sea - all these obviously indicate that they are derived from the root slov-. But even the Russian Slavjanin originated from the older form Slovjanin in which the short -o- was duly changed into an -a- before the accented syllable. This is not uncommon in Russian orthography, where an -a- is used instead of -o- (golova - galava), because in Russian this term from ancient times was connected with the word slava, the root of which is slav-. The very fact that national and tribal names bearing the root slov- have been preserved in the border territories of the present ethnic Slovanic territory should be sufficient reason that it issue out of the root slov-. Names from the root slav- are evidently of a secondary origin. Otherwise, crossing of words from the root slov- and slav- is a current phenomenon in Slovanic languages. This is really due to the influence of! the word slava on words derived from the concept slovo. For example, the word pravoslavie (orthodoxy), as a literal translation of the Greek orthodoxia, should be spelled "pravoslovie" - and instead of pravoslavny we should have the adjective "pravoslovny." Yet, due to the influence of the word slava in all Slovanic tongues, we find words derived only from the stem pravoslav-. So, the Slovak blahoslavif (to bless) - the Polish blagoslawic, and Czech blahoslaviti - has slav- due to this influence, even though correctly it should be "blahoslovif," because even the Russian has blagoslovif from the ecclesiastico-Slovanic blagosloviti, which is a literal translation of the Greek eulogein. All this demonstrates that the root of the word slava has influenced from ancient times the words derived from the root slov- (slovo). The opposite influence, that is, com- �34 SLOVAKIA pensation of the root slav- by means of the root slovcannot be ascertained. Therefore, it is indisputable that the national name of the Slovans (Slavic people) comes from the root slov-; and in those Slovanic languages where we find the root slav- in place of it (for example, the Russian Slavjanin), we can safely say that this is due to phonological development (in Russian and White Russian), or to the influence of the word slava. This conclusion can be complemented with the wealth of material from the Slovanic languages. Here we shall mention only two examples from Slovakia. Topographical names demonstrate that they are derived from the root slov-, for example, Slovany in Turiec County. Here we have the older form of the name Slovak which was replaced by the newer already in the fourteenth century. The name of the community Slovany certainly belongs among the ancient names of Slovak origin and comes from the period when the predecessors of the Slovaks immigrated to Turiec and had to settle among non-Slovaks, probably among the remainder of the Celts. It makes sense then that, in a non-Slovak environment, the ancient Slovaks named their settlement Slovany (phonetically Slovani in the Turiec dialect, because the older "-ja-" after labials was changed here to "-a-'; the genitive is Slovian, appropriately from the older Slovan, where the "-ia-" is used in place of older "-a-" as in ciara from cara, etc.). The adjective of Slovany is also appropriately "sloviansky." Even in Spis County there is a community called Slovinky. So, in topographical names in Slovakia we find only the root slov-, that is, before the advent of the Slovaks to their present territory - before the fifth century - the national name of the Slovans was formed from the root slov-, so that the forms with slav- are obviously altogether newer forms, as we mentioned above. From all this it follows that in solving the etymology of the name Slovan, we must start with the root slov-~, and not with the root slav-. Therefore, the possibility of deriving the national name of the Slovaks from the word slava is completely out of the question. Accepting this view, we then have a realistic basis for the solution of the etymology of the word Slovan. �SLOVAKIA 35 The Suffix "-Jan" In the ancient Slovanic tongue names of settlements were formed with the prefix "-jan," for example, pol'an designated an inhabitant of fields. Topographical names in "-any" nicely preserve the original function of the suffix "-jan," for example Brodzany (in the Nitra Valley) originally designated the inhabitants living near a ford (from the word brod there first originated brod+jan and then Brodzany); the name Lipany (for example, in eastern Slovakia, but also elsewhere in Slovanic countries) comes from lip + jan (really from the accusative Lipjany; even today in the dialect of eastern Slovakia it is Lipjani) and designates the inhabitants of a region in linden (basswood) trees, that is, of an area where there were forests of linden trees. According to this it is evident the suffix "-jan" was used to form the names of settlements from concretes, such as: brod, lipa, hora, luh, etc. The second ancient function of the suffix "-jan" was the formation of names of settlements to designate the inhabitants living in the area of some river, for example, the Polish Wislan from Wisljan still designates an inhabitant of the Wisla river region; similarly, the Slovak name Moravan comes from the name of the river Morava, Kysucan from Kysuce, and so on. This means that in the ancient Slovanic tongue the suffix "-jan" was used to create the names of settlers which were derived from concrete names, that is, appellatives, and from topographical names, particularly from the names of rivers. As far as the stem and the significance of the name Slovan is concerned, from the old form Slov + jan, it belongs among ancient names of settlements which were derived from concrete names. Since in the Slovanic languages there is not a trace after the concrete appellatives "slov, slova, slovo," and since the name Slovan is added in old Greek sources already from the sixth century B.C., it must be derived from some topographical name, because with its entire structure the name Slovan belongs to the same type of appellatives as Wislan, Moravan, and the like, that �36 SLOVAKIA is, to names derived from rivers, the names of which belong to the oldest group of topographical names. The names of Slovanic streams are generally of the feminine gender; very often we meet the adjective forms of the appellatives where the word "rieka" (river) or "voda" (water) has been omitted: Bystra, that is, "bystra voda" and Bystrica (a small rapid stream); Byster (a rapid brook) and Bystrec or Bysterec (a small rapid brook), etc. With the larger streams the word "river" is generally omitted and, therefore, the names of the larger rivers of Slovanic countries, inasmuch as they are of native origin, end in an "-a," that is, they are of the feminine gender. This apparently is refuted by the names Vah, Hron, Ipef, but, in our opinion, these are names of Celtic origin. In eastern Slovakia the river names Poprad and Hornad we regard as Daco-Sarmatian. The name Slovan cannot be the name of a settlement derived from the name of a town, as, for example, Romanus · from the name Roma, because there is no such town or city that could be the foundation of the word Slovan. Therefore, only a river name remains open to us, the name of a larger river, along which for a certain period of time the ancestors of the Slovans could have lived. Of course, the Slovanic name of this great river had to be of the feminine gender and, therefore, issue out of the presuposed river name "Slova," from which, by adding the suffix "-jan," was formed the name Slovan (in Russian: Slavjanin from the older form Slovjanin), which then became a national name in the ancient homeland of the Slovans. The River "Slova" In the national names of the south-Slovanic Slovenes (Slovinci) and the western-Slovanic Slovaks (Slovaci), the little altered ancient name of the Slovans has been preserved to this very day originating long before their departure from the ancient homeland. History tells us that the Slovenes by the end of the sixth century had already penetrated all the way to Pustertal in southern Tyrol and that the Slovaks occupied present-day Moravia and Slovakia before the sixth century. It follows from this that the �SLOVAKIA 37 national name of the Slovans must have originated already long before that time. And since, from the standpoint of linguistics, the name Slovan presupposes a river that was named Slova, we must look for such a river on the territory of the supposed ancient homeland of the Slovans. The region along this river had to be sufficiently large, its climactic conditions advantageous, and it had to spread over a geographical area that would assure sufficient protection against foreign invasions and thereby enable the biological development of the numerically great nation of the ancient Slovans. Comparative philology, Slavistics, as well as archeology and history, have long ago come to the generally accepted conclusion that the ancient homeland of the Slovanic peoples must be sought south of the present settlements of the Lithuanians and to the north of the northern arc of the Carpathians, approximately in the area of the eastern tributaries of the central Wisla and in the western water regions of the river Pripet', a tributary of the central Dnieper. As far as the area of the ancient homeland of the Slovans is concerned, as well as the chronology of the disintegration of the ancient Slovanic national and lingual unity, science has not as yet come to any unified conclusion, because particularly Slovanic scholars are frequently even subconsciously led by the contemporary political aspirations of their nations. Thus, for example, Lehr-Splawinski regards as the land of origin of the Slovans the areas of the Oder and Wisla rivers (vd. "Praslowianie," Biblioteka Studium Slowianskiego, Seria B, Nr. 1, Cracow, 1946), that is, the territory of present-day Poland. Generally the problem of the "land of origin" is very complicated and a more accurate localization of it is practically impossible when chronology is omitted, when the time of the existence of this ancient homeland is not marked out. People regard Denmark with the adjacent regions of northwestern Germany and southern Scandinavia as the ancient homeland of the Germans, but the predecessors of the Germans were not the first inhabitants of this territory and must have had their original homeland somewhere else before their advent into this last German homeland, that is, "last" as far as we know it. And the same holds for the �38 SLOVAKIA Slovans. Even the Trans-Carpathian homeland, whose accurate designation encounters so many difficulties, was not the first homeland of the Slovans. Conversely, however, it is the last homeland known to us and its area was not permanently limited because the Slovans spread and migrated just as the Germans and Celts had done before them. The Wisla and Oder regions are, of course, sufficiently large enough territories on which the nation of the ancient Slovans could have developed, but the non-Slovanic name of the Oder, the Celtic names of some of the tributaries of the Oder and Wisla rivers, and the lack of sufficient proof of the Slovanic origin of the name Wisla, indicate that we cannot here look for the land of origin of the Slovans in which the name Slovan could have originated. Besides this, there is nothing to prove even the possibility of expansion of the eastern Slovans from the Oder-Wisla homeland, which Lehr-Splawinski presupposes. There is no proof that the Oder or the Wisla were ever called Slova or any other name formed from the root "slov-" and, therefore, their water areas do not come into consideration in explaining the name Slovan. But there are also many other reasons why this region canot be considered as the land of origin of the Slovans. On the other hand, in folksongs, which have preserved its ancient name, the Dnieper is also called by the name Slavuta, which evidently comes from the older form Slovuta, because the name of the river could not be derived from the root "slav-" but only from the root "slov-" and Slovuta was changed into Slavuta in the same manner as was Slovjanin into Slavjanin, that is, due to the influence of the word slava. It is generally acknowledged that Dnieper, Dniester, and Don are names of Scythian, that is of Iranian origin. Slavuta as the Slovanic name of the Dnieper is certainly the older appellation, because in ancient times the Slovans they must have given the river a name earlier. Obviously came to the river Dnieper sooner than the Scythians, so they could not accept the Scythian word for a territory which the Scythians had not as yet settled. Under pressure from the Scythians, the Slovans came into the forest terrain along the great river whose Slovanic name is Sia- �SLOVAKIA 39 vuta and of which they Scythian name Dnieper was later circulated generally. Etymology of the Name "Slavuta" The archiac name Slavuta comes from the older form Slovuta which in turn was derived from the ancient Slovanic Slovonta. From the etymological standpoint, we are here concerned with an old adjective form, that is, with an ancient form of participle. From verbs of the type viesf, niesf, etc. (from the old Slovanic vezti, nesti), we have the present-day tongue participles of the feminine gender veduca, nesuca from the older forms vedontja, nesontja. The consonant "-j" in these forms is, of course, of ancient Slovanic origin, but not of the ancient tongue, as is attested to, for example, by the forms mohutny along with mohuci, slovutny, tekuty, etc. From the ancient Slovanic mogti (in Slovak today mocf) came the participle of the masculine gender mogontos, and mogonta in the feminine. Only later, probably when the so-called nominal declension of adjectives originated, when the form dobra became dobraja by the addition of "-ja," did the "-j" get also into the participial forms and the older mogontos became mogontjos, mogonta/mogontja, nesontos/nesontjos, nesonta/nesontja ( and later on, nesontja= nesuca), and so on. With this expansion of participles by a "-j", the form mogontos, mogonta dropped out of the category of participles, that is, it became a straight adjective and was expanded by the adjective suffix "-ny." So came into being the adjective mohutny and then the words mohutnosf, mohutnief. The adjective mohutny was so strongly differentiated with its significance from the appropriate verbal participle that, with the acceptance of Christianity, the Latin omnipotens was translated as vsemohuci and not vsemohutny. The consonant "-t-" in the word mohutny demonstrates the ancient origin of this adjective. The same holds for the adjective slovutny: in old Slovanic we first had slovontos, slovonta and this participle became an adjective with a special significance, that is, it became farther removed from the verb sluti, slovon, sloves (compare the old Czech slouti, slovu, sloves, etc.). The same thing happened here as with the form mogont-: the �40 SLOVAKIA suffix of adjectives was added and we got slovonty (now slovutny). To this day slovutny designates one who has a "sounding" (resounding, booming) name. But even before this meaning developed, the forms slovontos, slovonta had an altogether concrete meaning and meant as much as zvuciaci, zvuciaca (sounding, booming). The ancient Slovanic Slovonta (now Slavuta) meant "zvuciaca" (that is, river or water). The question is: do similar river names really exist? The analogy from German territory is at hand, because there we often come across the name Lauterbach, that is, a sounding or booming brook (Laut = sound, vowel; laut= soundingly, melodiously). From ancient times the Dnieper had the Slovanic appellation Slovonta, that is, a resounding (river), and to this day that part of the Dnieper where there are great rapids (porogi, prahy) is still called Slavuta. In historical times, when a part of the Slovans pushed farther East, from the Slovuta all the way to the river Don, the Scythian name for the river was, of course, accepted by the Slovans, but to this very day its typical epiteton ornans is "tichy" (silent, quiet) ; and they call the Don "tichy" in comparison to the Dnieper (zvuciaci) which is particularly known for its rapids (waterfalls, Zaporozie), which in many spots originally extended several kilometers. Water flowing over rapids made a resounding noise and, so, the river was named a resounding (booming) river (zvuciaca rieka), that is, Slovonta, Slavuta. The river originally could have been named SIova, that is, zvucna (= resounding), and later its name enlarged by the suffix "-uta," which better expressed its original meaning. The little river Neslovka is evidently "nezvucna" (not resounding), that is, quiet, while the Slavecna, a tributary of the Pripef, as well as the names of the type Slawa, Slawica, Slavuc, Slavec, etc., come from the root slov-, from which originally were formed the names of streams whose characteristic property was making a sound. The abstract meaning which we find, for example, in the Slovak word slovutny, is therefore of a secondary origin. The root slov- comes from the ancient kleu-, as Rozwadowski already mentioned, but he incorrectly designated it to mean to pour over, to clean ("oblievaf, cistif"), be- �SLOVAKIA 41 -cause only the meaning "zvucat:" (sound, boom) enables us to explain all the names of streams from the root slov( slav-). The words slava, slovo, slovutny come from a varied degree of the Indo-Euripean root Weu- (comp. the Greek Weos from Wefos, the Slovak slovo; the root Wou-, the "-o-" degree of the root Weu-, is also in the word slava). The predecessors of the Slovans came from the East into the region of the lower flow of the Dnieper before the Scythians and had to name it Slova. This great river in ancient times flowed mostly in a woody terrain and particularly the linden forests stretched to the rapids (prahy= porogi). Kiev itself lies on the territory of the former tribe of Polani, whom Nestor's chronicle already mentions by name. The Polani lived south and south west of Kiev; and the Drevl'ania, that is, inhabitants of forests and woodlands, lived north of them. That is the way it was in the beginning of the historical period of Kievian Russia already in the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. We have already said that the name pofan was the name of a settlement derived from the word pole (field). The words rofa and pole originally designated various kinds of cultivated land: rofa comes from the older form or+lja and is connected with the word or-ati (to plow), that is, orlja (rol'a = orlja) ; it indicates land for plowing so that the word has preserved its original meaning to this very day. On the other hand, pole from the older form pol-jo is connected with the root pol-/pal- (poleti- paliti); originally, therefore, it indicated land that was gained by burning a forest. The Polani near Kiev settled first in the wooded terrain which they cleared for plowland by burning the trees. Similarly even the Polish tribe of Polani in the area of present-day Poznan in Greater Poland acquired its name which later became the national name of the Poles, since the creator of the Polish kingdom was the tribe of Polani. The word Poliak is only a continuation of the name Pofan, just as Slovak is of Slovan. Obviously, the Slovans of the Kiev area did not burn out the woods and forests on the border of the steppe, because they would thereby have come under the subjection of the Scythians. South of Kiev, really south of the Polani, in ancient times there stretched a large forest, which pro- �42 SLOVAKIA tected the Slovans from invasions by the steppe Scythians. This circumstance issues from the analysis of the word Pol'an, but it is also attested to by authors of antiquity who wrote about the enormous linden forests in the region south of Kiev. which we find Topographical names of Pol'ana among the southern Slovans (Croations, Slovenes, Serbs), the western Slovans (Slovaks and Czechs), and in lands where Slovaks originally lived, for example, in Lower Austria - do not give testimony of any Polish colonization, but are only proof of colonization by burning. A thousand years ago, the great tribe of the Lachi lived to the west of Kiev and southeast of the Polani of Poznan. In old Russian their territory is called Ljadskaja zemlja (uncultivated land) . Here we are concerned with the name Lendjan, that is, the inhabitants of land that was uncultivated. At the end of the ninth century, when the Magyars came to Kiev, there they found out about the strong tribe of Lendjani and accepted the word Lend'an, from which the Magyars later developed the form Lengyel to designate the Poles. After the Poles of Greater Poland became stronger, the Lachi first succumbed to the Poles (in the tenth century after the fall of the Great Moravian Empire) and gradually adopted the Polish tongue. The names Pol'ania, Eadzania (abbrev. Lasi) were tribal names used at the end of the ancient Slovanic period. The Desna, Tributary of the Dnieper The Slovans came into the region of the central Dnieper from the south or southeast, as is attested to by a tributary of the Slavuta above Kiev, the Desna. The name of this river could have come only from the predecessors of the present southern Slovans, because only in their language does desna mean "right." According to present geographical customs, we use the expressions "right bank" and "left bank" of a river according to the direction of flow, that is, the direction from the source to the mouth of a stream. In ancient times, however, the custom · was just the opposite of this, because new inhabitants did not come in from the mountains, that is, they did not descend according to the direction of the flow, but just the opposite; in �SLOVAKIA 43 settling a new territory they usually went against the current of great rivers and against the current of their tributaries. So, Desna, even though it means "right," is according to our geographical conceptions "left," that is, the left tributary of the Dnieper-Slavu ta. This means that the predecessors of the Slovans who named the tributary Desna could nohow come into the region of the Desna from the west or the north, but only from the south or southeast. It is only natural that Desna comes from those ancient Slovans who spoke a dialect from which later developed the languages of the southern Slovans (Yugoslavs = Juho , Slaviani), because only they have preserved the adjective desan, desna, desno (in Slovak: pravy, prava, prave). In other words, the predecessors of the present Yugoslavs were settled for a certain time even on the river Desna and only much later, after the Scythians became powerless, did they spread farther to the south all the way to the Black Sea and southwest, and finally occupy t,he Bankans. Therefore, in their ancient homeland the Slovanic tribes were distributed approximately the same as are today the Slovanic nations, of course, on a substantially smaller territory. Another river called Desna is a left tributary of the Bug above Vinica. This is a reliable sign that the pre'.iecessors of the southern Slovans for a certain time did live above the upper Bug. Similarly another Desna is the left tributary of the river Marica in Bulgaria. Apparently, however, this is not a logical appellation; even though in all three cases by the word "right" - that is, Desna - left tributaries are designated, it is self-evident since these river names indicate the direction from which the Slovanic inhabitants that had given them their names had come. And so, the Desnas have an extraordinary meaning in ascertaining the course of Slovanic colonization in ancient times. The name of Desna, the left tributary of the Dnieper above Kiev, demonstrates that the ancient Slovans came to the wooded region of the central Dnieper, against the current, that is, from the south, and already at the time when the Scythians were penetrating from the steppe regions of the southern Don into the steppe regions of the Dnieper. �44 SLOVAKIA According to this, then, we must look for the "real land of origin" of the Slovans along the waste areas of the central Dnieper, which with its enormous area and the ad-vantages of wooded terrain, as well as the climactic conditions of that time afforded especially good conditions so that for long centuries and practically without any warfare the ancient Slovans could develop into a numerically large nation, which later spread to the west, southwest and south, and, finally, to the east and north. The name Dnieper (Dneper) is undoubtedly of Scythian origin. The ancient Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the steppe Scythians, could not have accepted a Scythian name for a river that flowed through a territory which was never inhabited by the Scythians. They must have named this great stream first of all by their own name, that is, with a name of Slovanic origin. The popular and archiac name Slavuta indicates that the name is derived from the lower flow of river and that the predecessors of the Slovans, when they came to the "sounding river with rapids," named it according to this most expressive characteristic with the name Slova, namely, "zvucna" (sounding). This could have happened sometime in the second millenary before Christ, but not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, because, according to most recent excavations near Senec in Slovakia, the Scythians were also in the steppe region of the central Danube already in the fifth and fourth centuries before Christ. From all this it follows that before their arrival into the water region of the Dnieper, the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, since this name is derived from the assumed river name Slova or Slovonta. But the Greeks in the fifth century B.C. did know of a great nation, the Sporoi who lived to the north of the Scythians in forests. Lehr-Splawinski connects the word Sporoi with the Greek "sporaden," according to which it would denote a "sporadically" dispersed nation. Our etymology of the name Sporoi is something else, but we cannot go into a solution of it at this time, because it would lead us too far away from our present subject. The very fact that an ancient Greek source from the �SLOVAKIA 45 fifth century B.C. does not use the name Slovan can indicate that this name was not used much among foreigners at that time, or that the Greeks, for traditional motives, used the older appellation of the Slovans, that is, Sporoi. Finally, it is necessary for us to mention that river names were no longer formed from the root slov- after the name Slovan became the national name of the Slovanic peoples. Of course, the process of forming the ancient Slovanic nation lasted long centuries and during this period some of the tribes emigrated to the west and southwest, and even to the northern arc of the Carpathians. But even these peripherally situated Slovanic tribes had connections with the rest of the ancient Slovans and were really the vanguard of their expansive colonization which could have developed fully only after the departure of the Celts from Central Europe, but particularly after the great German migration from the north to the south when thereby the areas were made free for the penetration of the Slovans to the west, southwest, and south. Conclusions About the Origin of the Name Slovan 1. From the linguistic standpoint, the name Slovan is the name of settlers, formed from a concrete by adding the suffix "-jan." Names from the root slav- are secondary, originating under the influence of the word slava. 2. It is necessary to issue out of the presupposed river name Slova, because in present Slovanic tongues there is no appelative slova, while on the other hand there are many river names derived from the root slov- right on the territory that could have been the "pravlasf" (land of origin) of the Slovans. 3. Of these names, only Slavuta, the original Slovanic name of the Dnieper preserved to this day, enables us to explain the name Slovan, because the form Slavuta from the older form Slovonta ("zvuciaca" - sounding) is only an extended form of the original Slova (zvucna). Only in the water region of the river that bore the name Slova (=Slavuta=Dnieper), could the name Slovan originate, because the predecessors of the Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the Scythians, came into the wooded region of this river. Only in this area were there all the climactic, �46 SLOVAKIA vital, and defensive conditions that enabled the developmen t. of the great nation of the ancient Slovans. 4. According to this, "the first known ancient homeland" (land of origin) of the Slovans in Europe was the area of the central Dnieper ( =Slova), from where the individual Slovanic tribes began to spread to the west, into the water areas of the central Visla which were abandoned by the Celts, and gradually they migrated farther south and southwest. For a certain time their ancient land of origin (pravlasf) extended to the water area of the central Wisla and spread farther. From their "first ancient homeland" to their last ancient homeland, there have passed over a thous-· and years. This calls for many researches before we can write the ancient history of the Slovans by periods. In the water area of the central Dnieper they must have lived not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, where they came there from the southeast, retreating before the pressure of the Iranian Scythians. Before their advent to the area of the river Slova (later, the Dnieper), the predecessors of the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, but had to be called by some other name, as is attested to also by the ancient Greek name Sporoi. We hope that we have succeeded in clarifying the meaning of the presuppose d river name Slova and thereby corrected the hypothesis of Rozwadows ki. Besides that, we have tried to localize the river Slova, regarding this form as Slovanic and the older name of the river Dnieper, whose name is of Iranian, that is, of Scythian origin. The name Dnieper (in Ukrainian Diiipro) was spread only after the fall of the Scythians, when the Slovans of the Kiev area could spread to the south as far as the Black Sea. Only the water area of the Slova (Slavuta, now the Dnieper) could have been the cradle of the name Slovan and of the ancient Slovanic nation which gradually spread from the water area of the Dnieper to the west, southwest, and south, and which, after occupying especially large areas, began gradually to become different nationally and linguistically. The linguistic and national differentati on of the Slovans, however, falls into the historical period and can be traced relatively easily. �SLOVAKIA 47 The Origin of the Name "Slovak" In ancient Slovanic, from the word pole we got the name of Pofanin, who settled it, nom. plural Pofane, just as from the topographical name Praga we got Prazanin, plural Prazane (in old Czech "Prazenin," but plural Praiane). In the fourteenth century began the compensation of the forms in "-an" with forms in "-ak" and this change was completed in the fifteenth century, when Polak replaced Pofan, Prazak-Praz an, etc. At about the same time, the older forms Slovanin, pl. Slovane, were replaced with the forms Slovak, Slovaci. From the viewpoint of internal development of Slovak, it is necessary to recall that the form Slovak is evidently -0f western Slovak origin, which is otherwise understandab le when we consider that the inhabitants of western Slovakia, as well as Moravian Slovakia, that is, the whole of eastern Moravia, were the creators of the Great Moravian Empire in the ninth century. According to the vowel system of words of central Slovakia, today we ought to have Sloviak, Sloviaci, like zemiak-zemi aky against the forms zemak-zemak y of western Slovakia and Moravian Slovakia. In the language of central Slovakia, against the original long "-a" after soft consonants we have "-ia-," for example, the older cara, zar, and others, became ciara, ziar, etc.; but in dialects of western Slovakia we still find cara, zar, etc. And it is a fact that in places of western Slovakia, where the older (long) "a" has been preserved, that is, where people say cara, zar, etc., the forms Slovak, Slovaci have been preserved to this day (for example, in Sebechleby, Hont; in Gombas, Liptov; and places in Orava County). Finally, even Sloviak, Sloviaci of eastern Slovakia point to the fact that these forms originated from the older forms Slovak, Slovaci; this happened sometime in the 14th or 15th century. In the literary language of central Slovakia, which came to be used over 112 years ago instead of Bernolak's Slovak, the forms Slovak-Slova ci are evidently of west Slovakian origin; this is in complete agreement with historical development, because the tribes of western and Moravian Slovakia with the number of their inhabitants, as well �48 SLOVAKIA as historical significance, until the middle of the nineteenth century were the nucleus of the Slovak ethnic. Of all the Slovanic nations, only the Slovaci (Slovaks) and Slovinci (Slovenes) have preserved the name of the ancient Slovanic nation to this day. This very circumstance sufficiently proves that in the period of differentiation of the ancient Slovanic nation into individual Slovanic nations and tongues, the forefathers of the Slovaks and Slovenes preserved their original, that is, ancient Slovanic appellation, while the other Slovans - the Russians, Poles, Serbs, Croatians, Bulgarians, Czechs, etc., gave up their original name of Slovans. That the Slovenes preserved their original name is understandable, because they got to the very edge of the Slovanic world and from the end of the eighth century had foreign rulers. But the Slovaks preserved the original name of the ancient Slovans in their name most probably because they once lived on a territory at least five times as large as present Slovakia and because they were the creators of the first great Slovanic empire on the central Danube (under King Samo, 624-659) and, later, were the creators of the historic Great Moravian Empire that in the ninth century was the mightiest Slovanic state, so that the Slovaks did not have the least motive to abandon the traditional name Slovan from which in the 14th and 15th centuries the present form Slovak developed. Acording to this, the name Slovak contains the original name of all the Slovans and it may be just this clinging of the Slovaks to the original, ancient name that may be the basis of new researches that will clarify the reason why just the Slovaks have so adamantly clung to the ancient name of the Slovans which with its origin extends to their very ancient homeland in the Dnieper area. The findings of historians, archeologists, and ethnographers, and probably the philosophy of the Slovak language, will complement and clarify what cannot be done by pure linguistics which is limited to ascertaining, revealing, and clarifying linguistic facts and linguistic connections. (The Slovak original of this article appeared in "MOST" (The Bridge), a quarterly for Slovak Culture and the organ of the Slovak Writers and Artists Association, Cleveland, Ohio, published by the Rev. John J . Lach, Whiting, Ind.; Vol. ill, No. 1, 1956). � 30 SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" Dr. Henrich Bartek The et}'lffiology of the name Slovan has not been thusfar clarified satisfactorily. A more accurate definition of the origin and first homeland of the Slovans (Slavs) would be of extraordinary significance, ,p articularly if it were ipossilble to define more precisely in what area the ancient predecessors of the Slovans acquired their name. Thereiby at lea;st the aJpproximate determination of the time the name Slovan originated could become the b.asis for a more profound knowledge of the ancient history of the Slovanic peoples. The solution of the etymology of the word Slovan is, aibove all else, a linguistic problem and, therefore, we must analyze it first of aH a:ccording to the methods of this discipline, so that the remaining scientific departments, such as archeology, ethnography, and history would only have to support the lingll!istic deductions. Until the present time, in popular scientific, but also in many .scientific treatises, there are circulated many different views aJbout the origin of the name Slovan, some of which have been adhered to for long centuries. Before the thirteenth century, for example, the name Slovan was conected with the word Slava (glory). This etymology found and still finds swpport especially in the Russian form Slavjanin (Slahvyahneen), and its qualifying derivative slavjanskij (s'1a1hvyahnskee), whose root, it is said, confoI'.ms with the root of the word slava (slahvah). In the first half of the nineteenth century, this etymology was poipulari'z ed by the Slovak John Kollar in the poetical composition "Slavy dcera," as well as by his romanticscientific dissertations which he wrote as a professor of Slovanic (,SlaJV) archeology at the University of Vienna. This pqpular etymology was a.nd still is very much favored because it caters to the self-conscio,uisness of the Slovans. Nevertheless, the founder of Slavistics, the Czech scholar Joseph Dobrovsky, and the founder of Slova:nic archeology, the eminent SlaV'hStios savant of Slovwk origin, �SLOVAKIA 31 Paul J. SaJ'ari!k, became aware of the untenability of the current explanation of the term Slovan. a:nd concluded that it wrus derived from slovo (1word). Arccortling to the first etymology, the popolar conc-e pt, Slovan would mean "gloriosus," while acco,r ding to the second, it would mean ''v,~rbosus.'' Dolbrovsky and Safarilk correctly deduced it from the root slov in exiplaining the term Slovan, because they probalbly considered the for,m from the r-o ot slav as secondary. But a,g ain,s t their etymology sipeaJks the fact that in the most ancient grou,p of S101Vanic words with the suffix jan, the names of inhaJbitants were formed from names that indioated concrete oibjects. The word slovo, however is a tyipical aJbstract thing and, therefore, cannot be the basis of the term indicating inhaibitants, which become the common national name of the Slorvanic peoples. Many other etymologies orf the name Slovan are not even considered because -o f their .p ha,n tastic nature. In 1-954, the well-1known Polish scholar of Slavistics, Thaddeus LehrSplruwinski, stated in the book which he wrote with Wl. Kuras zkiewicz and F1r. Slawsky (Przeglad i charakterystyka ja;zykow slowianskich): "Whence originated this term is not as yet sufficiently clrurified; most likely at first it indd!cated the peoiple who d,welled near some water (river or lake) that was named Slowa or Slowo (the Polish for Slova, Slovo). This e:,cpression existed at one time in the looguage of the ancient 'Slovanic peoples and related nations, and the suffix -anie ( -enie), w hkh we find in the term Slovanie (Slovienie), normally indicates the dwellers of territories (comp. Wislanie, Podhalanie, Krako· wianie, etc.) . Lehr-Splawinski evidently inclines here, with a reservation, to the ex,pla:nation offered in 1921 by the remarikalble Polish .p hilologist, Joihn Romvadowski (in the Magazine of Phlfo:logical and Lingustical Studies, dedicated to A. Belie), where he expressed the hypothesis that in the ancient Slovanic language there must have existed a river by the name of Slova or Slava, or a lake called Slovo. Rozwadowslci presupposed he was here concerned with the Indo-European root 'kleu- which meant, he said, "to pour 1 �32 SLOVAKIA over, to clean" ( oblievat:, cistit:). To support his thesis he presented in his dissertation also these Slovanic names for rivers : Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Slavec, N eslovka. Rozwadowski's explanation is ,possibly the lbest from the standpoint of linguisti!cs, because he derives the name Slovan from concrete river names. Nevertheless, in our Olpinion, difficulties arise from the significance of the root slov- ("o!blievaf, cistif), as well as from the circumstance that he did not define according to which assumed river, called Slova, the S:lovans got their name. Bes~des that the names he mentions as coming from the roots slov- and slav- indicate streams of every different characteristics, so that one cannot exiplain them from the meaning of the root kleu/,s lov ("oblievaf, ocistif). At times we are concerned with small streams and rivers which pour over and clean nothing; at other times with a great stream (for example, Slavuta is the Slovanic archaic term of the Dnieper), whose character is i:n deep contrast with the small mountain streams that bear the names derived from the root slov- or slav-. If we should compare the terrain in which they flow, as well as the characteristics of a whole series of b,roOO{s and rirvers which the Slovans called by the name Bystrica, or Bystra, Bystrec, and other similar names, we would easily ascertain that their names generally indicate a most ex;pressive characteristic of these streams, that is, thcir raJpid, that is, "bystry" flow. We cannot claim a similar common characteristic, however, for the streams which haive the name Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Neslovka, etc., if we follow Rozwadowski's meaning of the root slov-. At least the common, very expressive characteristic of these streams is not evident according to the etymology proposed by Rozwadowski, because the meaning of the root kleu-/slov- assumed by him does not sufficiently warrant this characteristic property, according to which in the distant past these streams of various kinds could be called according to the names formed from the root slov- or slav.Words With the Roots "Slov- and "Slav-" Slovanic (Slavic) languages, we meet with a the In twofold sound of the national name of the Slovans. They 1 �SLOVAKIA 33 are the names formed from the root slov-, as well as those formed from the root slav-, for example: Slowian (Polish), Slovan (Slovak and Czech), and (the Russian) Slavjanin, slavjanskij with the accent on the "-ja-." Slovenec, Slovenka (Slovene); and (in Slovak) Slovak, Slovenka, as well as the name Slovan, the name used up to the present time by the inhabitants near the Irmensky Lake in northern Russia (south of Ladoga Lake, and the name Slovinci, the name used by the adherents of the tribe that lives in the neighborhood of the Polish Kashubi on the coast of the Baltic Sea - all these obviously indicate that they are derived from the root slov-. But even the Russian Slavjanin originated from the older form Slovjanin in which the short -o- was duly changed into an -a- before the accented syllable. This is not uncommon in Russian orthography, where an -a- is used instead of -o- (golova - galava), because in Russian this term from ancient times was connected with the word slava, the root of which is slav-. The very fact that national and tribal names bearing the root slov- have been preserved in the border territories of the present ethnic Slovanic territory should be sufficient reason that it issue out of the root slov-. Names from the root slav- are evidently of a secondary origin. Otherwise, crossing of words from the root slov- and slav- is a current phenomenon in Slovanic languages. This is really due to the influence of! the word slava on words derived from the concept slovo. For example, the word pravoslavie (orthodoxy), as a literal translation of the Greek orthodoxia, should be spelled "pravoslovie" - and instead of pravoslavny we should have the adjective "pravoslovny." Yet, due to the influence of the word slava in all Slovanic tongues, we find words derived only from the stem pravoslav-. So, the Slovak blahoslavif (to bless) - the Polish blagoslawic, and Czech blahoslaviti - has slav- due to this influence, even though correctly it should be "blahoslovif," because even the Russian has blagoslovif from the ecclesiastico-Slovanic blagosloviti, which is a literal translation of the Greek eulogein. All this demonstrates that the root of the word slava has influenced from ancient times the words derived from the root slov- (slovo). The opposite influence, that is, com- �34 SLOVAKIA pensation of the root slav- by means of the root slovcannot be ascertained. Therefore, it is indisputable that the national name of the Slovans (Slavic people) comes from the root slov-; and in those Slovanic languages where we find the root slav- in place of it (for example, the Russian Slavjanin), we can safely say that this is due to phonological development (in Russian and White Russian), or to the influence of the word slava. This conclusion can be complemented with the wealth of material from the Slovanic languages. Here we shall mention only two examples from Slovakia. Topographical names demonstrate that they are derived from the root slov-, for example, Slovany in Turiec County. Here we have the older form of the name Slovak which was replaced by the newer already in the fourteenth century. The name of the community Slovany certainly belongs among the ancient names of Slovak origin and comes from the period when the predecessors of the Slovaks immigrated to Turiec and had to settle among non-Slovaks, probably among the remainder of the Celts. It makes sense then that, in a non-Slovak environment, the ancient Slovaks named their settlement Slovany (phonetically Slovani in the Turiec dialect, because the older "-ja-" after labials was changed here to "-a-'; the genitive is Slovian, appropriately from the older Slovan, where the "-ia-" is used in place of older "-a-" as in ciara from cara, etc.). The adjective of Slovany is also appropriately "sloviansky." Even in Spis County there is a community called Slovinky. So, in topographical names in Slovakia we find only the root slov-, that is, before the advent of the Slovaks to their present territory - before the fifth century - the national name of the Slovans was formed from the root slov-, so that the forms with slav- are obviously altogether newer forms, as we mentioned above. From all this it follows that in solving the etymology of the name Slovan, we must start with the root slov-~, and not with the root slav-. Therefore, the possibility of deriving the national name of the Slovaks from the word slava is completely out of the question. Accepting this view, we then have a realistic basis for the solution of the etymology of the word Slovan. �SLOVAKIA 35 The Suffix "-Jan" In the ancient Slovanic tongue names of settlements were formed with the prefix "-jan," for example, pol'an designated an inhabitant of fields. Topographical names in "-any" nicely preserve the original function of the suffix "-jan," for example Brodzany (in the Nitra Valley) originally designated the inhabitants living near a ford (from the word brod there first originated brod+jan and then Brodzany); the name Lipany (for example, in eastern Slovakia, but also elsewhere in Slovanic countries) comes from lip + jan (really from the accusative Lipjany; even today in the dialect of eastern Slovakia it is Lipjani) and designates the inhabitants of a region in linden (basswood) trees, that is, of an area where there were forests of linden trees. According to this it is evident the suffix "-jan" was used to form the names of settlements from concretes, such as: brod, lipa, hora, luh, etc. The second ancient function of the suffix "-jan" was the formation of names of settlements to designate the inhabitants living in the area of some river, for example, the Polish Wislan from Wisljan still designates an inhabitant of the Wisla river region; similarly, the Slovak name Moravan comes from the name of the river Morava, Kysucan from Kysuce, and so on. This means that in the ancient Slovanic tongue the suffix "-jan" was used to create the names of settlers which were derived from concrete names, that is, appellatives, and from topographical names, particularly from the names of rivers. As far as the stem and the significance of the name Slovan is concerned, from the old form Slov + jan, it belongs among ancient names of settlements which were derived from concrete names. Since in the Slovanic languages there is not a trace after the concrete appellatives "slov, slova, slovo," and since the name Slovan is added in old Greek sources already from the sixth century B.C., it must be derived from some topographical name, because with its entire structure the name Slovan belongs to the same type of appellatives as Wislan, Moravan, and the like, that �36 SLOVAKIA is, to names derived from rivers, the names of which belong to the oldest group of topographical names. The names of Slovanic streams are generally of the feminine gender; very often we meet the adjective forms of the appellatives where the word "rieka" (river) or "voda" (water) has been omitted: Bystra, that is, "bystra voda" and Bystrica (a small rapid stream); Byster (a rapid brook) and Bystrec or Bysterec (a small rapid brook), etc. With the larger streams the word "river" is generally omitted and, therefore, the names of the larger rivers of Slovanic countries, inasmuch as they are of native origin, end in an "-a," that is, they are of the feminine gender. This apparently is refuted by the names Vah, Hron, Ipef, but, in our opinion, these are names of Celtic origin. In eastern Slovakia the river names Poprad and Hornad we regard as Daco-Sarmatian. The name Slovan cannot be the name of a settlement derived from the name of a town, as, for example, Romanus · from the name Roma, because there is no such town or city that could be the foundation of the word Slovan. Therefore, only a river name remains open to us, the name of a larger river, along which for a certain period of time the ancestors of the Slovans could have lived. Of course, the Slovanic name of this great river had to be of the feminine gender and, therefore, issue out of the presuposed river name "Slova," from which, by adding the suffix "-jan," was formed the name Slovan (in Russian: Slavjanin from the older form Slovjanin), which then became a national name in the ancient homeland of the Slovans. The River "Slova" In the national names of the south-Slovanic Slovenes (Slovinci) and the western-Slovanic Slovaks (Slovaci), the little altered ancient name of the Slovans has been preserved to this very day originating long before their departure from the ancient homeland. History tells us that the Slovenes by the end of the sixth century had already penetrated all the way to Pustertal in southern Tyrol and that the Slovaks occupied present-day Moravia and Slovakia before the sixth century. It follows from this that the �SLOVAKIA 37 national name of the Slovans must have originated already long before that time. And since, from the standpoint of linguistics, the name Slovan presupposes a river that was named Slova, we must look for such a river on the territory of the supposed ancient homeland of the Slovans. The region along this river had to be sufficiently large, its climactic conditions advantageous, and it had to spread over a geographical area that would assure sufficient protection against foreign invasions and thereby enable the biological development of the numerically great nation of the ancient Slovans. Comparative philology, Slavistics, as well as archeology and history, have long ago come to the generally accepted conclusion that the ancient homeland of the Slovanic peoples must be sought south of the present settlements of the Lithuanians and to the north of the northern arc of the Carpathians, approximately in the area of the eastern tributaries of the central Wisla and in the western water regions of the river Pripet', a tributary of the central Dnieper. As far as the area of the ancient homeland of the Slovans is concerned, as well as the chronology of the disintegration of the ancient Slovanic national and lingual unity, science has not as yet come to any unified conclusion, because particularly Slovanic scholars are frequently even subconsciously led by the contemporary political aspirations of their nations. Thus, for example, Lehr-Splawinski regards as the land of origin of the Slovans the areas of the Oder and Wisla rivers (vd. "Praslowianie," Biblioteka Studium Slowianskiego, Seria B, Nr. 1, Cracow, 1946), that is, the territory of present-day Poland. Generally the problem of the "land of origin" is very complicated and a more accurate localization of it is practically impossible when chronology is omitted, when the time of the existence of this ancient homeland is not marked out. People regard Denmark with the adjacent regions of northwestern Germany and southern Scandinavia as the ancient homeland of the Germans, but the predecessors of the Germans were not the first inhabitants of this territory and must have had their original homeland somewhere else before their advent into this last German homeland, that is, "last" as far as we know it. And the same holds for the �38 SLOVAKIA Slovans. Even the Trans-Carpathian homeland, whose accurate designation encounters so many difficulties, was not the first homeland of the Slovans. Conversely, however, it is the last homeland known to us and its area was not permanently limited because the Slovans spread and migrated just as the Germans and Celts had done before them. The Wisla and Oder regions are, of course, sufficiently large enough territories on which the nation of the ancient Slovans could have developed, but the non-Slovanic name of the Oder, the Celtic names of some of the tributaries of the Oder and Wisla rivers, and the lack of sufficient proof of the Slovanic origin of the name Wisla, indicate that we cannot here look for the land of origin of the Slovans in which the name Slovan could have originated. Besides this, there is nothing to prove even the possibility of expansion of the eastern Slovans from the Oder-Wisla homeland, which Lehr-Splawinski presupposes. There is no proof that the Oder or the Wisla were ever called Slova or any other name formed from the root "slov-" and, therefore, their water areas do not come into consideration in explaining the name Slovan. But there are also many other reasons why this region canot be considered as the land of origin of the Slovans. On the other hand, in folksongs, which have preserved its ancient name, the Dnieper is also called by the name Slavuta, which evidently comes from the older form Slovuta, because the name of the river could not be derived from the root "slav-" but only from the root "slov-" and Slovuta was changed into Slavuta in the same manner as was Slovjanin into Slavjanin, that is, due to the influence of the word slava. It is generally acknowledged that Dnieper, Dniester, and Don are names of Scythian, that is of Iranian origin. Slavuta as the Slovanic name of the Dnieper is certainly the older appellation, because in ancient times the Slovans they must have given the river a name earlier. Obviously came to the river Dnieper sooner than the Scythians, so they could not accept the Scythian word for a territory which the Scythians had not as yet settled. Under pressure from the Scythians, the Slovans came into the forest terrain along the great river whose Slovanic name is Sia- �SLOVAKIA 39 vuta and of which they Scythian name Dnieper was later circulated generally. Etymology of the Name "Slavuta" The archiac name Slavuta comes from the older form Slovuta which in turn was derived from the ancient Slovanic Slovonta. From the etymological standpoint, we are here concerned with an old adjective form, that is, with an ancient form of participle. From verbs of the type viesf, niesf, etc. (from the old Slovanic vezti, nesti), we have the present-day tongue participles of the feminine gender veduca, nesuca from the older forms vedontja, nesontja. The consonant "-j" in these forms is, of course, of ancient Slovanic origin, but not of the ancient tongue, as is attested to, for example, by the forms mohutny along with mohuci, slovutny, tekuty, etc. From the ancient Slovanic mogti (in Slovak today mocf) came the participle of the masculine gender mogontos, and mogonta in the feminine. Only later, probably when the so-called nominal declension of adjectives originated, when the form dobra became dobraja by the addition of "-ja," did the "-j" get also into the participial forms and the older mogontos became mogontjos, mogonta/mogontja, nesontos/nesontjos, nesonta/nesontja ( and later on, nesontja= nesuca), and so on. With this expansion of participles by a "-j", the form mogontos, mogonta dropped out of the category of participles, that is, it became a straight adjective and was expanded by the adjective suffix "-ny." So came into being the adjective mohutny and then the words mohutnosf, mohutnief. The adjective mohutny was so strongly differentiated with its significance from the appropriate verbal participle that, with the acceptance of Christianity, the Latin omnipotens was translated as vsemohuci and not vsemohutny. The consonant "-t-" in the word mohutny demonstrates the ancient origin of this adjective. The same holds for the adjective slovutny: in old Slovanic we first had slovontos, slovonta and this participle became an adjective with a special significance, that is, it became farther removed from the verb sluti, slovon, sloves (compare the old Czech slouti, slovu, sloves, etc.). The same thing happened here as with the form mogont-: the �40 SLOVAKIA suffix of adjectives was added and we got slovonty (now slovutny). To this day slovutny designates one who has a "sounding" (resounding, booming) name. But even before this meaning developed, the forms slovontos, slovonta had an altogether concrete meaning and meant as much as zvuciaci, zvuciaca (sounding, booming). The ancient Slovanic Slovonta (now Slavuta) meant "zvuciaca" (that is, river or water). The question is: do similar river names really exist? The analogy from German territory is at hand, because there we often come across the name Lauterbach, that is, a sounding or booming brook (Laut = sound, vowel; laut= soundingly, melodiously). From ancient times the Dnieper had the Slovanic appellation Slovonta, that is, a resounding (river), and to this day that part of the Dnieper where there are great rapids (porogi, prahy) is still called Slavuta. In historical times, when a part of the Slovans pushed farther East, from the Slovuta all the way to the river Don, the Scythian name for the river was, of course, accepted by the Slovans, but to this very day its typical epiteton ornans is "tichy" (silent, quiet) ; and they call the Don "tichy" in comparison to the Dnieper (zvuciaci) which is particularly known for its rapids (waterfalls, Zaporozie), which in many spots originally extended several kilometers. Water flowing over rapids made a resounding noise and, so, the river was named a resounding (booming) river (zvuciaca rieka), that is, Slovonta, Slavuta. The river originally could have been named SIova, that is, zvucna (= resounding), and later its name enlarged by the suffix "-uta," which better expressed its original meaning. The little river Neslovka is evidently "nezvucna" (not resounding), that is, quiet, while the Slavecna, a tributary of the Pripef, as well as the names of the type Slawa, Slawica, Slavuc, Slavec, etc., come from the root slov-, from which originally were formed the names of streams whose characteristic property was making a sound. The abstract meaning which we find, for example, in the Slovak word slovutny, is therefore of a secondary origin. The root slov- comes from the ancient kleu-, as Rozwadowski already mentioned, but he incorrectly designated it to mean to pour over, to clean ("oblievaf, cistif"), be- �SLOVAKIA 41 -cause only the meaning "zvucat:" (sound, boom) enables us to explain all the names of streams from the root slov( slav-). The words slava, slovo, slovutny come from a varied degree of the Indo-Euripean root Weu- (comp. the Greek Weos from Wefos, the Slovak slovo; the root Wou-, the "-o-" degree of the root Weu-, is also in the word slava). The predecessors of the Slovans came from the East into the region of the lower flow of the Dnieper before the Scythians and had to name it Slova. This great river in ancient times flowed mostly in a woody terrain and particularly the linden forests stretched to the rapids (prahy= porogi). Kiev itself lies on the territory of the former tribe of Polani, whom Nestor's chronicle already mentions by name. The Polani lived south and south west of Kiev; and the Drevl'ania, that is, inhabitants of forests and woodlands, lived north of them. That is the way it was in the beginning of the historical period of Kievian Russia already in the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. We have already said that the name pofan was the name of a settlement derived from the word pole (field). The words rofa and pole originally designated various kinds of cultivated land: rofa comes from the older form or+lja and is connected with the word or-ati (to plow), that is, orlja (rol'a = orlja) ; it indicates land for plowing so that the word has preserved its original meaning to this very day. On the other hand, pole from the older form pol-jo is connected with the root pol-/pal- (poleti- paliti); originally, therefore, it indicated land that was gained by burning a forest. The Polani near Kiev settled first in the wooded terrain which they cleared for plowland by burning the trees. Similarly even the Polish tribe of Polani in the area of present-day Poznan in Greater Poland acquired its name which later became the national name of the Poles, since the creator of the Polish kingdom was the tribe of Polani. The word Poliak is only a continuation of the name Pofan, just as Slovak is of Slovan. Obviously, the Slovans of the Kiev area did not burn out the woods and forests on the border of the steppe, because they would thereby have come under the subjection of the Scythians. South of Kiev, really south of the Polani, in ancient times there stretched a large forest, which pro- �42 SLOVAKIA tected the Slovans from invasions by the steppe Scythians. This circumstance issues from the analysis of the word Pol'an, but it is also attested to by authors of antiquity who wrote about the enormous linden forests in the region south of Kiev. which we find Topographical names of Pol'ana among the southern Slovans (Croations, Slovenes, Serbs), the western Slovans (Slovaks and Czechs), and in lands where Slovaks originally lived, for example, in Lower Austria - do not give testimony of any Polish colonization, but are only proof of colonization by burning. A thousand years ago, the great tribe of the Lachi lived to the west of Kiev and southeast of the Polani of Poznan. In old Russian their territory is called Ljadskaja zemlja (uncultivated land) . Here we are concerned with the name Lendjan, that is, the inhabitants of land that was uncultivated. At the end of the ninth century, when the Magyars came to Kiev, there they found out about the strong tribe of Lendjani and accepted the word Lend'an, from which the Magyars later developed the form Lengyel to designate the Poles. After the Poles of Greater Poland became stronger, the Lachi first succumbed to the Poles (in the tenth century after the fall of the Great Moravian Empire) and gradually adopted the Polish tongue. The names Pol'ania, Eadzania (abbrev. Lasi) were tribal names used at the end of the ancient Slovanic period. The Desna, Tributary of the Dnieper The Slovans came into the region of the central Dnieper from the south or southeast, as is attested to by a tributary of the Slavuta above Kiev, the Desna. The name of this river could have come only from the predecessors of the present southern Slovans, because only in their language does desna mean "right." According to present geographical customs, we use the expressions "right bank" and "left bank" of a river according to the direction of flow, that is, the direction from the source to the mouth of a stream. In ancient times, however, the custom · was just the opposite of this, because new inhabitants did not come in from the mountains, that is, they did not descend according to the direction of the flow, but just the opposite; in �SLOVAKIA 43 settling a new territory they usually went against the current of great rivers and against the current of their tributaries. So, Desna, even though it means "right," is according to our geographical conceptions "left," that is, the left tributary of the Dnieper-Slavu ta. This means that the predecessors of the Slovans who named the tributary Desna could nohow come into the region of the Desna from the west or the north, but only from the south or southeast. It is only natural that Desna comes from those ancient Slovans who spoke a dialect from which later developed the languages of the southern Slovans (Yugoslavs = Juho , Slaviani), because only they have preserved the adjective desan, desna, desno (in Slovak: pravy, prava, prave). In other words, the predecessors of the present Yugoslavs were settled for a certain time even on the river Desna and only much later, after the Scythians became powerless, did they spread farther to the south all the way to the Black Sea and southwest, and finally occupy t,he Bankans. Therefore, in their ancient homeland the Slovanic tribes were distributed approximately the same as are today the Slovanic nations, of course, on a substantially smaller territory. Another river called Desna is a left tributary of the Bug above Vinica. This is a reliable sign that the pre'.iecessors of the southern Slovans for a certain time did live above the upper Bug. Similarly another Desna is the left tributary of the river Marica in Bulgaria. Apparently, however, this is not a logical appellation; even though in all three cases by the word "right" - that is, Desna - left tributaries are designated, it is self-evident since these river names indicate the direction from which the Slovanic inhabitants that had given them their names had come. And so, the Desnas have an extraordinary meaning in ascertaining the course of Slovanic colonization in ancient times. The name of Desna, the left tributary of the Dnieper above Kiev, demonstrates that the ancient Slovans came to the wooded region of the central Dnieper, against the current, that is, from the south, and already at the time when the Scythians were penetrating from the steppe regions of the southern Don into the steppe regions of the Dnieper. �44 SLOVAKIA According to this, then, we must look for the "real land of origin" of the Slovans along the waste areas of the central Dnieper, which with its enormous area and the ad-vantages of wooded terrain, as well as the climactic conditions of that time afforded especially good conditions so that for long centuries and practically without any warfare the ancient Slovans could develop into a numerically large nation, which later spread to the west, southwest and south, and, finally, to the east and north. The name Dnieper (Dneper) is undoubtedly of Scythian origin. The ancient Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the steppe Scythians, could not have accepted a Scythian name for a river that flowed through a territory which was never inhabited by the Scythians. They must have named this great stream first of all by their own name, that is, with a name of Slovanic origin. The popular and archiac name Slavuta indicates that the name is derived from the lower flow of river and that the predecessors of the Slovans, when they came to the "sounding river with rapids," named it according to this most expressive characteristic with the name Slova, namely, "zvucna" (sounding). This could have happened sometime in the second millenary before Christ, but not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, because, according to most recent excavations near Senec in Slovakia, the Scythians were also in the steppe region of the central Danube already in the fifth and fourth centuries before Christ. From all this it follows that before their arrival into the water region of the Dnieper, the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, since this name is derived from the assumed river name Slova or Slovonta. But the Greeks in the fifth century B.C. did know of a great nation, the Sporoi who lived to the north of the Scythians in forests. Lehr-Splawinski connects the word Sporoi with the Greek "sporaden," according to which it would denote a "sporadically" dispersed nation. Our etymology of the name Sporoi is something else, but we cannot go into a solution of it at this time, because it would lead us too far away from our present subject. The very fact that an ancient Greek source from the �SLOVAKIA 45 fifth century B.C. does not use the name Slovan can indicate that this name was not used much among foreigners at that time, or that the Greeks, for traditional motives, used the older appellation of the Slovans, that is, Sporoi. Finally, it is necessary for us to mention that river names were no longer formed from the root slov- after the name Slovan became the national name of the Slovanic peoples. Of course, the process of forming the ancient Slovanic nation lasted long centuries and during this period some of the tribes emigrated to the west and southwest, and even to the northern arc of the Carpathians. But even these peripherally situated Slovanic tribes had connections with the rest of the ancient Slovans and were really the vanguard of their expansive colonization which could have developed fully only after the departure of the Celts from Central Europe, but particularly after the great German migration from the north to the south when thereby the areas were made free for the penetration of the Slovans to the west, southwest, and south. Conclusions About the Origin of the Name Slovan 1. From the linguistic standpoint, the name Slovan is the name of settlers, formed from a concrete by adding the suffix "-jan." Names from the root slav- are secondary, originating under the influence of the word slava. 2. It is necessary to issue out of the presupposed river name Slova, because in present Slovanic tongues there is no appelative slova, while on the other hand there are many river names derived from the root slov- right on the territory that could have been the "pravlasf" (land of origin) of the Slovans. 3. Of these names, only Slavuta, the original Slovanic name of the Dnieper preserved to this day, enables us to explain the name Slovan, because the form Slavuta from the older form Slovonta ("zvuciaca" - sounding) is only an extended form of the original Slova (zvucna). Only in the water region of the river that bore the name Slova (=Slavuta=Dnieper), could the name Slovan originate, because the predecessors of the Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the Scythians, came into the wooded region of this river. Only in this area were there all the climactic, �46 SLOVAKIA vital, and defensive conditions that enabled the developmen t. of the great nation of the ancient Slovans. 4. According to this, "the first known ancient homeland" (land of origin) of the Slovans in Europe was the area of the central Dnieper ( =Slova), from where the individual Slovanic tribes began to spread to the west, into the water areas of the central Visla which were abandoned by the Celts, and gradually they migrated farther south and southwest. For a certain time their ancient land of origin (pravlasf) extended to the water area of the central Wisla and spread farther. From their "first ancient homeland" to their last ancient homeland, there have passed over a thous-· and years. This calls for many researches before we can write the ancient history of the Slovans by periods. In the water area of the central Dnieper they must have lived not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, where they came there from the southeast, retreating before the pressure of the Iranian Scythians. Before their advent to the area of the river Slova (later, the Dnieper), the predecessors of the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, but had to be called by some other name, as is attested to also by the ancient Greek name Sporoi. We hope that we have succeeded in clarifying the meaning of the presuppose d river name Slova and thereby corrected the hypothesis of Rozwadows ki. Besides that, we have tried to localize the river Slova, regarding this form as Slovanic and the older name of the river Dnieper, whose name is of Iranian, that is, of Scythian origin. The name Dnieper (in Ukrainian Diiipro) was spread only after the fall of the Scythians, when the Slovans of the Kiev area could spread to the south as far as the Black Sea. Only the water area of the Slova (Slavuta, now the Dnieper) could have been the cradle of the name Slovan and of the ancient Slovanic nation which gradually spread from the water area of the Dnieper to the west, southwest, and south, and which, after occupying especially large areas, began gradually to become different nationally and linguistically. The linguistic and national differentati on of the Slovans, however, falls into the historical period and can be traced relatively easily. �SLOVAKIA 47 The Origin of the Name "Slovak" In ancient Slovanic, from the word pole we got the name of Pofanin, who settled it, nom. plural Pofane, just as from the topographical name Praga we got Prazanin, plural Prazane (in old Czech "Prazenin," but plural Praiane). In the fourteenth century began the compensation of the forms in "-an" with forms in "-ak" and this change was completed in the fifteenth century, when Polak replaced Pofan, Prazak-Praz an, etc. At about the same time, the older forms Slovanin, pl. Slovane, were replaced with the forms Slovak, Slovaci. From the viewpoint of internal development of Slovak, it is necessary to recall that the form Slovak is evidently -0f western Slovak origin, which is otherwise understandab le when we consider that the inhabitants of western Slovakia, as well as Moravian Slovakia, that is, the whole of eastern Moravia, were the creators of the Great Moravian Empire in the ninth century. According to the vowel system of words of central Slovakia, today we ought to have Sloviak, Sloviaci, like zemiak-zemi aky against the forms zemak-zemak y of western Slovakia and Moravian Slovakia. In the language of central Slovakia, against the original long "-a" after soft consonants we have "-ia-," for example, the older cara, zar, and others, became ciara, ziar, etc.; but in dialects of western Slovakia we still find cara, zar, etc. And it is a fact that in places of western Slovakia, where the older (long) "a" has been preserved, that is, where people say cara, zar, etc., the forms Slovak, Slovaci have been preserved to this day (for example, in Sebechleby, Hont; in Gombas, Liptov; and places in Orava County). Finally, even Sloviak, Sloviaci of eastern Slovakia point to the fact that these forms originated from the older forms Slovak, Slovaci; this happened sometime in the 14th or 15th century. In the literary language of central Slovakia, which came to be used over 112 years ago instead of Bernolak's Slovak, the forms Slovak-Slova ci are evidently of west Slovakian origin; this is in complete agreement with historical development, because the tribes of western and Moravian Slovakia with the number of their inhabitants, as well �48 SLOVAKIA as historical significance, until the middle of the nineteenth century were the nucleus of the Slovak ethnic. Of all the Slovanic nations, only the Slovaci (Slovaks) and Slovinci (Slovenes) have preserved the name of the ancient Slovanic nation to this day. This very circumstance sufficiently proves that in the period of differentiation of the ancient Slovanic nation into individual Slovanic nations and tongues, the forefathers of the Slovaks and Slovenes preserved their original, that is, ancient Slovanic appellation, while the other Slovans - the Russians, Poles, Serbs, Croatians, Bulgarians, Czechs, etc., gave up their original name of Slovans. That the Slovenes preserved their original name is understandable, because they got to the very edge of the Slovanic world and from the end of the eighth century had foreign rulers. But the Slovaks preserved the original name of the ancient Slovans in their name most probably because they once lived on a territory at least five times as large as present Slovakia and because they were the creators of the first great Slovanic empire on the central Danube (under King Samo, 624-659) and, later, were the creators of the historic Great Moravian Empire that in the ninth century was the mightiest Slovanic state, so that the Slovaks did not have the least motive to abandon the traditional name Slovan from which in the 14th and 15th centuries the present form Slovak developed. Acording to this, the name Slovak contains the original name of all the Slovans and it may be just this clinging of the Slovaks to the original, ancient name that may be the basis of new researches that will clarify the reason why just the Slovaks have so adamantly clung to the ancient name of the Slovans which with its origin extends to their very ancient homeland in the Dnieper area. The findings of historians, archeologists, and ethnographers, and probably the philosophy of the Slovak language, will complement and clarify what cannot be done by pure linguistics which is limited to ascertaining, revealing, and clarifying linguistic facts and linguistic connections. (The Slovak original of this article appeared in "MOST" (The Bridge), a quarterly for Slovak Culture and the organ of the Slovak Writers and Artists Association, Cleveland, Ohio, published by the Rev. John J . Lach, Whiting, Ind.; Vol. ill, No. 1, 1956). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 30 SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" Dr. Henrich Bartek The et}'lffiology of the name Slovan has not been thusfar clarified satisfactorily. A more accurate definition of the origin and first homeland of the Slovans (Slavs) would be of extraordinary significance, ,p articularly if it were ipossilble to define more precisely in what area the ancient predecessors of the Slovans acquired their name. Thereiby at lea;st the aJpproximate determination of the time the name Slovan originated could become the b.asis for a more profound knowledge of the ancient history of the Slovanic peoples. The solution of the etymology of the word Slovan is, aibove all else, a linguistic problem and, therefore, we must analyze it first of aH a:ccording to the methods of this discipline, so that the remaining scientific departments, such as archeology, ethnography, and history would only have to support the lingll!istic deductions. Until the present time, in popular scientific, but also in many .scientific treatises, there are circulated many different views aJbout the origin of the name Slovan, some of which have been adhered to for long centuries. Before the thirteenth century, for example, the name Slovan was conected with the word Slava (glory). This etymology found and still finds swpport especially in the Russian form Slavjanin (Slahvyahneen), and its qualifying derivative slavjanskij (s'1a1hvyahnskee), whose root, it is said, confoI'.ms with the root of the word slava (slahvah). In the first half of the nineteenth century, this etymology was poipulari'z ed by the Slovak John Kollar in the poetical composition "Slavy dcera," as well as by his romanticscientific dissertations which he wrote as a professor of Slovanic (,SlaJV) archeology at the University of Vienna. This pqpular etymology was a.nd still is very much favored because it caters to the self-conscio,uisness of the Slovans. Nevertheless, the founder of Slavistics, the Czech scholar Joseph Dobrovsky, and the founder of Slova:nic archeology, the eminent SlaV'hStios savant of Slovwk origin, SLOVAKIA 31 Paul J. SaJ'ari!k, became aware of the untenability of the current explanation of the term Slovan. a:nd concluded that it wrus derived from slovo (1word). Arccortling to the first etymology, the popolar conc-e pt, Slovan would mean "gloriosus," while acco,r ding to the second, it would mean ''v,~rbosus.'' Dolbrovsky and Safarilk correctly deduced it from the root slov in exiplaining the term Slovan, because they probalbly considered the for,m from the r-o ot slav as secondary. But a,g ain,s t their etymology sipeaJks the fact that in the most ancient grou,p of S101Vanic words with the suffix jan, the names of inhaJbitants were formed from names that indioated concrete oibjects. The word slovo, however is a tyipical aJbstract thing and, therefore, cannot be the basis of the term indicating inhaibitants, which become the common national name of the Slorvanic peoples. Many other etymologies orf the name Slovan are not even considered because -o f their .p ha,n tastic nature. In 1-954, the well-1known Polish scholar of Slavistics, Thaddeus LehrSplruwinski, stated in the book which he wrote with Wl. Kuras zkiewicz and F1r. Slawsky (Przeglad i charakterystyka ja;zykow slowianskich): "Whence originated this term is not as yet sufficiently clrurified; most likely at first it indd!cated the peoiple who d,welled near some water (river or lake) that was named Slowa or Slowo (the Polish for Slova, Slovo). This e:,cpression existed at one time in the looguage of the ancient 'Slovanic peoples and related nations, and the suffix -anie ( -enie), w hkh we find in the term Slovanie (Slovienie), normally indicates the dwellers of territories (comp. Wislanie, Podhalanie, Krako· wianie, etc.) . Lehr-Splawinski evidently inclines here, with a reservation, to the ex,pla:nation offered in 1921 by the remarikalble Polish .p hilologist, Joihn Romvadowski (in the Magazine of Phlfo:logical and Lingustical Studies, dedicated to A. Belie), where he expressed the hypothesis that in the ancient Slovanic language there must have existed a river by the name of Slova or Slava, or a lake called Slovo. Rozwadowslci presupposed he was here concerned with the Indo-European root 'kleu- which meant, he said, "to pour 1 32 SLOVAKIA over, to clean" ( oblievat:, cistit:). To support his thesis he presented in his dissertation also these Slovanic names for rivers : Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Slavec, N eslovka. Rozwadowski's explanation is ,possibly the lbest from the standpoint of linguisti!cs, because he derives the name Slovan from concrete river names. Nevertheless, in our Olpinion, difficulties arise from the significance of the root slov- ("o!blievaf, cistif), as well as from the circumstance that he did not define according to which assumed river, called Slova, the S:lovans got their name. Bes~des that the names he mentions as coming from the roots slov- and slav- indicate streams of every different characteristics, so that one cannot exiplain them from the meaning of the root kleu/,s lov ("oblievaf, ocistif). At times we are concerned with small streams and rivers which pour over and clean nothing; at other times with a great stream (for example, Slavuta is the Slovanic archaic term of the Dnieper), whose character is i:n deep contrast with the small mountain streams that bear the names derived from the root slov- or slav-. If we should compare the terrain in which they flow, as well as the characteristics of a whole series of b,roOO{s and rirvers which the Slovans called by the name Bystrica, or Bystra, Bystrec, and other similar names, we would easily ascertain that their names generally indicate a most ex;pressive characteristic of these streams, that is, thcir raJpid, that is, "bystry" flow. We cannot claim a similar common characteristic, however, for the streams which haive the name Slawa, Slawica, Slavuta, Neslovka, etc., if we follow Rozwadowski's meaning of the root slov-. At least the common, very expressive characteristic of these streams is not evident according to the etymology proposed by Rozwadowski, because the meaning of the root kleu-/slov- assumed by him does not sufficiently warrant this characteristic property, according to which in the distant past these streams of various kinds could be called according to the names formed from the root slov- or slav.Words With the Roots "Slov- and "Slav-" Slovanic (Slavic) languages, we meet with a the In twofold sound of the national name of the Slovans. They 1 SLOVAKIA 33 are the names formed from the root slov-, as well as those formed from the root slav-, for example: Slowian (Polish), Slovan (Slovak and Czech), and (the Russian) Slavjanin, slavjanskij with the accent on the "-ja-." Slovenec, Slovenka (Slovene); and (in Slovak) Slovak, Slovenka, as well as the name Slovan, the name used up to the present time by the inhabitants near the Irmensky Lake in northern Russia (south of Ladoga Lake, and the name Slovinci, the name used by the adherents of the tribe that lives in the neighborhood of the Polish Kashubi on the coast of the Baltic Sea - all these obviously indicate that they are derived from the root slov-. But even the Russian Slavjanin originated from the older form Slovjanin in which the short -o- was duly changed into an -a- before the accented syllable. This is not uncommon in Russian orthography, where an -a- is used instead of -o- (golova - galava), because in Russian this term from ancient times was connected with the word slava, the root of which is slav-. The very fact that national and tribal names bearing the root slov- have been preserved in the border territories of the present ethnic Slovanic territory should be sufficient reason that it issue out of the root slov-. Names from the root slav- are evidently of a secondary origin. Otherwise, crossing of words from the root slov- and slav- is a current phenomenon in Slovanic languages. This is really due to the influence of! the word slava on words derived from the concept slovo. For example, the word pravoslavie (orthodoxy), as a literal translation of the Greek orthodoxia, should be spelled "pravoslovie" - and instead of pravoslavny we should have the adjective "pravoslovny." Yet, due to the influence of the word slava in all Slovanic tongues, we find words derived only from the stem pravoslav-. So, the Slovak blahoslavif (to bless) - the Polish blagoslawic, and Czech blahoslaviti - has slav- due to this influence, even though correctly it should be "blahoslovif," because even the Russian has blagoslovif from the ecclesiastico-Slovanic blagosloviti, which is a literal translation of the Greek eulogein. All this demonstrates that the root of the word slava has influenced from ancient times the words derived from the root slov- (slovo). The opposite influence, that is, com- 34 SLOVAKIA pensation of the root slav- by means of the root slovcannot be ascertained. Therefore, it is indisputable that the national name of the Slovans (Slavic people) comes from the root slov-; and in those Slovanic languages where we find the root slav- in place of it (for example, the Russian Slavjanin), we can safely say that this is due to phonological development (in Russian and White Russian), or to the influence of the word slava. This conclusion can be complemented with the wealth of material from the Slovanic languages. Here we shall mention only two examples from Slovakia. Topographical names demonstrate that they are derived from the root slov-, for example, Slovany in Turiec County. Here we have the older form of the name Slovak which was replaced by the newer already in the fourteenth century. The name of the community Slovany certainly belongs among the ancient names of Slovak origin and comes from the period when the predecessors of the Slovaks immigrated to Turiec and had to settle among non-Slovaks, probably among the remainder of the Celts. It makes sense then that, in a non-Slovak environment, the ancient Slovaks named their settlement Slovany (phonetically Slovani in the Turiec dialect, because the older "-ja-" after labials was changed here to "-a-'; the genitive is Slovian, appropriately from the older Slovan, where the "-ia-" is used in place of older "-a-" as in ciara from cara, etc.). The adjective of Slovany is also appropriately "sloviansky." Even in Spis County there is a community called Slovinky. So, in topographical names in Slovakia we find only the root slov-, that is, before the advent of the Slovaks to their present territory - before the fifth century - the national name of the Slovans was formed from the root slov-, so that the forms with slav- are obviously altogether newer forms, as we mentioned above. From all this it follows that in solving the etymology of the name Slovan, we must start with the root slov-~, and not with the root slav-. Therefore, the possibility of deriving the national name of the Slovaks from the word slava is completely out of the question. Accepting this view, we then have a realistic basis for the solution of the etymology of the word Slovan. SLOVAKIA 35 The Suffix "-Jan" In the ancient Slovanic tongue names of settlements were formed with the prefix "-jan," for example, pol'an designated an inhabitant of fields. Topographical names in "-any" nicely preserve the original function of the suffix "-jan," for example Brodzany (in the Nitra Valley) originally designated the inhabitants living near a ford (from the word brod there first originated brod+jan and then Brodzany); the name Lipany (for example, in eastern Slovakia, but also elsewhere in Slovanic countries) comes from lip + jan (really from the accusative Lipjany; even today in the dialect of eastern Slovakia it is Lipjani) and designates the inhabitants of a region in linden (basswood) trees, that is, of an area where there were forests of linden trees. According to this it is evident the suffix "-jan" was used to form the names of settlements from concretes, such as: brod, lipa, hora, luh, etc. The second ancient function of the suffix "-jan" was the formation of names of settlements to designate the inhabitants living in the area of some river, for example, the Polish Wislan from Wisljan still designates an inhabitant of the Wisla river region; similarly, the Slovak name Moravan comes from the name of the river Morava, Kysucan from Kysuce, and so on. This means that in the ancient Slovanic tongue the suffix "-jan" was used to create the names of settlers which were derived from concrete names, that is, appellatives, and from topographical names, particularly from the names of rivers. As far as the stem and the significance of the name Slovan is concerned, from the old form Slov + jan, it belongs among ancient names of settlements which were derived from concrete names. Since in the Slovanic languages there is not a trace after the concrete appellatives "slov, slova, slovo," and since the name Slovan is added in old Greek sources already from the sixth century B.C., it must be derived from some topographical name, because with its entire structure the name Slovan belongs to the same type of appellatives as Wislan, Moravan, and the like, that 36 SLOVAKIA is, to names derived from rivers, the names of which belong to the oldest group of topographical names. The names of Slovanic streams are generally of the feminine gender; very often we meet the adjective forms of the appellatives where the word "rieka" (river) or "voda" (water) has been omitted: Bystra, that is, "bystra voda" and Bystrica (a small rapid stream); Byster (a rapid brook) and Bystrec or Bysterec (a small rapid brook), etc. With the larger streams the word "river" is generally omitted and, therefore, the names of the larger rivers of Slovanic countries, inasmuch as they are of native origin, end in an "-a," that is, they are of the feminine gender. This apparently is refuted by the names Vah, Hron, Ipef, but, in our opinion, these are names of Celtic origin. In eastern Slovakia the river names Poprad and Hornad we regard as Daco-Sarmatian. The name Slovan cannot be the name of a settlement derived from the name of a town, as, for example, Romanus · from the name Roma, because there is no such town or city that could be the foundation of the word Slovan. Therefore, only a river name remains open to us, the name of a larger river, along which for a certain period of time the ancestors of the Slovans could have lived. Of course, the Slovanic name of this great river had to be of the feminine gender and, therefore, issue out of the presuposed river name "Slova," from which, by adding the suffix "-jan," was formed the name Slovan (in Russian: Slavjanin from the older form Slovjanin), which then became a national name in the ancient homeland of the Slovans. The River "Slova" In the national names of the south-Slovanic Slovenes (Slovinci) and the western-Slovanic Slovaks (Slovaci), the little altered ancient name of the Slovans has been preserved to this very day originating long before their departure from the ancient homeland. History tells us that the Slovenes by the end of the sixth century had already penetrated all the way to Pustertal in southern Tyrol and that the Slovaks occupied present-day Moravia and Slovakia before the sixth century. It follows from this that the SLOVAKIA 37 national name of the Slovans must have originated already long before that time. And since, from the standpoint of linguistics, the name Slovan presupposes a river that was named Slova, we must look for such a river on the territory of the supposed ancient homeland of the Slovans. The region along this river had to be sufficiently large, its climactic conditions advantageous, and it had to spread over a geographical area that would assure sufficient protection against foreign invasions and thereby enable the biological development of the numerically great nation of the ancient Slovans. Comparative philology, Slavistics, as well as archeology and history, have long ago come to the generally accepted conclusion that the ancient homeland of the Slovanic peoples must be sought south of the present settlements of the Lithuanians and to the north of the northern arc of the Carpathians, approximately in the area of the eastern tributaries of the central Wisla and in the western water regions of the river Pripet', a tributary of the central Dnieper. As far as the area of the ancient homeland of the Slovans is concerned, as well as the chronology of the disintegration of the ancient Slovanic national and lingual unity, science has not as yet come to any unified conclusion, because particularly Slovanic scholars are frequently even subconsciously led by the contemporary political aspirations of their nations. Thus, for example, Lehr-Splawinski regards as the land of origin of the Slovans the areas of the Oder and Wisla rivers (vd. "Praslowianie," Biblioteka Studium Slowianskiego, Seria B, Nr. 1, Cracow, 1946), that is, the territory of present-day Poland. Generally the problem of the "land of origin" is very complicated and a more accurate localization of it is practically impossible when chronology is omitted, when the time of the existence of this ancient homeland is not marked out. People regard Denmark with the adjacent regions of northwestern Germany and southern Scandinavia as the ancient homeland of the Germans, but the predecessors of the Germans were not the first inhabitants of this territory and must have had their original homeland somewhere else before their advent into this last German homeland, that is, "last" as far as we know it. And the same holds for the 38 SLOVAKIA Slovans. Even the Trans-Carpathian homeland, whose accurate designation encounters so many difficulties, was not the first homeland of the Slovans. Conversely, however, it is the last homeland known to us and its area was not permanently limited because the Slovans spread and migrated just as the Germans and Celts had done before them. The Wisla and Oder regions are, of course, sufficiently large enough territories on which the nation of the ancient Slovans could have developed, but the non-Slovanic name of the Oder, the Celtic names of some of the tributaries of the Oder and Wisla rivers, and the lack of sufficient proof of the Slovanic origin of the name Wisla, indicate that we cannot here look for the land of origin of the Slovans in which the name Slovan could have originated. Besides this, there is nothing to prove even the possibility of expansion of the eastern Slovans from the Oder-Wisla homeland, which Lehr-Splawinski presupposes. There is no proof that the Oder or the Wisla were ever called Slova or any other name formed from the root "slov-" and, therefore, their water areas do not come into consideration in explaining the name Slovan. But there are also many other reasons why this region canot be considered as the land of origin of the Slovans. On the other hand, in folksongs, which have preserved its ancient name, the Dnieper is also called by the name Slavuta, which evidently comes from the older form Slovuta, because the name of the river could not be derived from the root "slav-" but only from the root "slov-" and Slovuta was changed into Slavuta in the same manner as was Slovjanin into Slavjanin, that is, due to the influence of the word slava. It is generally acknowledged that Dnieper, Dniester, and Don are names of Scythian, that is of Iranian origin. Slavuta as the Slovanic name of the Dnieper is certainly the older appellation, because in ancient times the Slovans they must have given the river a name earlier. Obviously came to the river Dnieper sooner than the Scythians, so they could not accept the Scythian word for a territory which the Scythians had not as yet settled. Under pressure from the Scythians, the Slovans came into the forest terrain along the great river whose Slovanic name is Sia- SLOVAKIA 39 vuta and of which they Scythian name Dnieper was later circulated generally. Etymology of the Name "Slavuta" The archiac name Slavuta comes from the older form Slovuta which in turn was derived from the ancient Slovanic Slovonta. From the etymological standpoint, we are here concerned with an old adjective form, that is, with an ancient form of participle. From verbs of the type viesf, niesf, etc. (from the old Slovanic vezti, nesti), we have the present-day tongue participles of the feminine gender veduca, nesuca from the older forms vedontja, nesontja. The consonant "-j" in these forms is, of course, of ancient Slovanic origin, but not of the ancient tongue, as is attested to, for example, by the forms mohutny along with mohuci, slovutny, tekuty, etc. From the ancient Slovanic mogti (in Slovak today mocf) came the participle of the masculine gender mogontos, and mogonta in the feminine. Only later, probably when the so-called nominal declension of adjectives originated, when the form dobra became dobraja by the addition of "-ja," did the "-j" get also into the participial forms and the older mogontos became mogontjos, mogonta/mogontja, nesontos/nesontjos, nesonta/nesontja ( and later on, nesontja= nesuca), and so on. With this expansion of participles by a "-j", the form mogontos, mogonta dropped out of the category of participles, that is, it became a straight adjective and was expanded by the adjective suffix "-ny." So came into being the adjective mohutny and then the words mohutnosf, mohutnief. The adjective mohutny was so strongly differentiated with its significance from the appropriate verbal participle that, with the acceptance of Christianity, the Latin omnipotens was translated as vsemohuci and not vsemohutny. The consonant "-t-" in the word mohutny demonstrates the ancient origin of this adjective. The same holds for the adjective slovutny: in old Slovanic we first had slovontos, slovonta and this participle became an adjective with a special significance, that is, it became farther removed from the verb sluti, slovon, sloves (compare the old Czech slouti, slovu, sloves, etc.). The same thing happened here as with the form mogont-: the 40 SLOVAKIA suffix of adjectives was added and we got slovonty (now slovutny). To this day slovutny designates one who has a "sounding" (resounding, booming) name. But even before this meaning developed, the forms slovontos, slovonta had an altogether concrete meaning and meant as much as zvuciaci, zvuciaca (sounding, booming). The ancient Slovanic Slovonta (now Slavuta) meant "zvuciaca" (that is, river or water). The question is: do similar river names really exist? The analogy from German territory is at hand, because there we often come across the name Lauterbach, that is, a sounding or booming brook (Laut = sound, vowel; laut= soundingly, melodiously). From ancient times the Dnieper had the Slovanic appellation Slovonta, that is, a resounding (river), and to this day that part of the Dnieper where there are great rapids (porogi, prahy) is still called Slavuta. In historical times, when a part of the Slovans pushed farther East, from the Slovuta all the way to the river Don, the Scythian name for the river was, of course, accepted by the Slovans, but to this very day its typical epiteton ornans is "tichy" (silent, quiet) ; and they call the Don "tichy" in comparison to the Dnieper (zvuciaci) which is particularly known for its rapids (waterfalls, Zaporozie), which in many spots originally extended several kilometers. Water flowing over rapids made a resounding noise and, so, the river was named a resounding (booming) river (zvuciaca rieka), that is, Slovonta, Slavuta. The river originally could have been named SIova, that is, zvucna (= resounding), and later its name enlarged by the suffix "-uta," which better expressed its original meaning. The little river Neslovka is evidently "nezvucna" (not resounding), that is, quiet, while the Slavecna, a tributary of the Pripef, as well as the names of the type Slawa, Slawica, Slavuc, Slavec, etc., come from the root slov-, from which originally were formed the names of streams whose characteristic property was making a sound. The abstract meaning which we find, for example, in the Slovak word slovutny, is therefore of a secondary origin. The root slov- comes from the ancient kleu-, as Rozwadowski already mentioned, but he incorrectly designated it to mean to pour over, to clean ("oblievaf, cistif"), be- SLOVAKIA 41 -cause only the meaning "zvucat:" (sound, boom) enables us to explain all the names of streams from the root slov( slav-). The words slava, slovo, slovutny come from a varied degree of the Indo-Euripean root Weu- (comp. the Greek Weos from Wefos, the Slovak slovo; the root Wou-, the "-o-" degree of the root Weu-, is also in the word slava). The predecessors of the Slovans came from the East into the region of the lower flow of the Dnieper before the Scythians and had to name it Slova. This great river in ancient times flowed mostly in a woody terrain and particularly the linden forests stretched to the rapids (prahy= porogi). Kiev itself lies on the territory of the former tribe of Polani, whom Nestor's chronicle already mentions by name. The Polani lived south and south west of Kiev; and the Drevl'ania, that is, inhabitants of forests and woodlands, lived north of them. That is the way it was in the beginning of the historical period of Kievian Russia already in the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. We have already said that the name pofan was the name of a settlement derived from the word pole (field). The words rofa and pole originally designated various kinds of cultivated land: rofa comes from the older form or+lja and is connected with the word or-ati (to plow), that is, orlja (rol'a = orlja) ; it indicates land for plowing so that the word has preserved its original meaning to this very day. On the other hand, pole from the older form pol-jo is connected with the root pol-/pal- (poleti- paliti); originally, therefore, it indicated land that was gained by burning a forest. The Polani near Kiev settled first in the wooded terrain which they cleared for plowland by burning the trees. Similarly even the Polish tribe of Polani in the area of present-day Poznan in Greater Poland acquired its name which later became the national name of the Poles, since the creator of the Polish kingdom was the tribe of Polani. The word Poliak is only a continuation of the name Pofan, just as Slovak is of Slovan. Obviously, the Slovans of the Kiev area did not burn out the woods and forests on the border of the steppe, because they would thereby have come under the subjection of the Scythians. South of Kiev, really south of the Polani, in ancient times there stretched a large forest, which pro- 42 SLOVAKIA tected the Slovans from invasions by the steppe Scythians. This circumstance issues from the analysis of the word Pol'an, but it is also attested to by authors of antiquity who wrote about the enormous linden forests in the region south of Kiev. which we find Topographical names of Pol'ana among the southern Slovans (Croations, Slovenes, Serbs), the western Slovans (Slovaks and Czechs), and in lands where Slovaks originally lived, for example, in Lower Austria - do not give testimony of any Polish colonization, but are only proof of colonization by burning. A thousand years ago, the great tribe of the Lachi lived to the west of Kiev and southeast of the Polani of Poznan. In old Russian their territory is called Ljadskaja zemlja (uncultivated land) . Here we are concerned with the name Lendjan, that is, the inhabitants of land that was uncultivated. At the end of the ninth century, when the Magyars came to Kiev, there they found out about the strong tribe of Lendjani and accepted the word Lend'an, from which the Magyars later developed the form Lengyel to designate the Poles. After the Poles of Greater Poland became stronger, the Lachi first succumbed to the Poles (in the tenth century after the fall of the Great Moravian Empire) and gradually adopted the Polish tongue. The names Pol'ania, Eadzania (abbrev. Lasi) were tribal names used at the end of the ancient Slovanic period. The Desna, Tributary of the Dnieper The Slovans came into the region of the central Dnieper from the south or southeast, as is attested to by a tributary of the Slavuta above Kiev, the Desna. The name of this river could have come only from the predecessors of the present southern Slovans, because only in their language does desna mean "right." According to present geographical customs, we use the expressions "right bank" and "left bank" of a river according to the direction of flow, that is, the direction from the source to the mouth of a stream. In ancient times, however, the custom · was just the opposite of this, because new inhabitants did not come in from the mountains, that is, they did not descend according to the direction of the flow, but just the opposite; in SLOVAKIA 43 settling a new territory they usually went against the current of great rivers and against the current of their tributaries. So, Desna, even though it means "right," is according to our geographical conceptions "left," that is, the left tributary of the Dnieper-Slavu ta. This means that the predecessors of the Slovans who named the tributary Desna could nohow come into the region of the Desna from the west or the north, but only from the south or southeast. It is only natural that Desna comes from those ancient Slovans who spoke a dialect from which later developed the languages of the southern Slovans (Yugoslavs = Juho , Slaviani), because only they have preserved the adjective desan, desna, desno (in Slovak: pravy, prava, prave). In other words, the predecessors of the present Yugoslavs were settled for a certain time even on the river Desna and only much later, after the Scythians became powerless, did they spread farther to the south all the way to the Black Sea and southwest, and finally occupy t,he Bankans. Therefore, in their ancient homeland the Slovanic tribes were distributed approximately the same as are today the Slovanic nations, of course, on a substantially smaller territory. Another river called Desna is a left tributary of the Bug above Vinica. This is a reliable sign that the pre'.iecessors of the southern Slovans for a certain time did live above the upper Bug. Similarly another Desna is the left tributary of the river Marica in Bulgaria. Apparently, however, this is not a logical appellation; even though in all three cases by the word "right" - that is, Desna - left tributaries are designated, it is self-evident since these river names indicate the direction from which the Slovanic inhabitants that had given them their names had come. And so, the Desnas have an extraordinary meaning in ascertaining the course of Slovanic colonization in ancient times. The name of Desna, the left tributary of the Dnieper above Kiev, demonstrates that the ancient Slovans came to the wooded region of the central Dnieper, against the current, that is, from the south, and already at the time when the Scythians were penetrating from the steppe regions of the southern Don into the steppe regions of the Dnieper. 44 SLOVAKIA According to this, then, we must look for the "real land of origin" of the Slovans along the waste areas of the central Dnieper, which with its enormous area and the ad-vantages of wooded terrain, as well as the climactic conditions of that time afforded especially good conditions so that for long centuries and practically without any warfare the ancient Slovans could develop into a numerically large nation, which later spread to the west, southwest and south, and, finally, to the east and north. The name Dnieper (Dneper) is undoubtedly of Scythian origin. The ancient Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the steppe Scythians, could not have accepted a Scythian name for a river that flowed through a territory which was never inhabited by the Scythians. They must have named this great stream first of all by their own name, that is, with a name of Slovanic origin. The popular and archiac name Slavuta indicates that the name is derived from the lower flow of river and that the predecessors of the Slovans, when they came to the "sounding river with rapids," named it according to this most expressive characteristic with the name Slova, namely, "zvucna" (sounding). This could have happened sometime in the second millenary before Christ, but not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, because, according to most recent excavations near Senec in Slovakia, the Scythians were also in the steppe region of the central Danube already in the fifth and fourth centuries before Christ. From all this it follows that before their arrival into the water region of the Dnieper, the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, since this name is derived from the assumed river name Slova or Slovonta. But the Greeks in the fifth century B.C. did know of a great nation, the Sporoi who lived to the north of the Scythians in forests. Lehr-Splawinski connects the word Sporoi with the Greek "sporaden," according to which it would denote a "sporadically" dispersed nation. Our etymology of the name Sporoi is something else, but we cannot go into a solution of it at this time, because it would lead us too far away from our present subject. The very fact that an ancient Greek source from the SLOVAKIA 45 fifth century B.C. does not use the name Slovan can indicate that this name was not used much among foreigners at that time, or that the Greeks, for traditional motives, used the older appellation of the Slovans, that is, Sporoi. Finally, it is necessary for us to mention that river names were no longer formed from the root slov- after the name Slovan became the national name of the Slovanic peoples. Of course, the process of forming the ancient Slovanic nation lasted long centuries and during this period some of the tribes emigrated to the west and southwest, and even to the northern arc of the Carpathians. But even these peripherally situated Slovanic tribes had connections with the rest of the ancient Slovans and were really the vanguard of their expansive colonization which could have developed fully only after the departure of the Celts from Central Europe, but particularly after the great German migration from the north to the south when thereby the areas were made free for the penetration of the Slovans to the west, southwest, and south. Conclusions About the Origin of the Name Slovan 1. From the linguistic standpoint, the name Slovan is the name of settlers, formed from a concrete by adding the suffix "-jan." Names from the root slav- are secondary, originating under the influence of the word slava. 2. It is necessary to issue out of the presupposed river name Slova, because in present Slovanic tongues there is no appelative slova, while on the other hand there are many river names derived from the root slov- right on the territory that could have been the "pravlasf" (land of origin) of the Slovans. 3. Of these names, only Slavuta, the original Slovanic name of the Dnieper preserved to this day, enables us to explain the name Slovan, because the form Slavuta from the older form Slovonta ("zvuciaca" - sounding) is only an extended form of the original Slova (zvucna). Only in the water region of the river that bore the name Slova (=Slavuta=Dnieper), could the name Slovan originate, because the predecessors of the Slovans, retreating before the pressure of the Scythians, came into the wooded region of this river. Only in this area were there all the climactic, 46 SLOVAKIA vital, and defensive conditions that enabled the developmen t. of the great nation of the ancient Slovans. 4. According to this, "the first known ancient homeland" (land of origin) of the Slovans in Europe was the area of the central Dnieper ( =Slova), from where the individual Slovanic tribes began to spread to the west, into the water areas of the central Visla which were abandoned by the Celts, and gradually they migrated farther south and southwest. For a certain time their ancient land of origin (pravlasf) extended to the water area of the central Wisla and spread farther. From their "first ancient homeland" to their last ancient homeland, there have passed over a thous-· and years. This calls for many researches before we can write the ancient history of the Slovans by periods. In the water area of the central Dnieper they must have lived not later than the beginning of the first millenary before Christ, where they came there from the southeast, retreating before the pressure of the Iranian Scythians. Before their advent to the area of the river Slova (later, the Dnieper), the predecessors of the Slovans could not have been called Slovans, but had to be called by some other name, as is attested to also by the ancient Greek name Sporoi. We hope that we have succeeded in clarifying the meaning of the presuppose d river name Slova and thereby corrected the hypothesis of Rozwadows ki. Besides that, we have tried to localize the river Slova, regarding this form as Slovanic and the older name of the river Dnieper, whose name is of Iranian, that is, of Scythian origin. The name Dnieper (in Ukrainian Diiipro) was spread only after the fall of the Scythians, when the Slovans of the Kiev area could spread to the south as far as the Black Sea. Only the water area of the Slova (Slavuta, now the Dnieper) could have been the cradle of the name Slovan and of the ancient Slovanic nation which gradually spread from the water area of the Dnieper to the west, southwest, and south, and which, after occupying especially large areas, began gradually to become different nationally and linguistically. The linguistic and national differentati on of the Slovans, however, falls into the historical period and can be traced relatively easily. SLOVAKIA 47 The Origin of the Name "Slovak" In ancient Slovanic, from the word pole we got the name of Pofanin, who settled it, nom. plural Pofane, just as from the topographical name Praga we got Prazanin, plural Prazane (in old Czech "Prazenin," but plural Praiane). In the fourteenth century began the compensation of the forms in "-an" with forms in "-ak" and this change was completed in the fifteenth century, when Polak replaced Pofan, Prazak-Praz an, etc. At about the same time, the older forms Slovanin, pl. Slovane, were replaced with the forms Slovak, Slovaci. From the viewpoint of internal development of Slovak, it is necessary to recall that the form Slovak is evidently -0f western Slovak origin, which is otherwise understandab le when we consider that the inhabitants of western Slovakia, as well as Moravian Slovakia, that is, the whole of eastern Moravia, were the creators of the Great Moravian Empire in the ninth century. According to the vowel system of words of central Slovakia, today we ought to have Sloviak, Sloviaci, like zemiak-zemi aky against the forms zemak-zemak y of western Slovakia and Moravian Slovakia. In the language of central Slovakia, against the original long "-a" after soft consonants we have "-ia-," for example, the older cara, zar, and others, became ciara, ziar, etc.; but in dialects of western Slovakia we still find cara, zar, etc. And it is a fact that in places of western Slovakia, where the older (long) "a" has been preserved, that is, where people say cara, zar, etc., the forms Slovak, Slovaci have been preserved to this day (for example, in Sebechleby, Hont; in Gombas, Liptov; and places in Orava County). Finally, even Sloviak, Sloviaci of eastern Slovakia point to the fact that these forms originated from the older forms Slovak, Slovaci; this happened sometime in the 14th or 15th century. In the literary language of central Slovakia, which came to be used over 112 years ago instead of Bernolak's Slovak, the forms Slovak-Slova ci are evidently of west Slovakian origin; this is in complete agreement with historical development, because the tribes of western and Moravian Slovakia with the number of their inhabitants, as well 48 SLOVAKIA as historical significance, until the middle of the nineteenth century were the nucleus of the Slovak ethnic. Of all the Slovanic nations, only the Slovaci (Slovaks) and Slovinci (Slovenes) have preserved the name of the ancient Slovanic nation to this day. This very circumstance sufficiently proves that in the period of differentiation of the ancient Slovanic nation into individual Slovanic nations and tongues, the forefathers of the Slovaks and Slovenes preserved their original, that is, ancient Slovanic appellation, while the other Slovans - the Russians, Poles, Serbs, Croatians, Bulgarians, Czechs, etc., gave up their original name of Slovans. That the Slovenes preserved their original name is understandable, because they got to the very edge of the Slovanic world and from the end of the eighth century had foreign rulers. But the Slovaks preserved the original name of the ancient Slovans in their name most probably because they once lived on a territory at least five times as large as present Slovakia and because they were the creators of the first great Slovanic empire on the central Danube (under King Samo, 624-659) and, later, were the creators of the historic Great Moravian Empire that in the ninth century was the mightiest Slovanic state, so that the Slovaks did not have the least motive to abandon the traditional name Slovan from which in the 14th and 15th centuries the present form Slovak developed. Acording to this, the name Slovak contains the original name of all the Slovans and it may be just this clinging of the Slovaks to the original, ancient name that may be the basis of new researches that will clarify the reason why just the Slovaks have so adamantly clung to the ancient name of the Slovans which with its origin extends to their very ancient homeland in the Dnieper area. The findings of historians, archeologists, and ethnographers, and probably the philosophy of the Slovak language, will complement and clarify what cannot be done by pure linguistics which is limited to ascertaining, revealing, and clarifying linguistic facts and linguistic connections. (The Slovak original of this article appeared in "MOST" (The Bridge), a quarterly for Slovak Culture and the organ of the Slovak Writers and Artists Association, Cleveland, Ohio, published by the Rev. John J . Lach, Whiting, Ind.; Vol. ill, No. 1, 1956).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Origin of "Slovan" and "Slovak" Description An account of the resource Dr. Henrich Bartek Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), June 1958 pp. 30-48 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bartek, Henrich, 1907-1986 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/5df349359c13f759066467f60fa19f41.pdf fa86e8be18d24769d0e5fe3811b9ef87 PDF Text Text 18 SLOVAKIA UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum An dbjective search of the cultural development of Central ffiurOlpe will r,e veal that Slo,vakia was not only "the first cultural center," as M. Hodzas wrote, but also a land of noteworthy university traditions. With the loss of ,p olitical indeipenden~e in the tenth century and the inco.rporation of Slova!kia first into muJti-national Hungary and later into Ozecho..,Slova!kia, the university tradttions, as well as the entire cultural development of Slovalkia, are often ,presented, it is true, in foreign works as a paTt of Magyar and/ or Czech culture. This is e3:pecially true alb uot the foundation and activity of un1versities in SlorvaJkia, which Mwgyar historians, both young and old (1), classified e~clustvely under the caption of culture of the Magyar nation, despite the fact that in the Middle Ages - and in Cenm-ail ,E}urope even in the 17th centll!rY - modern nationalism ,w as something unknown and that those universities were conducted in a .s pirit of unirversalisrn and cosmopolitanism. Several arguments speak against any such exiplanation of the cultural development in Central ffiurope, and especially in the multi-national !Hungary ,p rior to 19118: 1) the nature of the medieval class .state which was managed by the nobility and gentry of all ethnical components; 2) the character of medieval universities and their mission; and, 3) the nationalistic composition of the students and the ,professorial sta~f. 'l 'f, in thi,s conteIIl\po11aneous period, one would classify, by an ex post exiplaination, the universities of Hungary as the cultural heritage of only one nation, then he would be malking use of an interpretation that is not in line ,w ith logic and historical truth. Cultural values in Hungary were creaited 1b y all the nations of Hungary and, since the nonMagyar nations often exceeded the Maigyars numerically, we can apply only the territorial 1principle when designing the prfority right of cultural institutions. Therefore, even �SLOVAKIA 19 this dissertaion speaJks rubout the university traditi:ons in Slova!kia and not aJbout traditions of Slova;k universities. It would not be in line with the resttlts of an oibjective search of the Slovak cultural ,p ast, if we should present the universities in Slovakia of the 15th or 17th century as 'SlovaJk. If we did, we would there by be committing an error almost as great as the Magyars when they present them a,s Magyar, or as the e~clusive heritage of the Magyar nation. But even overlooking the fact that the 15th or the 17th century did not as yet know the concept of a nation in the sense of the present-day meaning of the word and that culturnl institutions in Central Europe, and esipecially in Hungary, had a universalistic spirit and a language that was foremost Latin, the .national composition of Hungary demands a just distribution of merits, as well as cultural heritage, amon5 all the nations of the poiy,g lot Cro1WI1 of St. Stephen. II ffiven with this scrll!pulous distinction, the Sl01va!ks do have a prio,r ity right to three universities from the times of former Hungary and to two from the time of the incorporation of Slovakia into the Czecho-Sl01Valk Republic. That is, on the territory of Slovaikia, there was not only the .A;cadenia Istroipolitana, founded in Bratislaivia by Mathias Corrwin in 1465, and the University of 'I'rnava from the year 1635, but also the universities of Kosice and Bratislava. The Aicademia I.stropolitana, named aftex the Greek for Danulbe (Istros), was a typical medieval university, set up on the order of Italian universities, particularly that of Bologna, its mission /being mainly religious. Hungary, and especially Slcwalkia, was devastated by Jis:kra's Czech mercenary soldiers and by religious quarrels,. After Ji$kra's crupitulation in 1642, and after he had se:cured himself a;gainst the Turkish danger, King Mathias sought to consolidate his country. His plans called for, above all else, a learned priesthood and an educated nolbility revived in the Catholic spirit. Since at that time there was no university in Hungary, as the King himself wrote in his peti- �20 SLOVAKIA tion of May 19, 1465 which was addressed to the Pope, Mathias requested permission for a "studium generale" and Pope Pole II granted it on the same day. In the petition, King Mathias stated what motivated him to estrublish a university in Bratislava and what ,punpo.se it was to serwe. He wrote that "in the countries .bordering with hereti'Cs there is a need of learned men and that this was a loss for the Church itself, as well as for the Christian religion." The Ki.ng entrusted the organization of the university to the Arch'bishop of Ostrihom, J,o hn Vitez, and the university was started in the home of the Ventura Street. The solemn opening of the univensity took 1place on Jwy 28, 1467. Fortihwith the University of Bratisla;va established good relations with the Univensity orf Vienna which he.ljped out with several of its eminent professo,r s. With the death af King Mathias, however, the uni,v ersity not only lost its founder, but also its protector; it closed its doors in 1490. The Academia Istropolitana was a complete uniiversity with four faculties and a .study c,urriculum that equaled that of other European, particularly the Italian and German, univeTSities. The immediate proximity oif the older and well estalblished Uniiversity of Vienna, and the renown of the University of Cracow, estaiblished in 1364, and the Unirversity of Prague (11348) did not allow the University of Bratislaiva to develop as ,planned by King Mathias, who did want to attract students even from the surrounding countries. The fact is that many students from Hungary itself, particularly from SlorvaJkia, studied in Cracow and Pra1gue, Vienna and at Ralian universities. According to some sources in the years 1400-1525 in Oraco,w alone over 2000 students frOIIIl Slovakia attended, especially from her eastern area (2). Territorially, the Unirversity of Bratisla;va belongs to the history of Slovakia, in the remaining aspects it was a medievaI Catholic unirveTsity and :belongs to all the nations of Hungary from whkh ,b oth the students and also the professors descended. And since even in this case the �SLOVAKIA 21 Magyars cannot apply the dynastic principle (King Mathias was not of a Magyar dynasty), it is decidedly not in line with historic fact if anyone plruces the unhrersity in the cultural hi<story of only the Magyar nation. "The Academy Istropolitna, " as professor A. MTaz correctly states it, "originated f,r om the will and decision of the Hungarian ruler, it was the result of his cultUJral policy, which wais in many ways influenced by humanism and by contacts especially with the romantic world. Its designation must be understood in an all-state sense, but the very fact that this univer,s ity ori,g inated on Slovak territory, that in its ran1ks there was a great percentage of Slova!k students and professors - all thi,s puts the Corwinian Unirversity of Bratislava into close and lirvely relations with Slovalk cultUTal de,velo1pment" (3). The second univernity on the territory of Slorvakia, the Jesuit University in Trnava, was founded by Archlbishop Peter Pazmany and approved by ffimperor Ferdinand on Odolber 18, 1635. The UnirverS!ity of Trnava was also a Catholic unirver,s ity in ,w hich L'a tin was used, as is proved by the register and catalogues which haive 1been preserved. At first there were only two faculties at this uniiversity (iphilosoiphical and theological), with two others added later (the law faculty in 1667, and the medical in 1769). Archbishop Pa,m nany, originally a Calv:in of German birth (4), was critical of the Magyar nation wh~ch he clai<med as his own; but he, 1i'ke the other ecclesiastical authorities were aiware of the fact that Hungary was polyg,l ot and, therefore, it can be rightly claimed that the university was estalblished for all the nationalities of Hungary with the aim to speed the victory of the Counter-Reformation among the Magyars, as well as among the SJo,vaJks, and Germans, nay even among the Serbs and Ruthenians .by means of the Cyrillic a1phalbet. The words of the Charter about "noibilissimae gentis Hun1garicae" cannot b,e explaaned otherwise than that Pa~many had in mind the state-nation of Hungary, which was administered not only by the Magyar, but also by the Croation and Slovalk nobility and gentTy and compo,s ed of even the Ruimanians of Transyl- �22 SLOVAKIA vania, the Germans, Senbs, and Ruthenians who occupied the lands of St. Stephen's Crown. In the Charter, Archlbishoip Pazmainy says literally: "We often ~o1idtously pondered just in what manner we might take crure of prQlpagating the Catholic religion in Hungary and to wplift the authority of the ndble Hungarian naition; and the most advantageous medium that we came wpon was the estaJblishment of a university in which the mind of a belligerent nation could be moderated and capable people might be ti-ained for the administration Church and also the State." The administration of the State, especially in the 17th century, was not exclusively in the hands of the Magyar nobility and gentry, inasmuch the Magyarization of the Slovak nobility, for example, came quite some time later. Under the influence of the Tu:rlkish occupation and the partition of Hungary into three paI'ts (the southern and central part occupied by the Turks; Transylvainia and the Tisa River area b~ independent princes; and the northern part, that is SlovaJkia, with smaller parts of western Hungary administered by the Hapsburgs) , Slovakia played an altogether exceptional role in the 17th century. She was, Hod.fa tells us, the refuge of many intellectual efforts and for some time there was more cultural movement in Slo,vaJkia than in Bohemia or the occupied part of Hungary. .Aiccording to Hodza, practically a,U movements of the cultural and political Life met there and Slova1kia was indisputaJbly the cultural center of Catholic Hungary (5). So that the Slovalks could regard the Uni,v ersity of TrnaJva as their own is attested to not only by the fact that is was on the territocy of Slorvalkia which .played, as we saiw aJbove, an exrceptional role in Hungary in the seventeenth century. The significance of this university for the cultura-l development of the Slovaiks, their langunge and their national conscioU!Sness was so far-reaching that even one of the outstanding literary historians of the .p resent communistic university in SlovaJkia, Professo;r A. Mraz, acknowledges that "with its activity and within its frame- �SLOVAKIA 23 wor'k cultwral and scientific life was prQ_pagated and deepened, the effects of which, all things considered, affected very strong,ly the Sl~ak part of the inhaJbitants, even though this was done according to the plan of religious and scientific direction of this high school and its inclusion into the Jesuit European school ,system. Because o.f the university, Trnava became the cultuTal center of Catholic Hun,gary and Slovakia in the seventeenth centUTy." Mraz also states that "for 160 yews o,f the existence of the University of Trnava on SloiVaJk territory, together with its activity and educational atmosphere created by it, there were crystallized such SlovaJk cultural and natonal realities that were the support of Slovak national renascence" ( 6). From the archives orf the University of Trnava, we learn that UJP to the time of its transfer to Budin in the year 1777, the Slovaks attended the university in greatest numbers, not only as students but, in s·o me years, the Slovaxs predominated as professors. In the first five years, for example, out of 248 students logic, 90 are indicated a,s 'SlovaJks and 77 as Magyars (the others were marked as Croatians and Germans, or their nationality was not indicated). Mter 1649, the registers of the university do not indicate the nationality of the students reg,ulal'ly, but the nationality of those re::!eiving the baccalaureate is indicated: even during this period, it can lbe 1proved that the Siloiva'ks and other iSlorvanic peoples werre in the rubsolute majority at the uniivers,ity (7). Now, then, if we regard the University of Trna.va from the standpoint of the question whom it sewed, who studied and taught at it, the ,p reponderance is on the side of the SlovaJks, Croatians and Germans, a;nd then come the Magyars. As far as· cultural influence is concerned, the University of Trnarva has merited a permanent place in SlovaJk cultural history with the literary activity o.f its professors and wards even in the Slovak langua,ge. From the yearr 1578 to 1777, the unirvevsity issued 79 Lrutin pulblicati<ons in the field of apologetics and contro;versial works~· but also 14 such ipU!bli:cations in Slorvak. During that same, time, 20 Magyar and 12 German, lbut also 75 bodks in the �24 SLOVAKIA field of scetics and preaching (8), so that "the crystallization of the langll!age of Catholic writers from the period of the University of Trnava was marked to such a degree that when Anthony Bernolruk and his g,r oup came out with the idea of an independent Slovalk literary langua;ge, in many things they only codified the practices, prevalent in Catholic literature, of their predeces,s ors" (9). From the rubove, it is undouibtedly surfrficiently clear that the SlO'Vaiks can rightfully inolude the UnilV'ersity of Ton:wa in the cultural heritage of the 1Slovalk nation and that !it ibelOiillgs in the first iplace to the unirve:r,sity traditions of SlovaJkia. It was iin such a sense that the Slovaks celebrated the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Trnava in 1935, when they pulblished a whole ,s eries of literary works commemorating the occasion with the actirve ,partic~pation of not only their cultura·l, but also their ,politi'cal institutions. The third uni,v ersity in SlovaJkia was established in Kosice in 1657 by Benedict Kisdi, the bishop of Jasov; it began its aietivity in 1'658, and the 1SlovaJks are commemorating the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Kosice this year. Like the University oif Trnava, the University .of Kosice, too, is grateful to the Jesuits for its development and Mgh acaderruc standing .Emiperor Leopold I rupproved its foundation in 1660, when he issued a Golden Bull, placing the unirversity on a level with the other universities of the mona;rchy with the right of granting academic titles and degrees. The Unirver.sity of Kosice - later degraded to an academy iby the There~iaJll reforms and to a law academy during the Bachera - was formded lb y the same motives as the Trna'Va University. In the Charter of February 26, 1657, Bishop Benedict states that he decided to establish a "studiUJm universale, that is, an academy or unirversity and to entrust it to the Jesuits, whose industry, loyalty and skill in the educational field are known to the who,le world, .so that it could train caipaJble priests the lack of ,whom ~ very harmful for God's Chwrch and for our afflicted fatherland" (10). �SLOVAKIA 25 After the dissolution of the Kosice law academy by the Praigue Government in 1922, the archives of the University of Kosice, were taken to Bratislava and, as far as is known, no one has made a thorough study of them so that we might know a;ccurately the composition of the student 1body and its professorial staff. From the wo11ks of Jesuit scientific scholars, who have been active in Italian universities during recent years, we :know that religious servi·c es with exclusively Slo,va.k sermons, during the first years, in the uniiversity cha1pel, attracted so many listenera that they could not be taJken care of in the chaipel. Father Stanislaus Po1cin also states that one of his famous students was A. Balud'ansky, a native of Vysne Olsovany, who ovganized the Uniivers,ity oif St. Petersburg and also was its rector (11). On the whole, the Kosi,ce University was very much li!ke the University of Trnava. From the academic standpoint, the University of Kosice was independent, according to the intentions of its founder it was administered as an institution of higher learning only by Church regulations and later in the sense of the Bull of Leopold I. The latter granted the uni,v ersity the same iprivileges, immunities and .p rerogatives which he had granted to other great universities of the Hrupslburg Monarvchy, and the degrees ,granted ,b y it were on the same level as those granted :b y the other European universities. According to the Charter, at the univer~ity of Kosice there were faculties of logic, philosophy, mathematics, theology, moral, rupologetics, and Heibrew. In 1777 the university lost its theological faculty, but then the faculty of ,la;w was estrublished which, as we mentioned aJbo:ve, remained until 1922. Since we are here concerned with a unirversity on SlovaJk territory, we can conclude that, up to the time of the Theresiam reforms, its character di:fifered little, if at aU, from that of the University of Tr:nava. Certainly its national compositiorn and mission wer,e much the s,a me. It was a Jesuit Latin university set up to serve Counter-Reformation efforts in multi-national Hungary. Though parts of eastern !Slovakia were strongly influenced for a time by the �26 SLOVAKIA Reformation, the Slavruk element during the time of the Kosice University was more strongJy represented inasmuch the neighlboring Maygar parts of Hungary were strongly Calvm.istic and the stage for revolutionary, anti-Hapsburg activities. At the !b eginning of the eighteenth century, in the eastern parts of SlovaJkia, even the Slovaik Calvinists pwblished religious literature in the national tongue and expressed the hyipothesis that it was iproibably there that even the first translation Off he Holy Writ of the year 17561757 originated, with Romuald Hadlbavy, author of a LatinSlovruk dictionary, ipartioipating in it. A study of the archives would undoubtedly tell us much about the composition of students and professors of the University o.f Kosice. Unfortunately they are not accessible to us today because of the Czecho-Comrrnmist occupation of Slova1kia. A few documents rubout the Kosice University can be found in the arch1ves of the Vatican (12), but they do not ,g ive us a clear answer to the questions referred to. Ln 1912 another school of higher learning was established in Bratislava, the Academy of law, which belongs to SlovaJkia only territorially since its spirit and aims differed swbstantially from those of the universities dealt with above. After the collapse of Austria-Hungary, this academy was tr~ferred to Pathlrnstoly (P&!s). The Comenius University was then organized in Bratislava to help the Czech governments Cz.echize the Slovaks. Slovak generations, educated iby the Czech professors of this university, did not succumlb, however, but went in the 01pposite direction: they .b ecame strongly nationalistic, forming the vanguard of the movement for the ouJ.trn-al and political individuality and independence of 'Slo!V'akia. fo 1939, they changed not only the name of the university, iburt also its spirit and mission: the Slovak University serived the highest cultural, political, and economical aims of the Slovak nation until the Slovak Republic was destroyed in AprH, 1945, when Benes, with the help of the United Nations, estaJblished another "Czec:ho-iSlovaJkia," a ,p olitical mons·t irosity more monstrous than the first which was born in 1918. Since 1945, lilke the other fom m;;titutions of higher �SLOVAKIA 27 learning, the SlovaJk University in Bratislava, is a tool of Communism in the hands of a Czecho-Communist government. Slovaks At Foreign Universities To complete the picture oif university traditions in Slovakia, we must mention at least ibriefly that f,r om the fourteenth century until the pre;,;ent time Slovalks studied and taught not only in S,lovaJk unilver,s ities, or only in Hoogary and Austria, hut also in significant numbers in practically all European universities. Some of them attained high honors and recognition not only of university circles, but even of the sovereigns. In the era of Humanism and Renaissance, Slo•v ~s studied mamly at the Italian universities in Bologna and Padua, but also in Paris, Vienna, and especially in Crrueow a,nd P.ra,gue. At the latter univ,e rsity, Va:vrinec Benedicti of Nedozery (1'555-11616) was the rector and wrote a Czech ,gram.mer, while John Jesenius from Turiec County excelled in medicine, atd'. Our list of eminent ,SlovaJks of the Hwmanistic, Renaissanoe and Enlightenment eras at foreign universities is far from complete, but it is a noteworthy list. John Samb.oclky (Sambuet.1:S, born in Trnruva 16'31), made himself famous at the University of Bologna and later became an advisor and personal physician to, ffirrvpreor Maximilian II in Vienna. His literacy wo!'!ks we,r e ,published in practically all centers of humanistic culture from Padua through Paris, Vienna, G€neva, Nruples and Antwer;p on to ,F rrunkfurt. His scientific works were in the ma-i n of a historical and legal nature, but he also wrote Latin verses. Ma.rtin Rakovsky enjoyed world fame also in his time; and renaissance learning. In the writing of such treati!Ses Peter Rewa also excelled; his "De Monarchia et sacra corona regni Hungariae" was published in Fran:kfurt in 16159. The Uni'Versity of Trnava mulitiplied its scientific activity and interest of Slovruks in a university education not only on natrve soil, but also in foreign lands. Many scienti£ic workers and defenders of the Slwaiks and their culture grew up within its circle. One of the most prominent representatives of scientific scholars of Trnava was �28 SLOVAKIA Martin Szentivanyi who hailed from Liptovsky Svaty Jan; he ,w rote a1bout fifty various volumes and a six..ivolume encyclopedia called "Curiosora et selectiora variarum scientiarum miscellanea" in which he collected the scientific 1 knowledge of the va-rious disciplines of his time, from philosophy and mathematics to history, geogiraiphy, theology and economy (13). In the eighteenth century we have quite a numlber of eminent Slovruks worthy of mention, of whom we have in the first place Adam F. Kollar (lborn 1718 in Terchova) and Mathias Bel. Kollar, lilbrarian to the emperor's court in Vienna, devoted his time to history and diplomacy, but al.so to social and educational questions. During the refol'lms of Marie-Therese he played a significant role in her educational changes and in contempo,r ary pedago,grics. Mathias Bel, iborn in Ocova as Funtilk, was such a prominent and many-sided .personality that as a Lutheran he received recognition f;z-om the Pope and the Catholic ruler, who g,r anted him the title of nobleman. Bel, called "magnum decus Hungariae," published his scientific work,s in Latin, Ger.man, and Magyar; seven of his works, however, were in Slovruk. Most of his lite;z-ary works concerned themse1ves with history, geogra.phy, ethnography, and philology. He was a member of many foreign scientific societies and one of the most ,p rominent personalities of his generation in all of Hungary. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries SlovaJk Catholics and Lutherans studied and taught at many foreign universities and so helrped to elevate the culture of other nations, ,pairticularly that of the Czechs and Magyars. This question, however, still needs a systematic going-over and, hence, is not included in this dissertation. A significant numlber of Slovruks are also active in the contemporary period at various universities of the free woTld, particularly in Rome, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chili, Flrance, and the United ,States. ,Dr. Milan Hodza stated only a fact at the beginning af Woirld War II when he wrote that "Slovakia reached if not surpassed the Central European civilization level." �SLOVAKIA REFERENCES 1. Dez1der Heckenast: HUNGARIAN UNIVERSITIES, PAST A ND PRESENT, Slavic and East European Studies, Vol. II, Part 1, pp. 31-39; University of Montreal, Canada. 2. Compare Samuel Osusky's "Nasi studenti na Krakovskej universite od 1400-1525," Vi era a veda, Vol. II, 1931, pp. 174-178, 226-233, and Vol. IV, 1933, pp. 232-244. 3. Andrej Mraz : DEJINY SLOVENSKEJ LITERATURY, Slovak Academy of Sciences and Arts, Bratislava, 1948, pp. 20-21. 4. In his letter of December 5, 1634, Pazmany wrote the Bishop of Olomouc, Cardinal F. Ditrichstein, that his family comes from Germany (ex Germania) and that is why, he said, that he wishes his last descendant would become a complete Moravian (totaliter Moravum facere constitutum habeo). According to I. Acsady, Pazmany "frequently told Ferdinand II that it was not possible to trust even the best Magyar and that the Magyar people needed a yoke, because it was only thus that it would be possible to keep it under control. He did not even believe his own non-Catholic countrymen, nay, not even in the future of the Magyar nation," (quoted from Daniel Varsik's Slovak book: THE NATIONALITY PROBLEM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TRNAVA, Bratislava, 1938, p. 37). How Pazmany felt about the nationalities is also attested to by the gift which he gave the Franciscan church in Trnava "moved," as he wrote. "above all else by paternal love for the Slovak nation and by t he ardor of the devout people" (Epistolae, II, p. 2-1). 5. Dr. Milan Hodfa: FEDERATION IN CENTRAL EUROPE, London, 1942, pp. 208-209: "During the seventeenth century .. . Slovakia became also the refuge of many lofty intellectual efforts on behalf of that country. For some time to come in Slovakia there was much more cultural movement than in Bohemia or occupied Hungary .. . Trnava, which housed the Catholic University before it was transferred to Budapest, became a center of Catholic culture in the realm. Slovakia revealed itself as a meeting-place of practically all contemporary currents of cultural and political ideas." 6. Andrew Mraz: op. cit., pp. 35, 62. 7. Compare the thorough study of D. Varsik. "Narodnostny problem Trnavske j uni ve rz ity," which also has a resume in French in which Varsik states literally: "11 etait par consequent nature! que !'element slovaque fut preponderant a l'Universite de Trnava" (pp. 240-241). 8. Compare Stephen Dubravec's "Apologetika a kontroverz istika na un iverzite v Trnave," Sbornik LVOSSV, Vol. II, No. 2, Trnava, 1935, p. 197). 9. Andrew Mraz : op. cit., pp. 46-47. 10. Compare Stanislaus Polcin's S.J., "Tristo rokov od zalozenia Kosickej univerzity," MOST, Cleveland, 0., Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, pp. 97-106. 11. MOST, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, p. 105. 12. About the documents in the Vatican Archives, vd. mention in the study of S. Polcin,S.J. 13. Compare Stanislaus Jurovsky's "Fil ozofia Ma rti na Szent ivanyi ho," Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1944. � 18 SLOVAKIA UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum An dbjective search of the cultural development of Central ffiurOlpe will r,e veal that Slo,vakia was not only "the first cultural center," as M. Hodzas wrote, but also a land of noteworthy university traditions. With the loss of ,p olitical indeipenden~e in the tenth century and the inco.rporation of Slova!kia first into muJti-national Hungary and later into Ozecho..,Slova!kia, the university tradttions, as well as the entire cultural development of Slovalkia, are often ,presented, it is true, in foreign works as a paTt of Magyar and/ or Czech culture. This is e3:pecially true alb uot the foundation and activity of un1versities in SlorvaJkia, which Mwgyar historians, both young and old (1), classified e~clustvely under the caption of culture of the Magyar nation, despite the fact that in the Middle Ages - and in Cenm-ail ,E}urope even in the 17th centll!rY - modern nationalism ,w as something unknown and that those universities were conducted in a .s pirit of unirversalisrn and cosmopolitanism. Several arguments speak against any such exiplanation of the cultural development in Central ffiurope, and especially in the multi-national !Hungary ,p rior to 19118: 1) the nature of the medieval class .state which was managed by the nobility and gentry of all ethnical components; 2) the character of medieval universities and their mission; and, 3) the nationalistic composition of the students and the ,professorial sta~f. 'l 'f, in thi,s conteIIl\po11aneous period, one would classify, by an ex post exiplaination, the universities of Hungary as the cultural heritage of only one nation, then he would be malking use of an interpretation that is not in line ,w ith logic and historical truth. Cultural values in Hungary were creaited 1b y all the nations of Hungary and, since the nonMagyar nations often exceeded the Maigyars numerically, we can apply only the territorial 1principle when designing the prfority right of cultural institutions. Therefore, even �SLOVAKIA 19 this dissertaion speaJks rubout the university traditi:ons in Slova!kia and not aJbout traditions of Slova;k universities. It would not be in line with the resttlts of an oibjective search of the Slovak cultural ,p ast, if we should present the universities in Slovakia of the 15th or 17th century as 'SlovaJk. If we did, we would there by be committing an error almost as great as the Magyars when they present them a,s Magyar, or as the e~clusive heritage of the Magyar nation. But even overlooking the fact that the 15th or the 17th century did not as yet know the concept of a nation in the sense of the present-day meaning of the word and that culturnl institutions in Central Europe, and esipecially in Hungary, had a universalistic spirit and a language that was foremost Latin, the .national composition of Hungary demands a just distribution of merits, as well as cultural heritage, amon5 all the nations of the poiy,g lot Cro1WI1 of St. Stephen. II ffiven with this scrll!pulous distinction, the Sl01va!ks do have a prio,r ity right to three universities from the times of former Hungary and to two from the time of the incorporation of Slovakia into the Czecho-Sl01Valk Republic. That is, on the territory of Slovaikia, there was not only the .A;cadenia Istroipolitana, founded in Bratislaivia by Mathias Corrwin in 1465, and the University of 'I'rnava from the year 1635, but also the universities of Kosice and Bratislava. The Aicademia I.stropolitana, named aftex the Greek for Danulbe (Istros), was a typical medieval university, set up on the order of Italian universities, particularly that of Bologna, its mission /being mainly religious. Hungary, and especially Slcwalkia, was devastated by Jis:kra's Czech mercenary soldiers and by religious quarrels,. After Ji$kra's crupitulation in 1642, and after he had se:cured himself a;gainst the Turkish danger, King Mathias sought to consolidate his country. His plans called for, above all else, a learned priesthood and an educated nolbility revived in the Catholic spirit. Since at that time there was no university in Hungary, as the King himself wrote in his peti- �20 SLOVAKIA tion of May 19, 1465 which was addressed to the Pope, Mathias requested permission for a "studium generale" and Pope Pole II granted it on the same day. In the petition, King Mathias stated what motivated him to estrublish a university in Bratislava and what ,punpo.se it was to serwe. He wrote that "in the countries .bordering with hereti'Cs there is a need of learned men and that this was a loss for the Church itself, as well as for the Christian religion." The Ki.ng entrusted the organization of the university to the Arch'bishop of Ostrihom, J,o hn Vitez, and the university was started in the home of the Ventura Street. The solemn opening of the univensity took 1place on Jwy 28, 1467. Fortihwith the University of Bratisla;va established good relations with the Univensity orf Vienna which he.ljped out with several of its eminent professo,r s. With the death af King Mathias, however, the uni,v ersity not only lost its founder, but also its protector; it closed its doors in 1490. The Academia Istropolitana was a complete uniiversity with four faculties and a .study c,urriculum that equaled that of other European, particularly the Italian and German, univeTSities. The immediate proximity oif the older and well estalblished Uniiversity of Vienna, and the renown of the University of Cracow, estaiblished in 1364, and the Unirversity of Prague (11348) did not allow the University of Bratislaiva to develop as ,planned by King Mathias, who did want to attract students even from the surrounding countries. The fact is that many students from Hungary itself, particularly from SlorvaJkia, studied in Cracow and Pra1gue, Vienna and at Ralian universities. According to some sources in the years 1400-1525 in Oraco,w alone over 2000 students frOIIIl Slovakia attended, especially from her eastern area (2). Territorially, the Unirversity of Bratisla;va belongs to the history of Slovakia, in the remaining aspects it was a medievaI Catholic unirveTsity and :belongs to all the nations of Hungary from whkh ,b oth the students and also the professors descended. And since even in this case the �SLOVAKIA 21 Magyars cannot apply the dynastic principle (King Mathias was not of a Magyar dynasty), it is decidedly not in line with historic fact if anyone plruces the unhrersity in the cultural hi<story of only the Magyar nation. "The Academy Istropolitna, " as professor A. MTaz correctly states it, "originated f,r om the will and decision of the Hungarian ruler, it was the result of his cultUJral policy, which wais in many ways influenced by humanism and by contacts especially with the romantic world. Its designation must be understood in an all-state sense, but the very fact that this univer,s ity ori,g inated on Slovak territory, that in its ran1ks there was a great percentage of Slova!k students and professors - all thi,s puts the Corwinian Unirversity of Bratislava into close and lirvely relations with Slovalk cultUTal de,velo1pment" (3). The second univernity on the territory of Slorvakia, the Jesuit University in Trnava, was founded by Archlbishop Peter Pazmany and approved by ffimperor Ferdinand on Odolber 18, 1635. The UnirverS!ity of Trnava was also a Catholic unirver,s ity in ,w hich L'a tin was used, as is proved by the register and catalogues which haive 1been preserved. At first there were only two faculties at this uniiversity (iphilosoiphical and theological), with two others added later (the law faculty in 1667, and the medical in 1769). Archbishop Pa,m nany, originally a Calv:in of German birth (4), was critical of the Magyar nation wh~ch he clai<med as his own; but he, 1i'ke the other ecclesiastical authorities were aiware of the fact that Hungary was polyg,l ot and, therefore, it can be rightly claimed that the university was estalblished for all the nationalities of Hungary with the aim to speed the victory of the Counter-Reformation among the Magyars, as well as among the SJo,vaJks, and Germans, nay even among the Serbs and Ruthenians .by means of the Cyrillic a1phalbet. The words of the Charter about "noibilissimae gentis Hun1garicae" cannot b,e explaaned otherwise than that Pa~many had in mind the state-nation of Hungary, which was administered not only by the Magyar, but also by the Croation and Slovalk nobility and gentTy and compo,s ed of even the Ruimanians of Transyl- �22 SLOVAKIA vania, the Germans, Senbs, and Ruthenians who occupied the lands of St. Stephen's Crown. In the Charter, Archlbishoip Pazmainy says literally: "We often ~o1idtously pondered just in what manner we might take crure of prQlpagating the Catholic religion in Hungary and to wplift the authority of the ndble Hungarian naition; and the most advantageous medium that we came wpon was the estaJblishment of a university in which the mind of a belligerent nation could be moderated and capable people might be ti-ained for the administration Church and also the State." The administration of the State, especially in the 17th century, was not exclusively in the hands of the Magyar nobility and gentry, inasmuch the Magyarization of the Slovak nobility, for example, came quite some time later. Under the influence of the Tu:rlkish occupation and the partition of Hungary into three paI'ts (the southern and central part occupied by the Turks; Transylvainia and the Tisa River area b~ independent princes; and the northern part, that is SlovaJkia, with smaller parts of western Hungary administered by the Hapsburgs) , Slovakia played an altogether exceptional role in the 17th century. She was, Hod.fa tells us, the refuge of many intellectual efforts and for some time there was more cultural movement in Slo,vaJkia than in Bohemia or the occupied part of Hungary. .Aiccording to Hodza, practically a,U movements of the cultural and political Life met there and Slova1kia was indisputaJbly the cultural center of Catholic Hungary (5). So that the Slovalks could regard the Uni,v ersity of TrnaJva as their own is attested to not only by the fact that is was on the territocy of Slorvalkia which .played, as we saiw aJbove, an exrceptional role in Hungary in the seventeenth century. The significance of this university for the cultura-l development of the Slovaiks, their langunge and their national conscioU!Sness was so far-reaching that even one of the outstanding literary historians of the .p resent communistic university in SlovaJkia, Professo;r A. Mraz, acknowledges that "with its activity and within its frame- �SLOVAKIA 23 wor'k cultwral and scientific life was prQ_pagated and deepened, the effects of which, all things considered, affected very strong,ly the Sl~ak part of the inhaJbitants, even though this was done according to the plan of religious and scientific direction of this high school and its inclusion into the Jesuit European school ,system. Because o.f the university, Trnava became the cultuTal center of Catholic Hun,gary and Slovakia in the seventeenth centUTy." Mraz also states that "for 160 yews o,f the existence of the University of Trnava on SloiVaJk territory, together with its activity and educational atmosphere created by it, there were crystallized such SlovaJk cultural and natonal realities that were the support of Slovak national renascence" ( 6). From the archives orf the University of Trnava, we learn that UJP to the time of its transfer to Budin in the year 1777, the Slovaks attended the university in greatest numbers, not only as students but, in s·o me years, the Slovaxs predominated as professors. In the first five years, for example, out of 248 students logic, 90 are indicated a,s 'SlovaJks and 77 as Magyars (the others were marked as Croatians and Germans, or their nationality was not indicated). Mter 1649, the registers of the university do not indicate the nationality of the students reg,ulal'ly, but the nationality of those re::!eiving the baccalaureate is indicated: even during this period, it can lbe 1proved that the Siloiva'ks and other iSlorvanic peoples werre in the rubsolute majority at the uniivers,ity (7). Now, then, if we regard the University of Trna.va from the standpoint of the question whom it sewed, who studied and taught at it, the ,p reponderance is on the side of the SlovaJks, Croatians and Germans, a;nd then come the Magyars. As far as· cultural influence is concerned, the University of Trnarva has merited a permanent place in SlovaJk cultural history with the literary activity o.f its professors and wards even in the Slovak langua,ge. From the yearr 1578 to 1777, the unirvevsity issued 79 Lrutin pulblicati<ons in the field of apologetics and contro;versial works~· but also 14 such ipU!bli:cations in Slorvak. During that same, time, 20 Magyar and 12 German, lbut also 75 bodks in the �24 SLOVAKIA field of scetics and preaching (8), so that "the crystallization of the langll!age of Catholic writers from the period of the University of Trnava was marked to such a degree that when Anthony Bernolruk and his g,r oup came out with the idea of an independent Slovalk literary langua;ge, in many things they only codified the practices, prevalent in Catholic literature, of their predeces,s ors" (9). From the rubove, it is undouibtedly surfrficiently clear that the SlO'Vaiks can rightfully inolude the UnilV'ersity of Ton:wa in the cultural heritage of the 1Slovalk nation and that !it ibelOiillgs in the first iplace to the unirve:r,sity traditions of SlovaJkia. It was iin such a sense that the Slovaks celebrated the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Trnava in 1935, when they pulblished a whole ,s eries of literary works commemorating the occasion with the actirve ,partic~pation of not only their cultura·l, but also their ,politi'cal institutions. The third uni,v ersity in SlovaJkia was established in Kosice in 1657 by Benedict Kisdi, the bishop of Jasov; it began its aietivity in 1'658, and the 1SlovaJks are commemorating the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Kosice this year. Like the University oif Trnava, the University .of Kosice, too, is grateful to the Jesuits for its development and Mgh acaderruc standing .Emiperor Leopold I rupproved its foundation in 1660, when he issued a Golden Bull, placing the unirversity on a level with the other universities of the mona;rchy with the right of granting academic titles and degrees. The Unirver.sity of Kosice - later degraded to an academy iby the There~iaJll reforms and to a law academy during the Bachera - was formded lb y the same motives as the Trna'Va University. In the Charter of February 26, 1657, Bishop Benedict states that he decided to establish a "studiUJm universale, that is, an academy or unirversity and to entrust it to the Jesuits, whose industry, loyalty and skill in the educational field are known to the who,le world, .so that it could train caipaJble priests the lack of ,whom ~ very harmful for God's Chwrch and for our afflicted fatherland" (10). �SLOVAKIA 25 After the dissolution of the Kosice law academy by the Praigue Government in 1922, the archives of the University of Kosice, were taken to Bratislava and, as far as is known, no one has made a thorough study of them so that we might know a;ccurately the composition of the student 1body and its professorial staff. From the wo11ks of Jesuit scientific scholars, who have been active in Italian universities during recent years, we :know that religious servi·c es with exclusively Slo,va.k sermons, during the first years, in the uniiversity cha1pel, attracted so many listenera that they could not be taJken care of in the chaipel. Father Stanislaus Po1cin also states that one of his famous students was A. Balud'ansky, a native of Vysne Olsovany, who ovganized the Uniivers,ity oif St. Petersburg and also was its rector (11). On the whole, the Kosi,ce University was very much li!ke the University of Trnava. From the academic standpoint, the University of Kosice was independent, according to the intentions of its founder it was administered as an institution of higher learning only by Church regulations and later in the sense of the Bull of Leopold I. The latter granted the uni,v ersity the same iprivileges, immunities and .p rerogatives which he had granted to other great universities of the Hrupslburg Monarvchy, and the degrees ,granted ,b y it were on the same level as those granted :b y the other European universities. According to the Charter, at the univer~ity of Kosice there were faculties of logic, philosophy, mathematics, theology, moral, rupologetics, and Heibrew. In 1777 the university lost its theological faculty, but then the faculty of ,la;w was estrublished which, as we mentioned aJbo:ve, remained until 1922. Since we are here concerned with a unirversity on SlovaJk territory, we can conclude that, up to the time of the Theresiam reforms, its character di:fifered little, if at aU, from that of the University of Tr:nava. Certainly its national compositiorn and mission wer,e much the s,a me. It was a Jesuit Latin university set up to serve Counter-Reformation efforts in multi-national Hungary. Though parts of eastern !Slovakia were strongly influenced for a time by the �26 SLOVAKIA Reformation, the Slavruk element during the time of the Kosice University was more strongJy represented inasmuch the neighlboring Maygar parts of Hungary were strongly Calvm.istic and the stage for revolutionary, anti-Hapsburg activities. At the !b eginning of the eighteenth century, in the eastern parts of SlovaJkia, even the Slovaik Calvinists pwblished religious literature in the national tongue and expressed the hyipothesis that it was iproibably there that even the first translation Off he Holy Writ of the year 17561757 originated, with Romuald Hadlbavy, author of a LatinSlovruk dictionary, ipartioipating in it. A study of the archives would undoubtedly tell us much about the composition of students and professors of the University o.f Kosice. Unfortunately they are not accessible to us today because of the Czecho-Comrrnmist occupation of Slova1kia. A few documents rubout the Kosice University can be found in the arch1ves of the Vatican (12), but they do not ,g ive us a clear answer to the questions referred to. Ln 1912 another school of higher learning was established in Bratislava, the Academy of law, which belongs to SlovaJkia only territorially since its spirit and aims differed swbstantially from those of the universities dealt with above. After the collapse of Austria-Hungary, this academy was tr~ferred to Pathlrnstoly (P&!s). The Comenius University was then organized in Bratislava to help the Czech governments Cz.echize the Slovaks. Slovak generations, educated iby the Czech professors of this university, did not succumlb, however, but went in the 01pposite direction: they .b ecame strongly nationalistic, forming the vanguard of the movement for the ouJ.trn-al and political individuality and independence of 'Slo!V'akia. fo 1939, they changed not only the name of the university, iburt also its spirit and mission: the Slovak University serived the highest cultural, political, and economical aims of the Slovak nation until the Slovak Republic was destroyed in AprH, 1945, when Benes, with the help of the United Nations, estaJblished another "Czec:ho-iSlovaJkia," a ,p olitical mons·t irosity more monstrous than the first which was born in 1918. Since 1945, lilke the other fom m;;titutions of higher �SLOVAKIA 27 learning, the SlovaJk University in Bratislava, is a tool of Communism in the hands of a Czecho-Communist government. Slovaks At Foreign Universities To complete the picture oif university traditions in Slovakia, we must mention at least ibriefly that f,r om the fourteenth century until the pre;,;ent time Slovalks studied and taught not only in S,lovaJk unilver,s ities, or only in Hoogary and Austria, hut also in significant numbers in practically all European universities. Some of them attained high honors and recognition not only of university circles, but even of the sovereigns. In the era of Humanism and Renaissance, Slo•v ~s studied mamly at the Italian universities in Bologna and Padua, but also in Paris, Vienna, and especially in Crrueow a,nd P.ra,gue. At the latter univ,e rsity, Va:vrinec Benedicti of Nedozery (1'555-11616) was the rector and wrote a Czech ,gram.mer, while John Jesenius from Turiec County excelled in medicine, atd'. Our list of eminent ,SlovaJks of the Hwmanistic, Renaissanoe and Enlightenment eras at foreign universities is far from complete, but it is a noteworthy list. John Samb.oclky (Sambuet.1:S, born in Trnruva 16'31), made himself famous at the University of Bologna and later became an advisor and personal physician to, ffirrvpreor Maximilian II in Vienna. His literacy wo!'!ks we,r e ,published in practically all centers of humanistic culture from Padua through Paris, Vienna, G€neva, Nruples and Antwer;p on to ,F rrunkfurt. His scientific works were in the ma-i n of a historical and legal nature, but he also wrote Latin verses. Ma.rtin Rakovsky enjoyed world fame also in his time; and renaissance learning. In the writing of such treati!Ses Peter Rewa also excelled; his "De Monarchia et sacra corona regni Hungariae" was published in Fran:kfurt in 16159. The Uni'Versity of Trnava mulitiplied its scientific activity and interest of Slovruks in a university education not only on natrve soil, but also in foreign lands. Many scienti£ic workers and defenders of the Slwaiks and their culture grew up within its circle. One of the most prominent representatives of scientific scholars of Trnava was �28 SLOVAKIA Martin Szentivanyi who hailed from Liptovsky Svaty Jan; he ,w rote a1bout fifty various volumes and a six..ivolume encyclopedia called "Curiosora et selectiora variarum scientiarum miscellanea" in which he collected the scientific 1 knowledge of the va-rious disciplines of his time, from philosophy and mathematics to history, geogiraiphy, theology and economy (13). In the eighteenth century we have quite a numlber of eminent Slovruks worthy of mention, of whom we have in the first place Adam F. Kollar (lborn 1718 in Terchova) and Mathias Bel. Kollar, lilbrarian to the emperor's court in Vienna, devoted his time to history and diplomacy, but al.so to social and educational questions. During the refol'lms of Marie-Therese he played a significant role in her educational changes and in contempo,r ary pedago,grics. Mathias Bel, iborn in Ocova as Funtilk, was such a prominent and many-sided .personality that as a Lutheran he received recognition f;z-om the Pope and the Catholic ruler, who g,r anted him the title of nobleman. Bel, called "magnum decus Hungariae," published his scientific work,s in Latin, Ger.man, and Magyar; seven of his works, however, were in Slovruk. Most of his lite;z-ary works concerned themse1ves with history, geogra.phy, ethnography, and philology. He was a member of many foreign scientific societies and one of the most ,p rominent personalities of his generation in all of Hungary. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries SlovaJk Catholics and Lutherans studied and taught at many foreign universities and so helrped to elevate the culture of other nations, ,pairticularly that of the Czechs and Magyars. This question, however, still needs a systematic going-over and, hence, is not included in this dissertation. A significant numlber of Slovruks are also active in the contemporary period at various universities of the free woTld, particularly in Rome, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chili, Flrance, and the United ,States. ,Dr. Milan Hodza stated only a fact at the beginning af Woirld War II when he wrote that "Slovakia reached if not surpassed the Central European civilization level." �SLOVAKIA REFERENCES 1. Dez1der Heckenast: HUNGARIAN UNIVERSITIES, PAST A ND PRESENT, Slavic and East European Studies, Vol. II, Part 1, pp. 31-39; University of Montreal, Canada. 2. Compare Samuel Osusky's "Nasi studenti na Krakovskej universite od 1400-1525," Vi era a veda, Vol. II, 1931, pp. 174-178, 226-233, and Vol. IV, 1933, pp. 232-244. 3. Andrej Mraz : DEJINY SLOVENSKEJ LITERATURY, Slovak Academy of Sciences and Arts, Bratislava, 1948, pp. 20-21. 4. In his letter of December 5, 1634, Pazmany wrote the Bishop of Olomouc, Cardinal F. Ditrichstein, that his family comes from Germany (ex Germania) and that is why, he said, that he wishes his last descendant would become a complete Moravian (totaliter Moravum facere constitutum habeo). According to I. Acsady, Pazmany "frequently told Ferdinand II that it was not possible to trust even the best Magyar and that the Magyar people needed a yoke, because it was only thus that it would be possible to keep it under control. He did not even believe his own non-Catholic countrymen, nay, not even in the future of the Magyar nation," (quoted from Daniel Varsik's Slovak book: THE NATIONALITY PROBLEM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TRNAVA, Bratislava, 1938, p. 37). How Pazmany felt about the nationalities is also attested to by the gift which he gave the Franciscan church in Trnava "moved," as he wrote. "above all else by paternal love for the Slovak nation and by t he ardor of the devout people" (Epistolae, II, p. 2-1). 5. Dr. Milan Hodfa: FEDERATION IN CENTRAL EUROPE, London, 1942, pp. 208-209: "During the seventeenth century .. . Slovakia became also the refuge of many lofty intellectual efforts on behalf of that country. For some time to come in Slovakia there was much more cultural movement than in Bohemia or occupied Hungary .. . Trnava, which housed the Catholic University before it was transferred to Budapest, became a center of Catholic culture in the realm. Slovakia revealed itself as a meeting-place of practically all contemporary currents of cultural and political ideas." 6. Andrew Mraz: op. cit., pp. 35, 62. 7. Compare the thorough study of D. Varsik. "Narodnostny problem Trnavske j uni ve rz ity," which also has a resume in French in which Varsik states literally: "11 etait par consequent nature! que !'element slovaque fut preponderant a l'Universite de Trnava" (pp. 240-241). 8. Compare Stephen Dubravec's "Apologetika a kontroverz istika na un iverzite v Trnave," Sbornik LVOSSV, Vol. II, No. 2, Trnava, 1935, p. 197). 9. Andrew Mraz : op. cit., pp. 46-47. 10. Compare Stanislaus Polcin's S.J., "Tristo rokov od zalozenia Kosickej univerzity," MOST, Cleveland, 0., Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, pp. 97-106. 11. MOST, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, p. 105. 12. About the documents in the Vatican Archives, vd. mention in the study of S. Polcin,S.J. 13. Compare Stanislaus Jurovsky's "Fil ozofia Ma rti na Szent ivanyi ho," Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1944. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 18 SLOVAKIA UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum An dbjective search of the cultural development of Central ffiurOlpe will r,e veal that Slo,vakia was not only "the first cultural center," as M. Hodzas wrote, but also a land of noteworthy university traditions. With the loss of ,p olitical indeipenden~e in the tenth century and the inco.rporation of Slova!kia first into muJti-national Hungary and later into Ozecho..,Slova!kia, the university tradttions, as well as the entire cultural development of Slovalkia, are often ,presented, it is true, in foreign works as a paTt of Magyar and/ or Czech culture. This is e3:pecially true alb uot the foundation and activity of un1versities in SlorvaJkia, which Mwgyar historians, both young and old (1), classified e~clustvely under the caption of culture of the Magyar nation, despite the fact that in the Middle Ages - and in Cenm-ail ,E}urope even in the 17th centll!rY - modern nationalism ,w as something unknown and that those universities were conducted in a .s pirit of unirversalisrn and cosmopolitanism. Several arguments speak against any such exiplanation of the cultural development in Central ffiurope, and especially in the multi-national !Hungary ,p rior to 19118: 1) the nature of the medieval class .state which was managed by the nobility and gentry of all ethnical components; 2) the character of medieval universities and their mission; and, 3) the nationalistic composition of the students and the ,professorial sta~f. 'l 'f, in thi,s conteIIl\po11aneous period, one would classify, by an ex post exiplaination, the universities of Hungary as the cultural heritage of only one nation, then he would be malking use of an interpretation that is not in line ,w ith logic and historical truth. Cultural values in Hungary were creaited 1b y all the nations of Hungary and, since the nonMagyar nations often exceeded the Maigyars numerically, we can apply only the territorial 1principle when designing the prfority right of cultural institutions. Therefore, even SLOVAKIA 19 this dissertaion speaJks rubout the university traditi:ons in Slova!kia and not aJbout traditions of Slova;k universities. It would not be in line with the resttlts of an oibjective search of the Slovak cultural ,p ast, if we should present the universities in Slovakia of the 15th or 17th century as 'SlovaJk. If we did, we would there by be committing an error almost as great as the Magyars when they present them a,s Magyar, or as the e~clusive heritage of the Magyar nation. But even overlooking the fact that the 15th or the 17th century did not as yet know the concept of a nation in the sense of the present-day meaning of the word and that culturnl institutions in Central Europe, and esipecially in Hungary, had a universalistic spirit and a language that was foremost Latin, the .national composition of Hungary demands a just distribution of merits, as well as cultural heritage, amon5 all the nations of the poiy,g lot Cro1WI1 of St. Stephen. II ffiven with this scrll!pulous distinction, the Sl01va!ks do have a prio,r ity right to three universities from the times of former Hungary and to two from the time of the incorporation of Slovakia into the Czecho-Sl01Valk Republic. That is, on the territory of Slovaikia, there was not only the .A;cadenia Istroipolitana, founded in Bratislaivia by Mathias Corrwin in 1465, and the University of 'I'rnava from the year 1635, but also the universities of Kosice and Bratislava. The Aicademia I.stropolitana, named aftex the Greek for Danulbe (Istros), was a typical medieval university, set up on the order of Italian universities, particularly that of Bologna, its mission /being mainly religious. Hungary, and especially Slcwalkia, was devastated by Jis:kra's Czech mercenary soldiers and by religious quarrels,. After Ji$kra's crupitulation in 1642, and after he had se:cured himself a;gainst the Turkish danger, King Mathias sought to consolidate his country. His plans called for, above all else, a learned priesthood and an educated nolbility revived in the Catholic spirit. Since at that time there was no university in Hungary, as the King himself wrote in his peti- 20 SLOVAKIA tion of May 19, 1465 which was addressed to the Pope, Mathias requested permission for a "studium generale" and Pope Pole II granted it on the same day. In the petition, King Mathias stated what motivated him to estrublish a university in Bratislava and what ,punpo.se it was to serwe. He wrote that "in the countries .bordering with hereti'Cs there is a need of learned men and that this was a loss for the Church itself, as well as for the Christian religion." The Ki.ng entrusted the organization of the university to the Arch'bishop of Ostrihom, J,o hn Vitez, and the university was started in the home of the Ventura Street. The solemn opening of the univensity took 1place on Jwy 28, 1467. Fortihwith the University of Bratisla;va established good relations with the Univensity orf Vienna which he.ljped out with several of its eminent professo,r s. With the death af King Mathias, however, the uni,v ersity not only lost its founder, but also its protector; it closed its doors in 1490. The Academia Istropolitana was a complete uniiversity with four faculties and a .study c,urriculum that equaled that of other European, particularly the Italian and German, univeTSities. The immediate proximity oif the older and well estalblished Uniiversity of Vienna, and the renown of the University of Cracow, estaiblished in 1364, and the Unirversity of Prague (11348) did not allow the University of Bratislaiva to develop as ,planned by King Mathias, who did want to attract students even from the surrounding countries. The fact is that many students from Hungary itself, particularly from SlorvaJkia, studied in Cracow and Pra1gue, Vienna and at Ralian universities. According to some sources in the years 1400-1525 in Oraco,w alone over 2000 students frOIIIl Slovakia attended, especially from her eastern area (2). Territorially, the Unirversity of Bratisla;va belongs to the history of Slovakia, in the remaining aspects it was a medievaI Catholic unirveTsity and :belongs to all the nations of Hungary from whkh ,b oth the students and also the professors descended. And since even in this case the SLOVAKIA 21 Magyars cannot apply the dynastic principle (King Mathias was not of a Magyar dynasty), it is decidedly not in line with historic fact if anyone plruces the unhrersity in the cultural hi<story of only the Magyar nation. "The Academy Istropolitna, " as professor A. MTaz correctly states it, "originated f,r om the will and decision of the Hungarian ruler, it was the result of his cultUJral policy, which wais in many ways influenced by humanism and by contacts especially with the romantic world. Its designation must be understood in an all-state sense, but the very fact that this univer,s ity ori,g inated on Slovak territory, that in its ran1ks there was a great percentage of Slova!k students and professors - all thi,s puts the Corwinian Unirversity of Bratislava into close and lirvely relations with Slovalk cultUTal de,velo1pment" (3). The second univernity on the territory of Slorvakia, the Jesuit University in Trnava, was founded by Archlbishop Peter Pazmany and approved by ffimperor Ferdinand on Odolber 18, 1635. The UnirverS!ity of Trnava was also a Catholic unirver,s ity in ,w hich L'a tin was used, as is proved by the register and catalogues which haive 1been preserved. At first there were only two faculties at this uniiversity (iphilosoiphical and theological), with two others added later (the law faculty in 1667, and the medical in 1769). Archbishop Pa,m nany, originally a Calv:in of German birth (4), was critical of the Magyar nation wh~ch he clai<med as his own; but he, 1i'ke the other ecclesiastical authorities were aiware of the fact that Hungary was polyg,l ot and, therefore, it can be rightly claimed that the university was estalblished for all the nationalities of Hungary with the aim to speed the victory of the Counter-Reformation among the Magyars, as well as among the SJo,vaJks, and Germans, nay even among the Serbs and Ruthenians .by means of the Cyrillic a1phalbet. The words of the Charter about "noibilissimae gentis Hun1garicae" cannot b,e explaaned otherwise than that Pa~many had in mind the state-nation of Hungary, which was administered not only by the Magyar, but also by the Croation and Slovalk nobility and gentTy and compo,s ed of even the Ruimanians of Transyl- 22 SLOVAKIA vania, the Germans, Senbs, and Ruthenians who occupied the lands of St. Stephen's Crown. In the Charter, Archlbishoip Pazmainy says literally: "We often ~o1idtously pondered just in what manner we might take crure of prQlpagating the Catholic religion in Hungary and to wplift the authority of the ndble Hungarian naition; and the most advantageous medium that we came wpon was the estaJblishment of a university in which the mind of a belligerent nation could be moderated and capable people might be ti-ained for the administration Church and also the State." The administration of the State, especially in the 17th century, was not exclusively in the hands of the Magyar nobility and gentry, inasmuch the Magyarization of the Slovak nobility, for example, came quite some time later. Under the influence of the Tu:rlkish occupation and the partition of Hungary into three paI'ts (the southern and central part occupied by the Turks; Transylvainia and the Tisa River area b~ independent princes; and the northern part, that is SlovaJkia, with smaller parts of western Hungary administered by the Hapsburgs) , Slovakia played an altogether exceptional role in the 17th century. She was, Hod.fa tells us, the refuge of many intellectual efforts and for some time there was more cultural movement in Slo,vaJkia than in Bohemia or the occupied part of Hungary. .Aiccording to Hodza, practically a,U movements of the cultural and political Life met there and Slova1kia was indisputaJbly the cultural center of Catholic Hungary (5). So that the Slovalks could regard the Uni,v ersity of TrnaJva as their own is attested to not only by the fact that is was on the territocy of Slorvalkia which .played, as we saiw aJbove, an exrceptional role in Hungary in the seventeenth century. The significance of this university for the cultura-l development of the Slovaiks, their langunge and their national conscioU!Sness was so far-reaching that even one of the outstanding literary historians of the .p resent communistic university in SlovaJkia, Professo;r A. Mraz, acknowledges that "with its activity and within its frame- SLOVAKIA 23 wor'k cultwral and scientific life was prQ_pagated and deepened, the effects of which, all things considered, affected very strong,ly the Sl~ak part of the inhaJbitants, even though this was done according to the plan of religious and scientific direction of this high school and its inclusion into the Jesuit European school ,system. Because o.f the university, Trnava became the cultuTal center of Catholic Hun,gary and Slovakia in the seventeenth centUTy." Mraz also states that "for 160 yews o,f the existence of the University of Trnava on SloiVaJk territory, together with its activity and educational atmosphere created by it, there were crystallized such SlovaJk cultural and natonal realities that were the support of Slovak national renascence" ( 6). From the archives orf the University of Trnava, we learn that UJP to the time of its transfer to Budin in the year 1777, the Slovaks attended the university in greatest numbers, not only as students but, in s·o me years, the Slovaxs predominated as professors. In the first five years, for example, out of 248 students logic, 90 are indicated a,s 'SlovaJks and 77 as Magyars (the others were marked as Croatians and Germans, or their nationality was not indicated). Mter 1649, the registers of the university do not indicate the nationality of the students reg,ulal'ly, but the nationality of those re::!eiving the baccalaureate is indicated: even during this period, it can lbe 1proved that the Siloiva'ks and other iSlorvanic peoples werre in the rubsolute majority at the uniivers,ity (7). Now, then, if we regard the University of Trna.va from the standpoint of the question whom it sewed, who studied and taught at it, the ,p reponderance is on the side of the SlovaJks, Croatians and Germans, a;nd then come the Magyars. As far as· cultural influence is concerned, the University of Trnarva has merited a permanent place in SlovaJk cultural history with the literary activity o.f its professors and wards even in the Slovak langua,ge. From the yearr 1578 to 1777, the unirvevsity issued 79 Lrutin pulblicati<ons in the field of apologetics and contro;versial works~· but also 14 such ipU!bli:cations in Slorvak. During that same, time, 20 Magyar and 12 German, lbut also 75 bodks in the 24 SLOVAKIA field of scetics and preaching (8), so that "the crystallization of the langll!age of Catholic writers from the period of the University of Trnava was marked to such a degree that when Anthony Bernolruk and his g,r oup came out with the idea of an independent Slovalk literary langua;ge, in many things they only codified the practices, prevalent in Catholic literature, of their predeces,s ors" (9). From the rubove, it is undouibtedly surfrficiently clear that the SlO'Vaiks can rightfully inolude the UnilV'ersity of Ton:wa in the cultural heritage of the 1Slovalk nation and that !it ibelOiillgs in the first iplace to the unirve:r,sity traditions of SlovaJkia. It was iin such a sense that the Slovaks celebrated the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Trnava in 1935, when they pulblished a whole ,s eries of literary works commemorating the occasion with the actirve ,partic~pation of not only their cultura·l, but also their ,politi'cal institutions. The third uni,v ersity in SlovaJkia was established in Kosice in 1657 by Benedict Kisdi, the bishop of Jasov; it began its aietivity in 1'658, and the 1SlovaJks are commemorating the tri-centennial of the foundation of the University of Kosice this year. Like the University oif Trnava, the University .of Kosice, too, is grateful to the Jesuits for its development and Mgh acaderruc standing .Emiperor Leopold I rupproved its foundation in 1660, when he issued a Golden Bull, placing the unirversity on a level with the other universities of the mona;rchy with the right of granting academic titles and degrees. The Unirver.sity of Kosice - later degraded to an academy iby the There~iaJll reforms and to a law academy during the Bachera - was formded lb y the same motives as the Trna'Va University. In the Charter of February 26, 1657, Bishop Benedict states that he decided to establish a "studiUJm universale, that is, an academy or unirversity and to entrust it to the Jesuits, whose industry, loyalty and skill in the educational field are known to the who,le world, .so that it could train caipaJble priests the lack of ,whom ~ very harmful for God's Chwrch and for our afflicted fatherland" (10). SLOVAKIA 25 After the dissolution of the Kosice law academy by the Praigue Government in 1922, the archives of the University of Kosice, were taken to Bratislava and, as far as is known, no one has made a thorough study of them so that we might know a;ccurately the composition of the student 1body and its professorial staff. From the wo11ks of Jesuit scientific scholars, who have been active in Italian universities during recent years, we :know that religious servi·c es with exclusively Slo,va.k sermons, during the first years, in the uniiversity cha1pel, attracted so many listenera that they could not be taJken care of in the chaipel. Father Stanislaus Po1cin also states that one of his famous students was A. Balud'ansky, a native of Vysne Olsovany, who ovganized the Uniivers,ity oif St. Petersburg and also was its rector (11). On the whole, the Kosi,ce University was very much li!ke the University of Trnava. From the academic standpoint, the University of Kosice was independent, according to the intentions of its founder it was administered as an institution of higher learning only by Church regulations and later in the sense of the Bull of Leopold I. The latter granted the uni,v ersity the same iprivileges, immunities and .p rerogatives which he had granted to other great universities of the Hrupslburg Monarvchy, and the degrees ,granted ,b y it were on the same level as those granted :b y the other European universities. According to the Charter, at the univer~ity of Kosice there were faculties of logic, philosophy, mathematics, theology, moral, rupologetics, and Heibrew. In 1777 the university lost its theological faculty, but then the faculty of ,la;w was estrublished which, as we mentioned aJbo:ve, remained until 1922. Since we are here concerned with a unirversity on SlovaJk territory, we can conclude that, up to the time of the Theresiam reforms, its character di:fifered little, if at aU, from that of the University of Tr:nava. Certainly its national compositiorn and mission wer,e much the s,a me. It was a Jesuit Latin university set up to serve Counter-Reformation efforts in multi-national Hungary. Though parts of eastern !Slovakia were strongly influenced for a time by the 26 SLOVAKIA Reformation, the Slavruk element during the time of the Kosice University was more strongJy represented inasmuch the neighlboring Maygar parts of Hungary were strongly Calvm.istic and the stage for revolutionary, anti-Hapsburg activities. At the !b eginning of the eighteenth century, in the eastern parts of SlovaJkia, even the Slovaik Calvinists pwblished religious literature in the national tongue and expressed the hyipothesis that it was iproibably there that even the first translation Off he Holy Writ of the year 17561757 originated, with Romuald Hadlbavy, author of a LatinSlovruk dictionary, ipartioipating in it. A study of the archives would undoubtedly tell us much about the composition of students and professors of the University o.f Kosice. Unfortunately they are not accessible to us today because of the Czecho-Comrrnmist occupation of Slova1kia. A few documents rubout the Kosice University can be found in the arch1ves of the Vatican (12), but they do not ,g ive us a clear answer to the questions referred to. Ln 1912 another school of higher learning was established in Bratislava, the Academy of law, which belongs to SlovaJkia only territorially since its spirit and aims differed swbstantially from those of the universities dealt with above. After the collapse of Austria-Hungary, this academy was tr~ferred to Pathlrnstoly (P&!s). The Comenius University was then organized in Bratislava to help the Czech governments Cz.echize the Slovaks. Slovak generations, educated iby the Czech professors of this university, did not succumlb, however, but went in the 01pposite direction: they .b ecame strongly nationalistic, forming the vanguard of the movement for the ouJ.trn-al and political individuality and independence of 'Slo!V'akia. fo 1939, they changed not only the name of the university, iburt also its spirit and mission: the Slovak University serived the highest cultural, political, and economical aims of the Slovak nation until the Slovak Republic was destroyed in AprH, 1945, when Benes, with the help of the United Nations, estaJblished another "Czec:ho-iSlovaJkia," a ,p olitical mons·t irosity more monstrous than the first which was born in 1918. Since 1945, lilke the other fom m;;titutions of higher SLOVAKIA 27 learning, the SlovaJk University in Bratislava, is a tool of Communism in the hands of a Czecho-Communist government. Slovaks At Foreign Universities To complete the picture oif university traditions in Slovakia, we must mention at least ibriefly that f,r om the fourteenth century until the pre;,;ent time Slovalks studied and taught not only in S,lovaJk unilver,s ities, or only in Hoogary and Austria, hut also in significant numbers in practically all European universities. Some of them attained high honors and recognition not only of university circles, but even of the sovereigns. In the era of Humanism and Renaissance, Slo•v ~s studied mamly at the Italian universities in Bologna and Padua, but also in Paris, Vienna, and especially in Crrueow a,nd P.ra,gue. At the latter univ,e rsity, Va:vrinec Benedicti of Nedozery (1'555-11616) was the rector and wrote a Czech ,gram.mer, while John Jesenius from Turiec County excelled in medicine, atd'. Our list of eminent ,SlovaJks of the Hwmanistic, Renaissanoe and Enlightenment eras at foreign universities is far from complete, but it is a noteworthy list. John Samb.oclky (Sambuet.1:S, born in Trnruva 16'31), made himself famous at the University of Bologna and later became an advisor and personal physician to, ffirrvpreor Maximilian II in Vienna. His literacy wo!'!ks we,r e ,published in practically all centers of humanistic culture from Padua through Paris, Vienna, G€neva, Nruples and Antwer;p on to ,F rrunkfurt. His scientific works were in the ma-i n of a historical and legal nature, but he also wrote Latin verses. Ma.rtin Rakovsky enjoyed world fame also in his time; and renaissance learning. In the writing of such treati!Ses Peter Rewa also excelled; his "De Monarchia et sacra corona regni Hungariae" was published in Fran:kfurt in 16159. The Uni'Versity of Trnava mulitiplied its scientific activity and interest of Slovruks in a university education not only on natrve soil, but also in foreign lands. Many scienti£ic workers and defenders of the Slwaiks and their culture grew up within its circle. One of the most prominent representatives of scientific scholars of Trnava was 28 SLOVAKIA Martin Szentivanyi who hailed from Liptovsky Svaty Jan; he ,w rote a1bout fifty various volumes and a six..ivolume encyclopedia called "Curiosora et selectiora variarum scientiarum miscellanea" in which he collected the scientific 1 knowledge of the va-rious disciplines of his time, from philosophy and mathematics to history, geogiraiphy, theology and economy (13). In the eighteenth century we have quite a numlber of eminent Slovruks worthy of mention, of whom we have in the first place Adam F. Kollar (lborn 1718 in Terchova) and Mathias Bel. Kollar, lilbrarian to the emperor's court in Vienna, devoted his time to history and diplomacy, but al.so to social and educational questions. During the refol'lms of Marie-Therese he played a significant role in her educational changes and in contempo,r ary pedago,grics. Mathias Bel, iborn in Ocova as Funtilk, was such a prominent and many-sided .personality that as a Lutheran he received recognition f;z-om the Pope and the Catholic ruler, who g,r anted him the title of nobleman. Bel, called "magnum decus Hungariae," published his scientific work,s in Latin, Ger.man, and Magyar; seven of his works, however, were in Slovruk. Most of his lite;z-ary works concerned themse1ves with history, geogra.phy, ethnography, and philology. He was a member of many foreign scientific societies and one of the most ,p rominent personalities of his generation in all of Hungary. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries SlovaJk Catholics and Lutherans studied and taught at many foreign universities and so helrped to elevate the culture of other nations, ,pairticularly that of the Czechs and Magyars. This question, however, still needs a systematic going-over and, hence, is not included in this dissertation. A significant numlber of Slovruks are also active in the contemporary period at various universities of the free woTld, particularly in Rome, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chili, Flrance, and the United ,States. ,Dr. Milan Hodza stated only a fact at the beginning af Woirld War II when he wrote that "Slovakia reached if not surpassed the Central European civilization level." SLOVAKIA REFERENCES 1. Dez1der Heckenast: HUNGARIAN UNIVERSITIES, PAST A ND PRESENT, Slavic and East European Studies, Vol. II, Part 1, pp. 31-39; University of Montreal, Canada. 2. Compare Samuel Osusky's "Nasi studenti na Krakovskej universite od 1400-1525," Vi era a veda, Vol. II, 1931, pp. 174-178, 226-233, and Vol. IV, 1933, pp. 232-244. 3. Andrej Mraz : DEJINY SLOVENSKEJ LITERATURY, Slovak Academy of Sciences and Arts, Bratislava, 1948, pp. 20-21. 4. In his letter of December 5, 1634, Pazmany wrote the Bishop of Olomouc, Cardinal F. Ditrichstein, that his family comes from Germany (ex Germania) and that is why, he said, that he wishes his last descendant would become a complete Moravian (totaliter Moravum facere constitutum habeo). According to I. Acsady, Pazmany "frequently told Ferdinand II that it was not possible to trust even the best Magyar and that the Magyar people needed a yoke, because it was only thus that it would be possible to keep it under control. He did not even believe his own non-Catholic countrymen, nay, not even in the future of the Magyar nation," (quoted from Daniel Varsik's Slovak book: THE NATIONALITY PROBLEM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TRNAVA, Bratislava, 1938, p. 37). How Pazmany felt about the nationalities is also attested to by the gift which he gave the Franciscan church in Trnava "moved," as he wrote. "above all else by paternal love for the Slovak nation and by t he ardor of the devout people" (Epistolae, II, p. 2-1). 5. Dr. Milan Hodfa: FEDERATION IN CENTRAL EUROPE, London, 1942, pp. 208-209: "During the seventeenth century .. . Slovakia became also the refuge of many lofty intellectual efforts on behalf of that country. For some time to come in Slovakia there was much more cultural movement than in Bohemia or occupied Hungary .. . Trnava, which housed the Catholic University before it was transferred to Budapest, became a center of Catholic culture in the realm. Slovakia revealed itself as a meeting-place of practically all contemporary currents of cultural and political ideas." 6. Andrew Mraz: op. cit., pp. 35, 62. 7. Compare the thorough study of D. Varsik. "Narodnostny problem Trnavske j uni ve rz ity," which also has a resume in French in which Varsik states literally: "11 etait par consequent nature! que !'element slovaque fut preponderant a l'Universite de Trnava" (pp. 240-241). 8. Compare Stephen Dubravec's "Apologetika a kontroverz istika na un iverzite v Trnave," Sbornik LVOSSV, Vol. II, No. 2, Trnava, 1935, p. 197). 9. Andrew Mraz : op. cit., pp. 46-47. 10. Compare Stanislaus Polcin's S.J., "Tristo rokov od zalozenia Kosickej univerzity," MOST, Cleveland, 0., Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, pp. 97-106. 11. MOST, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1957, p. 105. 12. About the documents in the Vatican Archives, vd. mention in the study of S. Polcin,S.J. 13. Compare Stanislaus Jurovsky's "Fil ozofia Ma rti na Szent ivanyi ho," Turciansky Svaty Martin, 1944.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource University Traditions in Slovakia Description An account of the resource Dr. Joseph Kirschbaum Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), June 1958 pp. 18-29 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/e4e96e0185e88caf73e4f3a0ea0568ae.pdf 75095b8ce4605699c52bae7ffdcaf674 PDF Text Text Published quarterly by the VOL. VIII Slovak League of America NO. 2 (27) JUNE, 1958 SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM ' B. S. BUC, Ph.D. . 1. Magyar Renegade vs. Pan-Slavist The historical and ideological development of Slovak nationalism was certainly not devoid of internal conflicts. It is self-evident that a society, which lived through many centuries without any political markings whatsoever, had to submit to a series of influences. They left many traces upon its national• character, which hindered the harmonious blending of energies that would have been necessary for the more succes'sfu1 attainment of a lofty goal. Since the Slovaks had lived for a thousand years within the framework of the Hungarian State without their territorial boundaries, they possessed no suppositions to establish at least that kind of group consciousness which would mirror the cultural, political, or geographical character of the land in which they lived. Even though reawakened Slovak nationalism traced its beginnings of national individuality to G'reat Moravia, it had to lean mostly upon an ethnical distinction from the Magyar.(1) Since the land of the Slovaks formed an integral part of the Hungarian over practically the entire ethnical expanse of the Slovaks, and in the' south created such a conglomeration of Slovak and Magyar elements, th1:1.t even today it is impossible fo establish between them such bountiaries which would be agreeable to ' the state and at the same time would fulfill the desire for self-determination. Into the territory of Slovakia, as it was formed after the First World War as a part of Czecho-Slovakia, were incorporated 655,322 Hungarians. They comprised 27 percent of all the inhabitants. Meanwhile 180,000 Slovaks re, ,.. mained in Hungary and they, for the most part, were scat"( ( �2 SLOVAKIA tered throughout the land. This fact gave the Magyars a Slovakia in order to liberate their co-racialists. And they accomplished their goal in 1938 when Czecho-Slovakia crumbled under Hitler's pressure. The Vienna arbitrage, whose principal agents were the Italian foreign minister Ciano and the German foreign minister Ribentrop, apportioned to Hungary 10,309 square kilometers of Slovak land together with 853,670 inhabitants. According to statistics of the year 1930, these inhabitants comprised 503,980 Magyars, 26,157 Jews, 272,145 Slovaks, and 1,825 Ruthenians. Still remaining in Slovakia were 57,193 Magyars. The number of Slovaks in Hungary after the arbitrage increased from 180,00 to 352,145, that is, six times more than the Magyars remaining in Slovakia(2). After the Second World War, all the land taken away by the arbitrage was returned to Slovakia. The new communist-dominated Czecho-Slovak government proceeded to solve this national mixup by making an agreement with Communist Hungary to exchange all Magyars in Slovakia for all Slovaks in Hungary. Furthermore, it removed forcibly a certain portion of the Magyars from Southern Slovakia into the Sudetenland in place of the ousted Germans. Prior to World War I, the upper social classes in Slovakia - the intelligentsia, merchants and greater landowners - were also almost wholly magyarized. If they acknowledged their Slovak origin, they nevertheless accepted the idea of the Hungarian State as their political "credo" and did not concur with the efforts of revived Slovak nationalism. Rather they looked upon it as the manifestation of an unfriendly attitude to the Hungarian fatherland. They therefore engaged freely in all undertakings of the Hungarian government to smear the Pan-Slavists, as they labelled the Slovak patriots. Thus at the very beginning of Slovak nationalism, arises the first major conflict, namely the struggle between Slovak renegades and Pan-Slavists. Slovak renegades were those people of Slovak origin who, either because of opportunities or conviction, offered their services toward the assimilating efforts of the Hun_garian government, which aimed at creating as soon as possible a homogeneous speaking Magyar State. On the �SLOVAKIA 3 other hand, Slovak patriots, were considered Pan-Slavists. They were so named because, in their political struggle, they proceeded hand in hand with the other Slav nationalities in Hungary and often gave evidence of Pan-Slavistic tendencies. The conflict of these two divisions within Slovak society grew steadily more and more violent after the revolutionary year of 1848. Upon it were centered all struggles on Slovak ethnical territory, whether they were of a political, cultural, social, or religious nature. The division of Slovak society into renegades and Pan-Slavists had not only political but also social roots. The assemblage of Slovak renegades was composed of members of the lordly class, among whom we find the intelligentsia, merchants, greater landowners or peers. On the other side stood the great mass of people comprising the Pan-Slavists, among whom were numbered small village farmers and various agricultural workers. Because industry was still in its rudimentary stages, the working class was practically non-extant. From among the intelligentsia, priests had the closest contacts with the broad masses of people and, therefore, became natural leaders and agents of Slovak nationalism. . The aforementioned fact gives further testimony that Slovak nationalism was more a social than a national movement in its beginnings. The reviving tasks of national leaders in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism possessed rather a culturo-social than a national-political character. Slovak leaders entered upon a national-political program only with the revolutionary times of 1848, when they organized a military uprising and brought forth their demand that not Magyar but rather Slovak should be the language used in schools and official circles of the defined Slovak territory within the framework of Hungary. The beginnings leading towards the accomplishment of this demand seemed very favorable in the years prior to 1867. At that time Vienna, resisting the revolting Magyars, sought the support of her nationalities who demanded from the Magyar government of Hungary the same national rights which the Magyars, led by Slovak renegade Louis Kossuth, demanded for themselves in Vienna. �4 SLOVAKIA In 1867, .however, a ~ettlement took place between Vieniia and' Budapest. Slovak nationalism thus lost the '' giveIJ. over support of Vienna and was as a prize to the Magyars to become an internal concz;en of the Hungarian portion of the Habsburg Monarchy. Immediatel y the Magyars feverishly set for~h to magyarize all their nationalities, which action manifested itself on Slovak ethnical .territory by the abolition of all Slovak , political and purely cultural institutions and by the introductio n of Magyar as the official language jn HtJ.ngary. SGhools 1 were to educate a new generation, one that would speak only Magyar and one that would be devoted w:holly to the, Magyars and the ,Hungarian State which they controlled. In these attempts the Magyar-co ntrolled Hungarian governmen t found in Slovakia willing supporters among the ranks of the above-men tioned Slovak renegades, who, in full compliance ·with the psychologic al bent of every renegade, labored more fanatically in instilling the magyarizing program than the governmen t itself had actually contemplat ed. The result could only end in a bitter conflict with the deeply Slovak-con scious group of inhabitants. , This conflict came to light npt only in political manifestations, as is elecfoms, but purrow~d deep even into the daily concerns of the inhabitants . In elections, genuinely Slovak candidates generally had little hope of winning even in those ,electoral districts where the vast majority sympathize d with them. The reason lay in a voting law , which granted voting privileges only to those who possessed a certain· amount of property. This law excluded from voting precisely that portion of Slovak ethnical teritory which formed tb.e basis of Slovak nationalism and granted the decisive word to those who had lost t~eir Slovak national consciousn ess but propertywise were more ,powerful. li'urthermo re, the elections were public and influenced very ev,idently by much use of bribery. Official candidates received heavy aid and support from the governmen t, whereas national candidates could only rely upon their, own resources, which were for the most part meagre and limited. In daily life the conflict between . Slovak renegades �SLOVAKIA 5 and patriotic Slovaks was mirrored mostly in the use of language. The renegades used the Magyar tongue almost exclusively; they regarded the speaking of Magyar not only as a maninfestation of "patriotic" sentiment, but also as the mark of a higher social position. Slovak, 1on the other hand, was looked upon as the tongue of poverty and its use was considered a display of "anti-patriotic'' feeling. In this conflict, which created an atmosphere of almost continual political as well as social tension, Slovak nationalism suffered the loss of much strength, for social privileges, schools and governmental pressure inflicted upon it serious harm and threatened it with destruction. 2. "Czechoslovak" vs. Autonomist With the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia this process was suddenly halted and the Slovaks found themselves in more favorable conditions. Because of the- changed political situation, a large 'number bf former Slovak renegades departed from Slovakia. Furthermore, many of them began to admit again their Sldvak origin, orientated themselves to the new poltiical setup, and even though manifesting little enthusiasm for the revolutionary change, they nevertheless undertook no organized effort which could have proved detrimental to the erection of the new state. It is comprehensible that all national Slovak units accepted the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia with gfeat enthusiasm. But this enthusiasm lasted only as long as its emotional foundation, built in the past under the influence of Pan-Slavism, was extanh It was primarily nurtured by a common fate of the Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hungary and led them to progress jointly in their struggles for national ,rights. When, however, both units merged and , had to work out serious problems which appeared during the erection of the new state, the basic difference of the Czech and Slovak character projected itself on the scene and gave an impetus to many conflicts, which in time grew more violent. It is true that Czechs and Slovaks did not find it too difficult to understand one another ling-uistica:lly because of the marked kinship of their languages. Nevertheless, 1-the ideological antl cultural background · of �6 SLOVAKIA / their natures showed itself to be so different that it created an almost impassable gulf between them. The fore-warning of this break was the difference of their religious positions. From the burning of John Hus, the first ecclesiastical reformer at the beginning of the fifteenth century, the Czech character continued to show opposition to Rome and to the Habsburgs. After successfully routing all Czech reforming elements in 1647, the Habsburgs carried on intensive re-Catholiciza tion in Czech lands. With the downfall of the Habsburgs after the First World War, the Czechs found it opportune to undo what they had looked upon as an injustice and, therefore, did not conceal their anti-Catholic thinking in creating CzechoSlovakia. The Slovaks, who are 82 percent Catholic, had no grudge against Rome, and after attaining their national liberty showed no unfriendliness to Catholicism. Thus, immediately in the beginning of the new state, the religious question became an experimental rock of Czech-Slovak relationship and drove the popular and formerly Czechinclined Father Andrew Hlinka with his Slovak People's Party into violent opposition against the Czechs. When, in addition, with the help of a minority of Slovak Lutherans and isolated Liberals, Prague began to organize Czecho-Slova kia centralisticall y by disregarding former agreements about making it a federative republic of two distinct nations, "Czechs and Slovaks," Slovak Catholics inaugurated a movement which came to be known under the name "Autonomist. " The whole discussion seemed, however, to turn around the connotation of the phrase "Czechoslovak nation." In the first chapter of this treatise, allusion was made to the impact of Pan-Slavism upon the budding Slovak nationalism. The Pan-Slavist visualized a kind of political and ethnographica l unification of all Slavs on the ground of their kinship and close language relationship. Influenced by this Pan-Slavistic trend, some Slovaks - especially Lutherans - were prone to accept the idea of the complete fusion of the Slovaks with the Czechs. This objective was to be achieved through a centralized rather than federative Czecho-Slovak ia. Thus, in disregard of all �SLOVAKIA 7 previous agreements between the Czechs and Slovaks, the Czecho-Slovak Republic was organized on the basis of a centralized government. Moreover, the special phrase "Czechoslovak nation" was coined. It had to denote that Czechs and Slovaks were ethnographically, culturally, and politically the same nation. Practically, it meant that the Slovaks were to be made over into Czechs, since the Slovak language was declared a dialect of the Czech and Slovakia was not conceded any right to self-government. Thus, in this new conflict "Czechoslovak vs. Autonomist" two issues were involved: the issue of national difference between the Slovaks and Czechs and the issue of self-government for Slovakia. Those who denied them were "Czechoslovaks"; those who claimed them were "Autonomists." There arose once again the struggle between those who favored the government and those who opposed it for its incorrect interpretation of Slovak feelings. To determine by proper evaluation which side profited in this conflict, it would be unjust to form conclusions solely on the basis of the election outcomes of those parties who stood for the autonomist program. The Slovak People's Party, led by Father Hlinka, alone had a purely autonomist program. But the individuality of the Slovak nation was also stressed by the Slovak National Party, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister, comprising chiefly the Slovak Lutherans, and by the Communist Party. The latter proceeded further than Hlinka's party by demanding the complete separation of Slovakia from the Czechs lands as early as 1926. The autonomist movement achieved its greatest victory in the elections of 1925; of the 299 representative seats in the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, 160 were won by the Czechs, 47 by the Slovaks, 5 by the Ruthenians, 1 by the Russians, 75 by the Germans and 10 by the Magyars. Now the 47 seats belonging to the Slovaks did not represent autonomists only; it simply indicated the representatives from Slovak ethnical territory. Of these seats, 23, belonged to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, 5 to the Communist Party, 1 to the Slovak National Party; the remainder belonged to the parties which based their plat- �8 SLOVAKIA form on the principle of a "Czechoslovak" nation and stood for a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic(3). Even though the Slovak People's Party emerged from this election with 23 delegates and gained ascendancy over the other parties seeking for votes in Slovakia, its strength would not necesarily indicate that the idea of a Slovak national individuality was highly popular among Slovak inhabitants. In evaluating the results to determine how parties opposed to this idea were won over in Slovakia, one must not overlook the factor of material benefits offered by those in power to anyone voting for them. Thus, opportunism rather than nationalism was the chief factor which influenced the so-called official parties on Slovak ethnical territory. Actually the defenders and confessors of centralism in Slovakia comprised only a small group of individuals who, with the aid of the Czechs, constituted a true ruling class. In this way they assured for themselves a lasting political career and of course material comforts. They, therefore, took the place of the former Slovak renegades and, like the latter, were the instruments of foreign influences endeavoring to deter the uni-characteristic development of Slovak nationalism. Nevertheless, in the Czecho-Slovak versus Autonomist conflict, Slovak nationalism possessed since the beginning a greater advantage than in the Slovak renegade versus patriotic Slovak conflict because it had the support of schools. It is a very significant circumstance, that although the greater majority of professors and teachers in Slovak schools at the beginning of the Czecho-Slovak Repuplic were Czechs, who came to Slovakia l:>ecause of the lack of specialized Slovak talent, they nevertheless were not able to educate a Slovak generation which wo_u ld become devoted to the idea of the "Czechoslovak" nation, and to a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic ,based on that idea. The Czechs explain this phenomenon as the ungratefulness of the young Slovak generation for ,proferred aid. It is true that this Czech assistance enabl,~d the Slovaks to make inroads into modern European , society. But the key to the correct evaluation of this seeming ungrateful_ness is offered, by statistics which co111pare the labor pos- �SLOVAKIA 9 sibilities between Czechs and Slovaks on Slovak ethnical territory. The employment question became the most effective outlet for the dissemination of the autonomist movement over the broader Slovak strata, whereby a young, Czech-trained Slovak generation was won over to its objectives. On the other hand, it aided also that group of Slovaks and Czechs who, controlling the sole possibility of distributing labor, possessed an effective means of advantageously influencing in politics all opportunistically inclined natures. Thus, the "Czechoslovak" versus Autonomist conflict also assumed the character of a social struggle. The employment problem in other homogeneous speaking states caused a social tension and made it possible for Communists and Socialists to make greater election gains. In Slovakia, however, it led to an increased tension between Czechs and Slovaks and became the fruitful soil for a separatist nationalism. Czech officials, teachers, and other white collar employees entered Slovakia with the understanding that they would remain there in the exercise of their proper functions until Slovakia could gather sufficient expert forces of its own. After the departure of the Magyars and Slovak, renegades, there remained few experts in Slovakia who could be used in public administration and education(4). Since the Czechs in Austria had their own autonomy and at the same time took an important part in the management of the entire monarchy, they possessed a surplus of intellectuals and for that reason considered Slovakia as a province for the allocation of their intellectuals. Not only did the Czechs reveal an unwillingness to leave the labor possibilities in favor of the new Slovak intelligentsia, but, by utilizing their own influential connections, they also increased their own ranks. The unequal representation of Slovaks and Czechs that existed in the public organs of Slovakia is evident from the following employment statistics of the Board of State Railways in Bratislava and Kosice. In 1925, of 5,134 engineers and higher officers, 90 percent were Czechs; of 12,355 second grade laborers 60 percent were Czechs; of 16, 025 unskilled laborers, 30 percent were Czechs(5). �10 SLOVAKIA This situation is best mirrored in the emigration from Czecho-Slovakia during the years 1920-1937. Of the 400,193 people, who emigrated from the whole country, 213,283 or 52.2 percent belonged to Slovakia. This is an astonishingly high percentage when one considers that Slovakia formed only 23 percent of the whole population of the Czecho-Slovak Republic(6). It was impossible for such a situation not to give rise to many complaints on the part of the Slovaks. It turned them against the Czechs as well as against the Czecho-Slovak state and steadily created suppositions for the greater emphasis of a separate national individuality and eventually an independent state. 3. Lutheran vs. Catholic The conflicts of Slovak nationalism often have their roots in the religious differences of the Slovak population. We have already mentioned that Catholic priests and Lutheran ministers had played an important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism. To Western observers this often appears as a remnant of so-called clericalism. It is hardly possible, however, to make a parallel between what is known in France and Italy as clericalism and the role of priests in Slovak politics. In Slovakia priests entered into politics under the influence of the ideas of the Enlightenment, which philosophy gave an impetus to anticlerical struggles in other countries. And it is a fact that Slovak priests also entered into frequent controversy with higher members of the hierarchy, chiefly because the latter were not of Slovak origin and for the greater part supported the Magyar government in its attempts at assimilation in Hungary. That these conflicts did not develop into open religious splits can be accredited to the Popes who, stemming from Pope Leo XIII and his social encyclicals, sympathized with peoples' movements and continually sought to keep them within the fold of the Church. It happened frequently that in disagreements, involving priests and bishops, Rome stood on the side of the priests whenever the controversy stemmed from different social or national sources An outstanding example of the Vatican's attitude is �SLOVAKIA 11 mirrored in the case of Father IDinka, leader of the Slovak Autonomists. Suspended in 1906 by his Magyar Bishop Parvy for participating in the election campaign, Hlinka found Rome favorable to his cause. Bishop Parvy was thus virtually compelled to reinstate Hlinka as pastor. Thus, assured of the sympathies of the Vatican and enthused over the idea of helping their oppressed kin, the Slovak priests took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. Whenever any member of the Slovak laity in Hungary received an education, the person usually became denationalized either because of the schools or the nature of his position, which demanded of him a subservient service to the government. Otherwise it was impossible to advance in a chosen career. Furthermore, children from peasant, village families found it economically almost impossible to receive a higher education. Only members of wealthier families, which comprised the group of Slovak renegades, were able to pursue higher studies and obtain leading positions. The only vocation open to boys with a village and farming background was that to the priesthood. Not only did the priestly vocation offer an education to such boys, since seminary studies were almost completely free, but it also sent its priests back among the same people whence they came. Furthermore, although the courses were conducted in a Magyar spirit, and this could have influenced them, nevertheless upon the completion of their studies they returned to their own people and once again found themselves in the center of their origin. Moreover, they were not weighted down with the fear that they would be hindered in their career if they failed to act according to the intentions of the government. They were, therefore, very independent in their actions and in fulfilling their vocation. These priests, however, were on the lowest rung of the ecclesiastical hierarchy; the higher rungs were either completely Magyar or Slovak renegadist. It is self-evident that they would be mostly attracted to the ideas of the Enlightenment concerning the people and later romantic ideas concerning the nation. In the majority of instances they, therefore, sought with revolutionary zest to make �12 SLOVAKIA these ideas productive under the motto: "For God and Country!" It is true that, because of the nature of their vocation, they carried religion into politics, and therefore gave an impetus to conflicts of a religious nature. But it is also true, that the reasons why religion became embroiled in politics in Central Europe were not because priests desired to become the leaders of national and peoples' movements, but because of the very nature of the society which retained the religious foundation it had inherited from the Middle Ages. The undermining of this foundation, after the birth of Liberalism, could not fail to call forth ecclesiastical reaction, which began to appear in the establishment of Catholic parties as the most effective, defensive means in the political struggles of democracies. According to the statistics of 1930, the population of Slovakia comprised percentage-wise the following religious denominations: Roman and Greek Catholics - 78.013 percent; Lutherans 12.008 percent; Calvinists 4.376 percent; Jews - 4.102 percent; others - 1.5 percent(?). Only Catholics and Lutherans, however, play a role in Slovak nationalism. Calvinists are for the most part Magyars; and Jews, when not Magyars, in most instances take sides with those who oppose Slovak nationalism. Between Lutherans and Catholics there existed in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism a certain competition in patriotism, which did not always tend in the same direction, principally in matters concerning the legislation of the national Slovak language. In their religious services, the Lutherans used the old Czech language of the so-called "Kralice Bible" that was translated by the Moravian Brethren who were followers of John Hus. This fact led them to retain Czech as the literary tongue for some time. Catholics, on the other hand, always used the Slovak language of the common people and legalized it as national in 1787. From the beginning, Catholics showed the evident tendency to emphasize their distinct national Slovak individuality from that of the Czechs. Lutherans, highly influenced by Pan-Slavism however, were prone to accept the idea that Czechs and Slovaks form a common racial unit of one great Slav family. �SLOVAKIA 13 It was not until the revolutionary times of 1848 that r..udovit Stur, one of the most eminent Lutheran national revivers, established the supposition that Lutherans should also accept the principle of a Slovak language distinct from the Czech. Suppositions were thus established for the close cooperation between Lutherans and Catholics to guarantee national rights to Slovaks in what formerely had been Hungary. In spite of their minority, the Lutherans in 1848 took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. They formed a rich romantic literature, initiated many political steps in the Hungarian government to obtain national rights for Slovaks, founded a few Slovak cultural institutions and led the only Slovak political party in Hungary, called the Slovak National Party. Catholics accepted their leadership as self-evidential. This acceptance assured almost complete harmony between both units of Slovak nationalism. Towards the end of the nineteenth century Catholics were summoned into more feverish political activity by a newly-created, all-state, Catholic party called the People's Party, founded and headed by the Magyar Count Zichy. The party was brought to life through many laws passed by the liberal-controlled Hungarian Parliament that sought to destroy the present Christian tradition of the country. One of these laws dealt with marriage and demanded that every citizen undergo a civil wedding ceremony. Otherwise, the program of the People's Party appropriated the social principles enumerated in the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII and also fought for the recognition of national rights for individual nationalism in Hungary. It was a program which Slovak Catholic priests were seeking to realize for a long time. For this reason, the party achieved comparatively wonderful success on Slovak ethnical territory shortly after its entrance into the political struggle. In this party Father Andrew Hlinka achieved public political recognition and in time became the most eminent representative of Slovak nationalism. Although the People's Party received great help from non-Magyar priests and the Catholic laity, the Magyar leaders were in no way anxious to fulfill the nationalitypoint of their program either in the government or within �14 SLOVAKIA the framework of their own party. Rather they supported almost openly the assimilative pressure of the government upon nationalities and, therefore, upon the Slovaks. The deceived Slovak Catholics, therefore, left this party and formed their own Slovak People's Party under the leadership of Father Andrew Hlinka. This party appropriated the social and religious program of the original People's Party and immediately brought forth its claim to national rights for Slovaks. The introduction of the Slovak People's Party created the following situation in Slovakia: Slovak Catholics began to organize into the People's Party, whereas the existing Slovak National Party became only a political organ of Slovak Lutherans. It emphasized a political division according to religion, but no serious conflicts, in the sense of Catholic versus Lutheran, ensued at that time. Magyar pressure steadily created new suppositions for cooperation towards the same national goal. This political division along religious lines became the source of conflict between Catholics and Lutherans only when, in the new Czecho-Slovakia, the fight for national rights was replaced by the struggle to seize power. In this struggle the Lutherans were victorious, because they accepted willingly the centralizing efforts of Prague. The anti-ecclesiastical and Hussite-enrooted politics of the new Czecho-Slovakia meant a grave injury to the deeply religious-conscious Catholics, though it was, to a certain extent, welcomed by the Lutherans. For Catholics, it was a serious reason to fight uncompromisingly for an autonomous Slovakia; for Lutherans and a small group of liberals it was the foundation whereby they easily accepted the principle of the "Czechoslovak" nation and the centralization based on this principle. Prague, therefore, rewarded them with power, and did that without any regard for the vast majority of Slovak Catholics. Practically all of the more prominent politicians in Czecho-Slovakia from Slovakia were Lutherans. They formed a very narrow ruling class, because they were limited to a few chosen families. Out of their midst came a narrow circile of so-called "experts," whom Prague made good use of to govern in Slo- �SLOVAKIA 15 vakia. The eminent English historian C. A. Macartney describes the situation thusly: The fact remains that the (Czechoslovak) government has been obliged more often than not to rule Slovakia against the wishes of most of its inhabitants, maintaining itself only by the expedients of restricting the powers of the self-governing bodies to within the narrowest possible limits, of filling the seats designated for "experts" with its own nominees, and utilizing freely weapons of censorship and police supervision(8). 4. The Reason For the Division It will not be hard to understand why the above-mentioned conflicts developed within the Slovak community if we bear in mind the two main obstacles which revived Slovak nationalism had to overcome. The one was of an internal character, while the other was due to external pressure. Internally, the Slovaks had at the beginning the ten- t dency to confuse their nationality with that of an imaginary Slav nation. This mixup arose from the Pan-Slavistic ideology that greatly appealed to some Slovak leaders, because it imbued them with the feeling of strength in view of the desperate situation in which they found themselves in Hungary. On the other hand, it hindered them from developing the consciousness of a distinct national Slovak character, because some readily accepted the idea of unity with the "closest" Slav nation, namely, th,e Czechs. The Slovaks who felt most strongly inclined to a union with the Czechs opposed the codification of a separate Slovak language. To them the Czech language seemed suitable even for those of their kin living in Hungary. Although these tendencies never took firm roots with majority of the population in Slovakia, they were, the ) nevertheless, strong enough to arouse conflicts and later to enable the Czechs to exploit the Slovaks politically. That I the Czechs have not succeeded can be attributed to the fact that the majority of the Slovaks have always felt \ and professed to be an ethnographically, historically, and culturally distinct nation from the Czechs, and have constantly endeavored to create for Slovakia such political conditions which would stress that distinct national character. I �16 SLOVAKIA The terms "Czechoslovak" and "Autonomist" are to be understood as political designations: the "Czechoslovaks" are those Slovaks who profess to be Czechs; the "Autonomists" are those who feel and act as Slovaks. The designation "Autonomist" comes from the Autonomist Party whose purpose was to assure an autonomous government for Slovakia as opposed to a centralized Czecho-Slovakia sought for by Czechoslovaks. The conflict "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" can best be expressed in the form of a question: Are we Czechs or are we Slovaks? To this question the Czechoslovak would answer: I am a Czech; the Autonomist: I am a Slovak. Realizing these basic differences, we can easily see that the "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict resemble the former "Slovak renegade (Magyarized Slovak) versus Pan-Slavist" conflict. The term "Czechoslovak" compares with the Slovak renegade, while the term "Autonomist" with the Pan-Slavist. The difference, however, lies in the fact that the Magyarized Slovak denied his Slovak nationality, while the Czechoslovak has always admitted his original Slovak ethnographical nationality. The former's denial flows from the lack of kinship between Slovaks and Magyars, whereas the Czechoslovak admission is based upon a close racial kinship between Czechs' and Slovaks. Thus, the latter would like to merge the Slovaks with the Czechs despite the fact that there is a sensitive difference between both these related nations. That these conflicts developed to such proportions as to endanger the survival of the Slovaks can be accounted for by the political pressure exerted first by Magyars and later by Czechs. With the removal of that pressure came the disappearance of these conflicts and a deeper understanding of a distinct national personality ensued. As of now, the "Magyarized Slovak versus Pan-Slavist" conflict belongs to history and has r.ceased to be of any importance in the politics of the country. Hardly any citizen of Slovak descent would long for the return of former Hungary, let alone to profess any kinship with the Magyars. The "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict is not yet dead. Nevertheless, it is losing its original "rai- �SLOVAKIA 17 son d' etre." The Slovaks who still long for the preservation of Czecho-Slovakia, have abandoned the highly disputed fiction of the "Czechoslovak nation" and are accepting the realistic view that Czechs and Slovaks are ethnographically, politically, and historically distinct nations. Thus, these conflicts brought to an end discussions about national personality. The differences which still remain / revolve about the following problem: in what kind of an alliance or political form should Slovaks live to assure for themselves the best conditions for their future survival? (1) Sometimes a distinction has to be made between "Magyar" and "Hungarian" in dealing with the national problems of Hungary prior to World War I. The former Hungarian Kingdom was a country of many nationalities that in their capacity of citizens, were also Hungarians. The designation "Magyar" for "Hungarian" is, therefore, more appropriate whenever the ethnographic character of the problem is to be emphasized. Thus "Magyarizing process" is to denote the forceful methods used by the dominating Magyars or Hungarians to assimilate the other nationalities of Hungary with the view of creating a linguistically and ethnographically homogeneous state. (2) Joseph A. Mikus: La Slovaquie dans le Drame de !'Europe, Paris, 1955; p. 104. (3) Karol Sidor: Andrej Hlinka, Bratislava, 1934; p. 535. (4) Harrison Thomson: Czechoslovakia in European History, p. 292. ((5) K. Culen: Cesi a Slovaci vo Verejnej Sprave Cesko-Slo• venskej Republiky, Bratislava, 1944; p. 70. (6) Joseph A. Mikus: op. cit.; p. 66. (7) Kalendar Kanadskej Slovenskej Ligy, Winnipeg, 1953; p. 64. (8) Hungary and Her Successors, London, 1937; p. 145. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The on[y just and deimocira.tiic solution od' tJhe 'Cwchoslo,v ak' mess crnate'd by T. G. Masaryk and Benes and their foHorwers woudd be tJhe compl.ete freedom and .poliitica:l. inde-0 pendence of the nations inv;o1ved. No just and deimoeratic soluition will be arnived at as long as a 'CzechoslovaJkia' is a}iloiwed to ex,isit, becaiuse everything proposed in the direction of rea[i:zirug the fornldaimental rights of the Slovruk and Rlutihenian peoples would. he l'a be[ed 'aiccording to law' as anti~State and punishiable as such, as. it had been in the first (1918-1938) and third ReipUibJics (1945-1948) orf Czecho-Slo~ia." - (P. A. Hroibak, letter to Hon. Aivin M. Benltfo:y, Juliy 10, 1953). � Published quarterly by the VOL. VIII Slovak League of America NO. 2 (27) JUNE, 1958 SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM ' B. S. BUC, Ph.D. . 1. Magyar Renegade vs. Pan-Slavist The historical and ideological development of Slovak nationalism was certainly not devoid of internal conflicts. It is self-evident that a society, which lived through many centuries without any political markings whatsoever, had to submit to a series of influences. They left many traces upon its national• character, which hindered the harmonious blending of energies that would have been necessary for the more succes'sfu1 attainment of a lofty goal. Since the Slovaks had lived for a thousand years within the framework of the Hungarian State without their territorial boundaries, they possessed no suppositions to establish at least that kind of group consciousness which would mirror the cultural, political, or geographical character of the land in which they lived. Even though reawakened Slovak nationalism traced its beginnings of national individuality to G'reat Moravia, it had to lean mostly upon an ethnical distinction from the Magyar.(1) Since the land of the Slovaks formed an integral part of the Hungarian over practically the entire ethnical expanse of the Slovaks, and in the' south created such a conglomeration of Slovak and Magyar elements, th1:1.t even today it is impossible fo establish between them such bountiaries which would be agreeable to ' the state and at the same time would fulfill the desire for self-determination. Into the territory of Slovakia, as it was formed after the First World War as a part of Czecho-Slovakia, were incorporated 655,322 Hungarians. They comprised 27 percent of all the inhabitants. Meanwhile 180,000 Slovaks re, ,.. mained in Hungary and they, for the most part, were scat"( ( �2 SLOVAKIA tered throughout the land. This fact gave the Magyars a Slovakia in order to liberate their co-racialists. And they accomplished their goal in 1938 when Czecho-Slovakia crumbled under Hitler's pressure. The Vienna arbitrage, whose principal agents were the Italian foreign minister Ciano and the German foreign minister Ribentrop, apportioned to Hungary 10,309 square kilometers of Slovak land together with 853,670 inhabitants. According to statistics of the year 1930, these inhabitants comprised 503,980 Magyars, 26,157 Jews, 272,145 Slovaks, and 1,825 Ruthenians. Still remaining in Slovakia were 57,193 Magyars. The number of Slovaks in Hungary after the arbitrage increased from 180,00 to 352,145, that is, six times more than the Magyars remaining in Slovakia(2). After the Second World War, all the land taken away by the arbitrage was returned to Slovakia. The new communist-dominated Czecho-Slovak government proceeded to solve this national mixup by making an agreement with Communist Hungary to exchange all Magyars in Slovakia for all Slovaks in Hungary. Furthermore, it removed forcibly a certain portion of the Magyars from Southern Slovakia into the Sudetenland in place of the ousted Germans. Prior to World War I, the upper social classes in Slovakia - the intelligentsia, merchants and greater landowners - were also almost wholly magyarized. If they acknowledged their Slovak origin, they nevertheless accepted the idea of the Hungarian State as their political "credo" and did not concur with the efforts of revived Slovak nationalism. Rather they looked upon it as the manifestation of an unfriendly attitude to the Hungarian fatherland. They therefore engaged freely in all undertakings of the Hungarian government to smear the Pan-Slavists, as they labelled the Slovak patriots. Thus at the very beginning of Slovak nationalism, arises the first major conflict, namely the struggle between Slovak renegades and Pan-Slavists. Slovak renegades were those people of Slovak origin who, either because of opportunities or conviction, offered their services toward the assimilating efforts of the Hun_garian government, which aimed at creating as soon as possible a homogeneous speaking Magyar State. On the �SLOVAKIA 3 other hand, Slovak patriots, were considered Pan-Slavists. They were so named because, in their political struggle, they proceeded hand in hand with the other Slav nationalities in Hungary and often gave evidence of Pan-Slavistic tendencies. The conflict of these two divisions within Slovak society grew steadily more and more violent after the revolutionary year of 1848. Upon it were centered all struggles on Slovak ethnical territory, whether they were of a political, cultural, social, or religious nature. The division of Slovak society into renegades and Pan-Slavists had not only political but also social roots. The assemblage of Slovak renegades was composed of members of the lordly class, among whom we find the intelligentsia, merchants, greater landowners or peers. On the other side stood the great mass of people comprising the Pan-Slavists, among whom were numbered small village farmers and various agricultural workers. Because industry was still in its rudimentary stages, the working class was practically non-extant. From among the intelligentsia, priests had the closest contacts with the broad masses of people and, therefore, became natural leaders and agents of Slovak nationalism. . The aforementioned fact gives further testimony that Slovak nationalism was more a social than a national movement in its beginnings. The reviving tasks of national leaders in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism possessed rather a culturo-social than a national-political character. Slovak leaders entered upon a national-political program only with the revolutionary times of 1848, when they organized a military uprising and brought forth their demand that not Magyar but rather Slovak should be the language used in schools and official circles of the defined Slovak territory within the framework of Hungary. The beginnings leading towards the accomplishment of this demand seemed very favorable in the years prior to 1867. At that time Vienna, resisting the revolting Magyars, sought the support of her nationalities who demanded from the Magyar government of Hungary the same national rights which the Magyars, led by Slovak renegade Louis Kossuth, demanded for themselves in Vienna. �4 SLOVAKIA In 1867, .however, a ~ettlement took place between Vieniia and' Budapest. Slovak nationalism thus lost the '' giveIJ. over support of Vienna and was as a prize to the Magyars to become an internal concz;en of the Hungarian portion of the Habsburg Monarchy. Immediatel y the Magyars feverishly set for~h to magyarize all their nationalities, which action manifested itself on Slovak ethnical .territory by the abolition of all Slovak , political and purely cultural institutions and by the introductio n of Magyar as the official language jn HtJ.ngary. SGhools 1 were to educate a new generation, one that would speak only Magyar and one that would be devoted w:holly to the, Magyars and the ,Hungarian State which they controlled. In these attempts the Magyar-co ntrolled Hungarian governmen t found in Slovakia willing supporters among the ranks of the above-men tioned Slovak renegades, who, in full compliance ·with the psychologic al bent of every renegade, labored more fanatically in instilling the magyarizing program than the governmen t itself had actually contemplat ed. The result could only end in a bitter conflict with the deeply Slovak-con scious group of inhabitants. , This conflict came to light npt only in political manifestations, as is elecfoms, but purrow~d deep even into the daily concerns of the inhabitants . In elections, genuinely Slovak candidates generally had little hope of winning even in those ,electoral districts where the vast majority sympathize d with them. The reason lay in a voting law , which granted voting privileges only to those who possessed a certain· amount of property. This law excluded from voting precisely that portion of Slovak ethnical teritory which formed tb.e basis of Slovak nationalism and granted the decisive word to those who had lost t~eir Slovak national consciousn ess but propertywise were more ,powerful. li'urthermo re, the elections were public and influenced very ev,idently by much use of bribery. Official candidates received heavy aid and support from the governmen t, whereas national candidates could only rely upon their, own resources, which were for the most part meagre and limited. In daily life the conflict between . Slovak renegades �SLOVAKIA 5 and patriotic Slovaks was mirrored mostly in the use of language. The renegades used the Magyar tongue almost exclusively; they regarded the speaking of Magyar not only as a maninfestation of "patriotic" sentiment, but also as the mark of a higher social position. Slovak, 1on the other hand, was looked upon as the tongue of poverty and its use was considered a display of "anti-patriotic'' feeling. In this conflict, which created an atmosphere of almost continual political as well as social tension, Slovak nationalism suffered the loss of much strength, for social privileges, schools and governmental pressure inflicted upon it serious harm and threatened it with destruction. 2. "Czechoslovak" vs. Autonomist With the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia this process was suddenly halted and the Slovaks found themselves in more favorable conditions. Because of the- changed political situation, a large 'number bf former Slovak renegades departed from Slovakia. Furthermore, many of them began to admit again their Sldvak origin, orientated themselves to the new poltiical setup, and even though manifesting little enthusiasm for the revolutionary change, they nevertheless undertook no organized effort which could have proved detrimental to the erection of the new state. It is comprehensible that all national Slovak units accepted the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia with gfeat enthusiasm. But this enthusiasm lasted only as long as its emotional foundation, built in the past under the influence of Pan-Slavism, was extanh It was primarily nurtured by a common fate of the Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hungary and led them to progress jointly in their struggles for national ,rights. When, however, both units merged and , had to work out serious problems which appeared during the erection of the new state, the basic difference of the Czech and Slovak character projected itself on the scene and gave an impetus to many conflicts, which in time grew more violent. It is true that Czechs and Slovaks did not find it too difficult to understand one another ling-uistica:lly because of the marked kinship of their languages. Nevertheless, 1-the ideological antl cultural background · of �6 SLOVAKIA / their natures showed itself to be so different that it created an almost impassable gulf between them. The fore-warning of this break was the difference of their religious positions. From the burning of John Hus, the first ecclesiastical reformer at the beginning of the fifteenth century, the Czech character continued to show opposition to Rome and to the Habsburgs. After successfully routing all Czech reforming elements in 1647, the Habsburgs carried on intensive re-Catholiciza tion in Czech lands. With the downfall of the Habsburgs after the First World War, the Czechs found it opportune to undo what they had looked upon as an injustice and, therefore, did not conceal their anti-Catholic thinking in creating CzechoSlovakia. The Slovaks, who are 82 percent Catholic, had no grudge against Rome, and after attaining their national liberty showed no unfriendliness to Catholicism. Thus, immediately in the beginning of the new state, the religious question became an experimental rock of Czech-Slovak relationship and drove the popular and formerly Czechinclined Father Andrew Hlinka with his Slovak People's Party into violent opposition against the Czechs. When, in addition, with the help of a minority of Slovak Lutherans and isolated Liberals, Prague began to organize Czecho-Slova kia centralisticall y by disregarding former agreements about making it a federative republic of two distinct nations, "Czechs and Slovaks," Slovak Catholics inaugurated a movement which came to be known under the name "Autonomist. " The whole discussion seemed, however, to turn around the connotation of the phrase "Czechoslovak nation." In the first chapter of this treatise, allusion was made to the impact of Pan-Slavism upon the budding Slovak nationalism. The Pan-Slavist visualized a kind of political and ethnographica l unification of all Slavs on the ground of their kinship and close language relationship. Influenced by this Pan-Slavistic trend, some Slovaks - especially Lutherans - were prone to accept the idea of the complete fusion of the Slovaks with the Czechs. This objective was to be achieved through a centralized rather than federative Czecho-Slovak ia. Thus, in disregard of all �SLOVAKIA 7 previous agreements between the Czechs and Slovaks, the Czecho-Slovak Republic was organized on the basis of a centralized government. Moreover, the special phrase "Czechoslovak nation" was coined. It had to denote that Czechs and Slovaks were ethnographically, culturally, and politically the same nation. Practically, it meant that the Slovaks were to be made over into Czechs, since the Slovak language was declared a dialect of the Czech and Slovakia was not conceded any right to self-government. Thus, in this new conflict "Czechoslovak vs. Autonomist" two issues were involved: the issue of national difference between the Slovaks and Czechs and the issue of self-government for Slovakia. Those who denied them were "Czechoslovaks"; those who claimed them were "Autonomists." There arose once again the struggle between those who favored the government and those who opposed it for its incorrect interpretation of Slovak feelings. To determine by proper evaluation which side profited in this conflict, it would be unjust to form conclusions solely on the basis of the election outcomes of those parties who stood for the autonomist program. The Slovak People's Party, led by Father Hlinka, alone had a purely autonomist program. But the individuality of the Slovak nation was also stressed by the Slovak National Party, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister, comprising chiefly the Slovak Lutherans, and by the Communist Party. The latter proceeded further than Hlinka's party by demanding the complete separation of Slovakia from the Czechs lands as early as 1926. The autonomist movement achieved its greatest victory in the elections of 1925; of the 299 representative seats in the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, 160 were won by the Czechs, 47 by the Slovaks, 5 by the Ruthenians, 1 by the Russians, 75 by the Germans and 10 by the Magyars. Now the 47 seats belonging to the Slovaks did not represent autonomists only; it simply indicated the representatives from Slovak ethnical territory. Of these seats, 23, belonged to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, 5 to the Communist Party, 1 to the Slovak National Party; the remainder belonged to the parties which based their plat- �8 SLOVAKIA form on the principle of a "Czechoslovak" nation and stood for a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic(3). Even though the Slovak People's Party emerged from this election with 23 delegates and gained ascendancy over the other parties seeking for votes in Slovakia, its strength would not necesarily indicate that the idea of a Slovak national individuality was highly popular among Slovak inhabitants. In evaluating the results to determine how parties opposed to this idea were won over in Slovakia, one must not overlook the factor of material benefits offered by those in power to anyone voting for them. Thus, opportunism rather than nationalism was the chief factor which influenced the so-called official parties on Slovak ethnical territory. Actually the defenders and confessors of centralism in Slovakia comprised only a small group of individuals who, with the aid of the Czechs, constituted a true ruling class. In this way they assured for themselves a lasting political career and of course material comforts. They, therefore, took the place of the former Slovak renegades and, like the latter, were the instruments of foreign influences endeavoring to deter the uni-characteristic development of Slovak nationalism. Nevertheless, in the Czecho-Slovak versus Autonomist conflict, Slovak nationalism possessed since the beginning a greater advantage than in the Slovak renegade versus patriotic Slovak conflict because it had the support of schools. It is a very significant circumstance, that although the greater majority of professors and teachers in Slovak schools at the beginning of the Czecho-Slovak Repuplic were Czechs, who came to Slovakia l:>ecause of the lack of specialized Slovak talent, they nevertheless were not able to educate a Slovak generation which wo_u ld become devoted to the idea of the "Czechoslovak" nation, and to a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic ,based on that idea. The Czechs explain this phenomenon as the ungratefulness of the young Slovak generation for ,proferred aid. It is true that this Czech assistance enabl,~d the Slovaks to make inroads into modern European , society. But the key to the correct evaluation of this seeming ungrateful_ness is offered, by statistics which co111pare the labor pos- �SLOVAKIA 9 sibilities between Czechs and Slovaks on Slovak ethnical territory. The employment question became the most effective outlet for the dissemination of the autonomist movement over the broader Slovak strata, whereby a young, Czech-trained Slovak generation was won over to its objectives. On the other hand, it aided also that group of Slovaks and Czechs who, controlling the sole possibility of distributing labor, possessed an effective means of advantageously influencing in politics all opportunistically inclined natures. Thus, the "Czechoslovak" versus Autonomist conflict also assumed the character of a social struggle. The employment problem in other homogeneous speaking states caused a social tension and made it possible for Communists and Socialists to make greater election gains. In Slovakia, however, it led to an increased tension between Czechs and Slovaks and became the fruitful soil for a separatist nationalism. Czech officials, teachers, and other white collar employees entered Slovakia with the understanding that they would remain there in the exercise of their proper functions until Slovakia could gather sufficient expert forces of its own. After the departure of the Magyars and Slovak, renegades, there remained few experts in Slovakia who could be used in public administration and education(4). Since the Czechs in Austria had their own autonomy and at the same time took an important part in the management of the entire monarchy, they possessed a surplus of intellectuals and for that reason considered Slovakia as a province for the allocation of their intellectuals. Not only did the Czechs reveal an unwillingness to leave the labor possibilities in favor of the new Slovak intelligentsia, but, by utilizing their own influential connections, they also increased their own ranks. The unequal representation of Slovaks and Czechs that existed in the public organs of Slovakia is evident from the following employment statistics of the Board of State Railways in Bratislava and Kosice. In 1925, of 5,134 engineers and higher officers, 90 percent were Czechs; of 12,355 second grade laborers 60 percent were Czechs; of 16, 025 unskilled laborers, 30 percent were Czechs(5). �10 SLOVAKIA This situation is best mirrored in the emigration from Czecho-Slovakia during the years 1920-1937. Of the 400,193 people, who emigrated from the whole country, 213,283 or 52.2 percent belonged to Slovakia. This is an astonishingly high percentage when one considers that Slovakia formed only 23 percent of the whole population of the Czecho-Slovak Republic(6). It was impossible for such a situation not to give rise to many complaints on the part of the Slovaks. It turned them against the Czechs as well as against the Czecho-Slovak state and steadily created suppositions for the greater emphasis of a separate national individuality and eventually an independent state. 3. Lutheran vs. Catholic The conflicts of Slovak nationalism often have their roots in the religious differences of the Slovak population. We have already mentioned that Catholic priests and Lutheran ministers had played an important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism. To Western observers this often appears as a remnant of so-called clericalism. It is hardly possible, however, to make a parallel between what is known in France and Italy as clericalism and the role of priests in Slovak politics. In Slovakia priests entered into politics under the influence of the ideas of the Enlightenment, which philosophy gave an impetus to anticlerical struggles in other countries. And it is a fact that Slovak priests also entered into frequent controversy with higher members of the hierarchy, chiefly because the latter were not of Slovak origin and for the greater part supported the Magyar government in its attempts at assimilation in Hungary. That these conflicts did not develop into open religious splits can be accredited to the Popes who, stemming from Pope Leo XIII and his social encyclicals, sympathized with peoples' movements and continually sought to keep them within the fold of the Church. It happened frequently that in disagreements, involving priests and bishops, Rome stood on the side of the priests whenever the controversy stemmed from different social or national sources An outstanding example of the Vatican's attitude is �SLOVAKIA 11 mirrored in the case of Father IDinka, leader of the Slovak Autonomists. Suspended in 1906 by his Magyar Bishop Parvy for participating in the election campaign, Hlinka found Rome favorable to his cause. Bishop Parvy was thus virtually compelled to reinstate Hlinka as pastor. Thus, assured of the sympathies of the Vatican and enthused over the idea of helping their oppressed kin, the Slovak priests took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. Whenever any member of the Slovak laity in Hungary received an education, the person usually became denationalized either because of the schools or the nature of his position, which demanded of him a subservient service to the government. Otherwise it was impossible to advance in a chosen career. Furthermore, children from peasant, village families found it economically almost impossible to receive a higher education. Only members of wealthier families, which comprised the group of Slovak renegades, were able to pursue higher studies and obtain leading positions. The only vocation open to boys with a village and farming background was that to the priesthood. Not only did the priestly vocation offer an education to such boys, since seminary studies were almost completely free, but it also sent its priests back among the same people whence they came. Furthermore, although the courses were conducted in a Magyar spirit, and this could have influenced them, nevertheless upon the completion of their studies they returned to their own people and once again found themselves in the center of their origin. Moreover, they were not weighted down with the fear that they would be hindered in their career if they failed to act according to the intentions of the government. They were, therefore, very independent in their actions and in fulfilling their vocation. These priests, however, were on the lowest rung of the ecclesiastical hierarchy; the higher rungs were either completely Magyar or Slovak renegadist. It is self-evident that they would be mostly attracted to the ideas of the Enlightenment concerning the people and later romantic ideas concerning the nation. In the majority of instances they, therefore, sought with revolutionary zest to make �12 SLOVAKIA these ideas productive under the motto: "For God and Country!" It is true that, because of the nature of their vocation, they carried religion into politics, and therefore gave an impetus to conflicts of a religious nature. But it is also true, that the reasons why religion became embroiled in politics in Central Europe were not because priests desired to become the leaders of national and peoples' movements, but because of the very nature of the society which retained the religious foundation it had inherited from the Middle Ages. The undermining of this foundation, after the birth of Liberalism, could not fail to call forth ecclesiastical reaction, which began to appear in the establishment of Catholic parties as the most effective, defensive means in the political struggles of democracies. According to the statistics of 1930, the population of Slovakia comprised percentage-wise the following religious denominations: Roman and Greek Catholics - 78.013 percent; Lutherans 12.008 percent; Calvinists 4.376 percent; Jews - 4.102 percent; others - 1.5 percent(?). Only Catholics and Lutherans, however, play a role in Slovak nationalism. Calvinists are for the most part Magyars; and Jews, when not Magyars, in most instances take sides with those who oppose Slovak nationalism. Between Lutherans and Catholics there existed in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism a certain competition in patriotism, which did not always tend in the same direction, principally in matters concerning the legislation of the national Slovak language. In their religious services, the Lutherans used the old Czech language of the so-called "Kralice Bible" that was translated by the Moravian Brethren who were followers of John Hus. This fact led them to retain Czech as the literary tongue for some time. Catholics, on the other hand, always used the Slovak language of the common people and legalized it as national in 1787. From the beginning, Catholics showed the evident tendency to emphasize their distinct national Slovak individuality from that of the Czechs. Lutherans, highly influenced by Pan-Slavism however, were prone to accept the idea that Czechs and Slovaks form a common racial unit of one great Slav family. �SLOVAKIA 13 It was not until the revolutionary times of 1848 that r..udovit Stur, one of the most eminent Lutheran national revivers, established the supposition that Lutherans should also accept the principle of a Slovak language distinct from the Czech. Suppositions were thus established for the close cooperation between Lutherans and Catholics to guarantee national rights to Slovaks in what formerely had been Hungary. In spite of their minority, the Lutherans in 1848 took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. They formed a rich romantic literature, initiated many political steps in the Hungarian government to obtain national rights for Slovaks, founded a few Slovak cultural institutions and led the only Slovak political party in Hungary, called the Slovak National Party. Catholics accepted their leadership as self-evidential. This acceptance assured almost complete harmony between both units of Slovak nationalism. Towards the end of the nineteenth century Catholics were summoned into more feverish political activity by a newly-created, all-state, Catholic party called the People's Party, founded and headed by the Magyar Count Zichy. The party was brought to life through many laws passed by the liberal-controlled Hungarian Parliament that sought to destroy the present Christian tradition of the country. One of these laws dealt with marriage and demanded that every citizen undergo a civil wedding ceremony. Otherwise, the program of the People's Party appropriated the social principles enumerated in the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII and also fought for the recognition of national rights for individual nationalism in Hungary. It was a program which Slovak Catholic priests were seeking to realize for a long time. For this reason, the party achieved comparatively wonderful success on Slovak ethnical territory shortly after its entrance into the political struggle. In this party Father Andrew Hlinka achieved public political recognition and in time became the most eminent representative of Slovak nationalism. Although the People's Party received great help from non-Magyar priests and the Catholic laity, the Magyar leaders were in no way anxious to fulfill the nationalitypoint of their program either in the government or within �14 SLOVAKIA the framework of their own party. Rather they supported almost openly the assimilative pressure of the government upon nationalities and, therefore, upon the Slovaks. The deceived Slovak Catholics, therefore, left this party and formed their own Slovak People's Party under the leadership of Father Andrew Hlinka. This party appropriated the social and religious program of the original People's Party and immediately brought forth its claim to national rights for Slovaks. The introduction of the Slovak People's Party created the following situation in Slovakia: Slovak Catholics began to organize into the People's Party, whereas the existing Slovak National Party became only a political organ of Slovak Lutherans. It emphasized a political division according to religion, but no serious conflicts, in the sense of Catholic versus Lutheran, ensued at that time. Magyar pressure steadily created new suppositions for cooperation towards the same national goal. This political division along religious lines became the source of conflict between Catholics and Lutherans only when, in the new Czecho-Slovakia, the fight for national rights was replaced by the struggle to seize power. In this struggle the Lutherans were victorious, because they accepted willingly the centralizing efforts of Prague. The anti-ecclesiastical and Hussite-enrooted politics of the new Czecho-Slovakia meant a grave injury to the deeply religious-conscious Catholics, though it was, to a certain extent, welcomed by the Lutherans. For Catholics, it was a serious reason to fight uncompromisingly for an autonomous Slovakia; for Lutherans and a small group of liberals it was the foundation whereby they easily accepted the principle of the "Czechoslovak" nation and the centralization based on this principle. Prague, therefore, rewarded them with power, and did that without any regard for the vast majority of Slovak Catholics. Practically all of the more prominent politicians in Czecho-Slovakia from Slovakia were Lutherans. They formed a very narrow ruling class, because they were limited to a few chosen families. Out of their midst came a narrow circile of so-called "experts," whom Prague made good use of to govern in Slo- �SLOVAKIA 15 vakia. The eminent English historian C. A. Macartney describes the situation thusly: The fact remains that the (Czechoslovak) government has been obliged more often than not to rule Slovakia against the wishes of most of its inhabitants, maintaining itself only by the expedients of restricting the powers of the self-governing bodies to within the narrowest possible limits, of filling the seats designated for "experts" with its own nominees, and utilizing freely weapons of censorship and police supervision(8). 4. The Reason For the Division It will not be hard to understand why the above-mentioned conflicts developed within the Slovak community if we bear in mind the two main obstacles which revived Slovak nationalism had to overcome. The one was of an internal character, while the other was due to external pressure. Internally, the Slovaks had at the beginning the ten- t dency to confuse their nationality with that of an imaginary Slav nation. This mixup arose from the Pan-Slavistic ideology that greatly appealed to some Slovak leaders, because it imbued them with the feeling of strength in view of the desperate situation in which they found themselves in Hungary. On the other hand, it hindered them from developing the consciousness of a distinct national Slovak character, because some readily accepted the idea of unity with the "closest" Slav nation, namely, th,e Czechs. The Slovaks who felt most strongly inclined to a union with the Czechs opposed the codification of a separate Slovak language. To them the Czech language seemed suitable even for those of their kin living in Hungary. Although these tendencies never took firm roots with majority of the population in Slovakia, they were, the ) nevertheless, strong enough to arouse conflicts and later to enable the Czechs to exploit the Slovaks politically. That I the Czechs have not succeeded can be attributed to the fact that the majority of the Slovaks have always felt \ and professed to be an ethnographically, historically, and culturally distinct nation from the Czechs, and have constantly endeavored to create for Slovakia such political conditions which would stress that distinct national character. I �16 SLOVAKIA The terms "Czechoslovak" and "Autonomist" are to be understood as political designations: the "Czechoslovaks" are those Slovaks who profess to be Czechs; the "Autonomists" are those who feel and act as Slovaks. The designation "Autonomist" comes from the Autonomist Party whose purpose was to assure an autonomous government for Slovakia as opposed to a centralized Czecho-Slovakia sought for by Czechoslovaks. The conflict "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" can best be expressed in the form of a question: Are we Czechs or are we Slovaks? To this question the Czechoslovak would answer: I am a Czech; the Autonomist: I am a Slovak. Realizing these basic differences, we can easily see that the "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict resemble the former "Slovak renegade (Magyarized Slovak) versus Pan-Slavist" conflict. The term "Czechoslovak" compares with the Slovak renegade, while the term "Autonomist" with the Pan-Slavist. The difference, however, lies in the fact that the Magyarized Slovak denied his Slovak nationality, while the Czechoslovak has always admitted his original Slovak ethnographical nationality. The former's denial flows from the lack of kinship between Slovaks and Magyars, whereas the Czechoslovak admission is based upon a close racial kinship between Czechs' and Slovaks. Thus, the latter would like to merge the Slovaks with the Czechs despite the fact that there is a sensitive difference between both these related nations. That these conflicts developed to such proportions as to endanger the survival of the Slovaks can be accounted for by the political pressure exerted first by Magyars and later by Czechs. With the removal of that pressure came the disappearance of these conflicts and a deeper understanding of a distinct national personality ensued. As of now, the "Magyarized Slovak versus Pan-Slavist" conflict belongs to history and has r.ceased to be of any importance in the politics of the country. Hardly any citizen of Slovak descent would long for the return of former Hungary, let alone to profess any kinship with the Magyars. The "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict is not yet dead. Nevertheless, it is losing its original "rai- �SLOVAKIA 17 son d' etre." The Slovaks who still long for the preservation of Czecho-Slovakia, have abandoned the highly disputed fiction of the "Czechoslovak nation" and are accepting the realistic view that Czechs and Slovaks are ethnographically, politically, and historically distinct nations. Thus, these conflicts brought to an end discussions about national personality. The differences which still remain / revolve about the following problem: in what kind of an alliance or political form should Slovaks live to assure for themselves the best conditions for their future survival? (1) Sometimes a distinction has to be made between "Magyar" and "Hungarian" in dealing with the national problems of Hungary prior to World War I. The former Hungarian Kingdom was a country of many nationalities that in their capacity of citizens, were also Hungarians. The designation "Magyar" for "Hungarian" is, therefore, more appropriate whenever the ethnographic character of the problem is to be emphasized. Thus "Magyarizing process" is to denote the forceful methods used by the dominating Magyars or Hungarians to assimilate the other nationalities of Hungary with the view of creating a linguistically and ethnographically homogeneous state. (2) Joseph A. Mikus: La Slovaquie dans le Drame de !'Europe, Paris, 1955; p. 104. (3) Karol Sidor: Andrej Hlinka, Bratislava, 1934; p. 535. (4) Harrison Thomson: Czechoslovakia in European History, p. 292. ((5) K. Culen: Cesi a Slovaci vo Verejnej Sprave Cesko-Slo• venskej Republiky, Bratislava, 1944; p. 70. (6) Joseph A. Mikus: op. cit.; p. 66. (7) Kalendar Kanadskej Slovenskej Ligy, Winnipeg, 1953; p. 64. (8) Hungary and Her Successors, London, 1937; p. 145. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The on[y just and deimocira.tiic solution od' tJhe 'Cwchoslo,v ak' mess crnate'd by T. G. Masaryk and Benes and their foHorwers woudd be tJhe compl.ete freedom and .poliitica:l. inde-0 pendence of the nations inv;o1ved. No just and deimoeratic soluition will be arnived at as long as a 'CzechoslovaJkia' is a}iloiwed to ex,isit, becaiuse everything proposed in the direction of rea[i:zirug the fornldaimental rights of the Slovruk and Rlutihenian peoples would. he l'a be[ed 'aiccording to law' as anti~State and punishiable as such, as. it had been in the first (1918-1938) and third ReipUibJics (1945-1948) orf Czecho-Slo~ia." - (P. A. Hroibak, letter to Hon. Aivin M. Benltfo:y, Juliy 10, 1953). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Published quarterly by the VOL. VIII Slovak League of America NO. 2 (27) JUNE, 1958 SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM ' B. S. BUC, Ph.D. . 1. Magyar Renegade vs. Pan-Slavist The historical and ideological development of Slovak nationalism was certainly not devoid of internal conflicts. It is self-evident that a society, which lived through many centuries without any political markings whatsoever, had to submit to a series of influences. They left many traces upon its national• character, which hindered the harmonious blending of energies that would have been necessary for the more succes'sfu1 attainment of a lofty goal. Since the Slovaks had lived for a thousand years within the framework of the Hungarian State without their territorial boundaries, they possessed no suppositions to establish at least that kind of group consciousness which would mirror the cultural, political, or geographical character of the land in which they lived. Even though reawakened Slovak nationalism traced its beginnings of national individuality to G'reat Moravia, it had to lean mostly upon an ethnical distinction from the Magyar.(1) Since the land of the Slovaks formed an integral part of the Hungarian over practically the entire ethnical expanse of the Slovaks, and in the' south created such a conglomeration of Slovak and Magyar elements, th1:1.t even today it is impossible fo establish between them such bountiaries which would be agreeable to ' the state and at the same time would fulfill the desire for self-determination. Into the territory of Slovakia, as it was formed after the First World War as a part of Czecho-Slovakia, were incorporated 655,322 Hungarians. They comprised 27 percent of all the inhabitants. Meanwhile 180,000 Slovaks re, ,.. mained in Hungary and they, for the most part, were scat"( ( 2 SLOVAKIA tered throughout the land. This fact gave the Magyars a Slovakia in order to liberate their co-racialists. And they accomplished their goal in 1938 when Czecho-Slovakia crumbled under Hitler's pressure. The Vienna arbitrage, whose principal agents were the Italian foreign minister Ciano and the German foreign minister Ribentrop, apportioned to Hungary 10,309 square kilometers of Slovak land together with 853,670 inhabitants. According to statistics of the year 1930, these inhabitants comprised 503,980 Magyars, 26,157 Jews, 272,145 Slovaks, and 1,825 Ruthenians. Still remaining in Slovakia were 57,193 Magyars. The number of Slovaks in Hungary after the arbitrage increased from 180,00 to 352,145, that is, six times more than the Magyars remaining in Slovakia(2). After the Second World War, all the land taken away by the arbitrage was returned to Slovakia. The new communist-dominated Czecho-Slovak government proceeded to solve this national mixup by making an agreement with Communist Hungary to exchange all Magyars in Slovakia for all Slovaks in Hungary. Furthermore, it removed forcibly a certain portion of the Magyars from Southern Slovakia into the Sudetenland in place of the ousted Germans. Prior to World War I, the upper social classes in Slovakia - the intelligentsia, merchants and greater landowners - were also almost wholly magyarized. If they acknowledged their Slovak origin, they nevertheless accepted the idea of the Hungarian State as their political "credo" and did not concur with the efforts of revived Slovak nationalism. Rather they looked upon it as the manifestation of an unfriendly attitude to the Hungarian fatherland. They therefore engaged freely in all undertakings of the Hungarian government to smear the Pan-Slavists, as they labelled the Slovak patriots. Thus at the very beginning of Slovak nationalism, arises the first major conflict, namely the struggle between Slovak renegades and Pan-Slavists. Slovak renegades were those people of Slovak origin who, either because of opportunities or conviction, offered their services toward the assimilating efforts of the Hun_garian government, which aimed at creating as soon as possible a homogeneous speaking Magyar State. On the SLOVAKIA 3 other hand, Slovak patriots, were considered Pan-Slavists. They were so named because, in their political struggle, they proceeded hand in hand with the other Slav nationalities in Hungary and often gave evidence of Pan-Slavistic tendencies. The conflict of these two divisions within Slovak society grew steadily more and more violent after the revolutionary year of 1848. Upon it were centered all struggles on Slovak ethnical territory, whether they were of a political, cultural, social, or religious nature. The division of Slovak society into renegades and Pan-Slavists had not only political but also social roots. The assemblage of Slovak renegades was composed of members of the lordly class, among whom we find the intelligentsia, merchants, greater landowners or peers. On the other side stood the great mass of people comprising the Pan-Slavists, among whom were numbered small village farmers and various agricultural workers. Because industry was still in its rudimentary stages, the working class was practically non-extant. From among the intelligentsia, priests had the closest contacts with the broad masses of people and, therefore, became natural leaders and agents of Slovak nationalism. . The aforementioned fact gives further testimony that Slovak nationalism was more a social than a national movement in its beginnings. The reviving tasks of national leaders in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism possessed rather a culturo-social than a national-political character. Slovak leaders entered upon a national-political program only with the revolutionary times of 1848, when they organized a military uprising and brought forth their demand that not Magyar but rather Slovak should be the language used in schools and official circles of the defined Slovak territory within the framework of Hungary. The beginnings leading towards the accomplishment of this demand seemed very favorable in the years prior to 1867. At that time Vienna, resisting the revolting Magyars, sought the support of her nationalities who demanded from the Magyar government of Hungary the same national rights which the Magyars, led by Slovak renegade Louis Kossuth, demanded for themselves in Vienna. 4 SLOVAKIA In 1867, .however, a ~ettlement took place between Vieniia and' Budapest. Slovak nationalism thus lost the '' giveIJ. over support of Vienna and was as a prize to the Magyars to become an internal concz;en of the Hungarian portion of the Habsburg Monarchy. Immediatel y the Magyars feverishly set for~h to magyarize all their nationalities, which action manifested itself on Slovak ethnical .territory by the abolition of all Slovak , political and purely cultural institutions and by the introductio n of Magyar as the official language jn HtJ.ngary. SGhools 1 were to educate a new generation, one that would speak only Magyar and one that would be devoted w:holly to the, Magyars and the ,Hungarian State which they controlled. In these attempts the Magyar-co ntrolled Hungarian governmen t found in Slovakia willing supporters among the ranks of the above-men tioned Slovak renegades, who, in full compliance ·with the psychologic al bent of every renegade, labored more fanatically in instilling the magyarizing program than the governmen t itself had actually contemplat ed. The result could only end in a bitter conflict with the deeply Slovak-con scious group of inhabitants. , This conflict came to light npt only in political manifestations, as is elecfoms, but purrow~d deep even into the daily concerns of the inhabitants . In elections, genuinely Slovak candidates generally had little hope of winning even in those ,electoral districts where the vast majority sympathize d with them. The reason lay in a voting law , which granted voting privileges only to those who possessed a certain· amount of property. This law excluded from voting precisely that portion of Slovak ethnical teritory which formed tb.e basis of Slovak nationalism and granted the decisive word to those who had lost t~eir Slovak national consciousn ess but propertywise were more ,powerful. li'urthermo re, the elections were public and influenced very ev,idently by much use of bribery. Official candidates received heavy aid and support from the governmen t, whereas national candidates could only rely upon their, own resources, which were for the most part meagre and limited. In daily life the conflict between . Slovak renegades SLOVAKIA 5 and patriotic Slovaks was mirrored mostly in the use of language. The renegades used the Magyar tongue almost exclusively; they regarded the speaking of Magyar not only as a maninfestation of "patriotic" sentiment, but also as the mark of a higher social position. Slovak, 1on the other hand, was looked upon as the tongue of poverty and its use was considered a display of "anti-patriotic'' feeling. In this conflict, which created an atmosphere of almost continual political as well as social tension, Slovak nationalism suffered the loss of much strength, for social privileges, schools and governmental pressure inflicted upon it serious harm and threatened it with destruction. 2. "Czechoslovak" vs. Autonomist With the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia this process was suddenly halted and the Slovaks found themselves in more favorable conditions. Because of the- changed political situation, a large 'number bf former Slovak renegades departed from Slovakia. Furthermore, many of them began to admit again their Sldvak origin, orientated themselves to the new poltiical setup, and even though manifesting little enthusiasm for the revolutionary change, they nevertheless undertook no organized effort which could have proved detrimental to the erection of the new state. It is comprehensible that all national Slovak units accepted the establishment of Czecho-Slovakia with gfeat enthusiasm. But this enthusiasm lasted only as long as its emotional foundation, built in the past under the influence of Pan-Slavism, was extanh It was primarily nurtured by a common fate of the Czechs and Slovaks in Austria-Hungary and led them to progress jointly in their struggles for national ,rights. When, however, both units merged and , had to work out serious problems which appeared during the erection of the new state, the basic difference of the Czech and Slovak character projected itself on the scene and gave an impetus to many conflicts, which in time grew more violent. It is true that Czechs and Slovaks did not find it too difficult to understand one another ling-uistica:lly because of the marked kinship of their languages. Nevertheless, 1-the ideological antl cultural background · of 6 SLOVAKIA / their natures showed itself to be so different that it created an almost impassable gulf between them. The fore-warning of this break was the difference of their religious positions. From the burning of John Hus, the first ecclesiastical reformer at the beginning of the fifteenth century, the Czech character continued to show opposition to Rome and to the Habsburgs. After successfully routing all Czech reforming elements in 1647, the Habsburgs carried on intensive re-Catholiciza tion in Czech lands. With the downfall of the Habsburgs after the First World War, the Czechs found it opportune to undo what they had looked upon as an injustice and, therefore, did not conceal their anti-Catholic thinking in creating CzechoSlovakia. The Slovaks, who are 82 percent Catholic, had no grudge against Rome, and after attaining their national liberty showed no unfriendliness to Catholicism. Thus, immediately in the beginning of the new state, the religious question became an experimental rock of Czech-Slovak relationship and drove the popular and formerly Czechinclined Father Andrew Hlinka with his Slovak People's Party into violent opposition against the Czechs. When, in addition, with the help of a minority of Slovak Lutherans and isolated Liberals, Prague began to organize Czecho-Slova kia centralisticall y by disregarding former agreements about making it a federative republic of two distinct nations, "Czechs and Slovaks," Slovak Catholics inaugurated a movement which came to be known under the name "Autonomist. " The whole discussion seemed, however, to turn around the connotation of the phrase "Czechoslovak nation." In the first chapter of this treatise, allusion was made to the impact of Pan-Slavism upon the budding Slovak nationalism. The Pan-Slavist visualized a kind of political and ethnographica l unification of all Slavs on the ground of their kinship and close language relationship. Influenced by this Pan-Slavistic trend, some Slovaks - especially Lutherans - were prone to accept the idea of the complete fusion of the Slovaks with the Czechs. This objective was to be achieved through a centralized rather than federative Czecho-Slovak ia. Thus, in disregard of all SLOVAKIA 7 previous agreements between the Czechs and Slovaks, the Czecho-Slovak Republic was organized on the basis of a centralized government. Moreover, the special phrase "Czechoslovak nation" was coined. It had to denote that Czechs and Slovaks were ethnographically, culturally, and politically the same nation. Practically, it meant that the Slovaks were to be made over into Czechs, since the Slovak language was declared a dialect of the Czech and Slovakia was not conceded any right to self-government. Thus, in this new conflict "Czechoslovak vs. Autonomist" two issues were involved: the issue of national difference between the Slovaks and Czechs and the issue of self-government for Slovakia. Those who denied them were "Czechoslovaks"; those who claimed them were "Autonomists." There arose once again the struggle between those who favored the government and those who opposed it for its incorrect interpretation of Slovak feelings. To determine by proper evaluation which side profited in this conflict, it would be unjust to form conclusions solely on the basis of the election outcomes of those parties who stood for the autonomist program. The Slovak People's Party, led by Father Hlinka, alone had a purely autonomist program. But the individuality of the Slovak nation was also stressed by the Slovak National Party, led by Martin Razus, a Lutheran minister, comprising chiefly the Slovak Lutherans, and by the Communist Party. The latter proceeded further than Hlinka's party by demanding the complete separation of Slovakia from the Czechs lands as early as 1926. The autonomist movement achieved its greatest victory in the elections of 1925; of the 299 representative seats in the Czecho-Slovak Parliament, 160 were won by the Czechs, 47 by the Slovaks, 5 by the Ruthenians, 1 by the Russians, 75 by the Germans and 10 by the Magyars. Now the 47 seats belonging to the Slovaks did not represent autonomists only; it simply indicated the representatives from Slovak ethnical territory. Of these seats, 23, belonged to the Hlinka Slovak People's Party, 5 to the Communist Party, 1 to the Slovak National Party; the remainder belonged to the parties which based their plat- 8 SLOVAKIA form on the principle of a "Czechoslovak" nation and stood for a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic(3). Even though the Slovak People's Party emerged from this election with 23 delegates and gained ascendancy over the other parties seeking for votes in Slovakia, its strength would not necesarily indicate that the idea of a Slovak national individuality was highly popular among Slovak inhabitants. In evaluating the results to determine how parties opposed to this idea were won over in Slovakia, one must not overlook the factor of material benefits offered by those in power to anyone voting for them. Thus, opportunism rather than nationalism was the chief factor which influenced the so-called official parties on Slovak ethnical territory. Actually the defenders and confessors of centralism in Slovakia comprised only a small group of individuals who, with the aid of the Czechs, constituted a true ruling class. In this way they assured for themselves a lasting political career and of course material comforts. They, therefore, took the place of the former Slovak renegades and, like the latter, were the instruments of foreign influences endeavoring to deter the uni-characteristic development of Slovak nationalism. Nevertheless, in the Czecho-Slovak versus Autonomist conflict, Slovak nationalism possessed since the beginning a greater advantage than in the Slovak renegade versus patriotic Slovak conflict because it had the support of schools. It is a very significant circumstance, that although the greater majority of professors and teachers in Slovak schools at the beginning of the Czecho-Slovak Repuplic were Czechs, who came to Slovakia l:>ecause of the lack of specialized Slovak talent, they nevertheless were not able to educate a Slovak generation which wo_u ld become devoted to the idea of the "Czechoslovak" nation, and to a centralized Czecho-Slovak Republic ,based on that idea. The Czechs explain this phenomenon as the ungratefulness of the young Slovak generation for ,proferred aid. It is true that this Czech assistance enabl,~d the Slovaks to make inroads into modern European , society. But the key to the correct evaluation of this seeming ungrateful_ness is offered, by statistics which co111pare the labor pos- SLOVAKIA 9 sibilities between Czechs and Slovaks on Slovak ethnical territory. The employment question became the most effective outlet for the dissemination of the autonomist movement over the broader Slovak strata, whereby a young, Czech-trained Slovak generation was won over to its objectives. On the other hand, it aided also that group of Slovaks and Czechs who, controlling the sole possibility of distributing labor, possessed an effective means of advantageously influencing in politics all opportunistically inclined natures. Thus, the "Czechoslovak" versus Autonomist conflict also assumed the character of a social struggle. The employment problem in other homogeneous speaking states caused a social tension and made it possible for Communists and Socialists to make greater election gains. In Slovakia, however, it led to an increased tension between Czechs and Slovaks and became the fruitful soil for a separatist nationalism. Czech officials, teachers, and other white collar employees entered Slovakia with the understanding that they would remain there in the exercise of their proper functions until Slovakia could gather sufficient expert forces of its own. After the departure of the Magyars and Slovak, renegades, there remained few experts in Slovakia who could be used in public administration and education(4). Since the Czechs in Austria had their own autonomy and at the same time took an important part in the management of the entire monarchy, they possessed a surplus of intellectuals and for that reason considered Slovakia as a province for the allocation of their intellectuals. Not only did the Czechs reveal an unwillingness to leave the labor possibilities in favor of the new Slovak intelligentsia, but, by utilizing their own influential connections, they also increased their own ranks. The unequal representation of Slovaks and Czechs that existed in the public organs of Slovakia is evident from the following employment statistics of the Board of State Railways in Bratislava and Kosice. In 1925, of 5,134 engineers and higher officers, 90 percent were Czechs; of 12,355 second grade laborers 60 percent were Czechs; of 16, 025 unskilled laborers, 30 percent were Czechs(5). 10 SLOVAKIA This situation is best mirrored in the emigration from Czecho-Slovakia during the years 1920-1937. Of the 400,193 people, who emigrated from the whole country, 213,283 or 52.2 percent belonged to Slovakia. This is an astonishingly high percentage when one considers that Slovakia formed only 23 percent of the whole population of the Czecho-Slovak Republic(6). It was impossible for such a situation not to give rise to many complaints on the part of the Slovaks. It turned them against the Czechs as well as against the Czecho-Slovak state and steadily created suppositions for the greater emphasis of a separate national individuality and eventually an independent state. 3. Lutheran vs. Catholic The conflicts of Slovak nationalism often have their roots in the religious differences of the Slovak population. We have already mentioned that Catholic priests and Lutheran ministers had played an important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism. To Western observers this often appears as a remnant of so-called clericalism. It is hardly possible, however, to make a parallel between what is known in France and Italy as clericalism and the role of priests in Slovak politics. In Slovakia priests entered into politics under the influence of the ideas of the Enlightenment, which philosophy gave an impetus to anticlerical struggles in other countries. And it is a fact that Slovak priests also entered into frequent controversy with higher members of the hierarchy, chiefly because the latter were not of Slovak origin and for the greater part supported the Magyar government in its attempts at assimilation in Hungary. That these conflicts did not develop into open religious splits can be accredited to the Popes who, stemming from Pope Leo XIII and his social encyclicals, sympathized with peoples' movements and continually sought to keep them within the fold of the Church. It happened frequently that in disagreements, involving priests and bishops, Rome stood on the side of the priests whenever the controversy stemmed from different social or national sources An outstanding example of the Vatican's attitude is SLOVAKIA 11 mirrored in the case of Father IDinka, leader of the Slovak Autonomists. Suspended in 1906 by his Magyar Bishop Parvy for participating in the election campaign, Hlinka found Rome favorable to his cause. Bishop Parvy was thus virtually compelled to reinstate Hlinka as pastor. Thus, assured of the sympathies of the Vatican and enthused over the idea of helping their oppressed kin, the Slovak priests took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. Whenever any member of the Slovak laity in Hungary received an education, the person usually became denationalized either because of the schools or the nature of his position, which demanded of him a subservient service to the government. Otherwise it was impossible to advance in a chosen career. Furthermore, children from peasant, village families found it economically almost impossible to receive a higher education. Only members of wealthier families, which comprised the group of Slovak renegades, were able to pursue higher studies and obtain leading positions. The only vocation open to boys with a village and farming background was that to the priesthood. Not only did the priestly vocation offer an education to such boys, since seminary studies were almost completely free, but it also sent its priests back among the same people whence they came. Furthermore, although the courses were conducted in a Magyar spirit, and this could have influenced them, nevertheless upon the completion of their studies they returned to their own people and once again found themselves in the center of their origin. Moreover, they were not weighted down with the fear that they would be hindered in their career if they failed to act according to the intentions of the government. They were, therefore, very independent in their actions and in fulfilling their vocation. These priests, however, were on the lowest rung of the ecclesiastical hierarchy; the higher rungs were either completely Magyar or Slovak renegadist. It is self-evident that they would be mostly attracted to the ideas of the Enlightenment concerning the people and later romantic ideas concerning the nation. In the majority of instances they, therefore, sought with revolutionary zest to make 12 SLOVAKIA these ideas productive under the motto: "For God and Country!" It is true that, because of the nature of their vocation, they carried religion into politics, and therefore gave an impetus to conflicts of a religious nature. But it is also true, that the reasons why religion became embroiled in politics in Central Europe were not because priests desired to become the leaders of national and peoples' movements, but because of the very nature of the society which retained the religious foundation it had inherited from the Middle Ages. The undermining of this foundation, after the birth of Liberalism, could not fail to call forth ecclesiastical reaction, which began to appear in the establishment of Catholic parties as the most effective, defensive means in the political struggles of democracies. According to the statistics of 1930, the population of Slovakia comprised percentage-wise the following religious denominations: Roman and Greek Catholics - 78.013 percent; Lutherans 12.008 percent; Calvinists 4.376 percent; Jews - 4.102 percent; others - 1.5 percent(?). Only Catholics and Lutherans, however, play a role in Slovak nationalism. Calvinists are for the most part Magyars; and Jews, when not Magyars, in most instances take sides with those who oppose Slovak nationalism. Between Lutherans and Catholics there existed in the beginnings of Slovak nationalism a certain competition in patriotism, which did not always tend in the same direction, principally in matters concerning the legislation of the national Slovak language. In their religious services, the Lutherans used the old Czech language of the so-called "Kralice Bible" that was translated by the Moravian Brethren who were followers of John Hus. This fact led them to retain Czech as the literary tongue for some time. Catholics, on the other hand, always used the Slovak language of the common people and legalized it as national in 1787. From the beginning, Catholics showed the evident tendency to emphasize their distinct national Slovak individuality from that of the Czechs. Lutherans, highly influenced by Pan-Slavism however, were prone to accept the idea that Czechs and Slovaks form a common racial unit of one great Slav family. SLOVAKIA 13 It was not until the revolutionary times of 1848 that r..udovit Stur, one of the most eminent Lutheran national revivers, established the supposition that Lutherans should also accept the principle of a Slovak language distinct from the Czech. Suppositions were thus established for the close cooperation between Lutherans and Catholics to guarantee national rights to Slovaks in what formerely had been Hungary. In spite of their minority, the Lutherans in 1848 took over the leadership in Slovak nationalism. They formed a rich romantic literature, initiated many political steps in the Hungarian government to obtain national rights for Slovaks, founded a few Slovak cultural institutions and led the only Slovak political party in Hungary, called the Slovak National Party. Catholics accepted their leadership as self-evidential. This acceptance assured almost complete harmony between both units of Slovak nationalism. Towards the end of the nineteenth century Catholics were summoned into more feverish political activity by a newly-created, all-state, Catholic party called the People's Party, founded and headed by the Magyar Count Zichy. The party was brought to life through many laws passed by the liberal-controlled Hungarian Parliament that sought to destroy the present Christian tradition of the country. One of these laws dealt with marriage and demanded that every citizen undergo a civil wedding ceremony. Otherwise, the program of the People's Party appropriated the social principles enumerated in the encyclicals of Pope Leo XIII and also fought for the recognition of national rights for individual nationalism in Hungary. It was a program which Slovak Catholic priests were seeking to realize for a long time. For this reason, the party achieved comparatively wonderful success on Slovak ethnical territory shortly after its entrance into the political struggle. In this party Father Andrew Hlinka achieved public political recognition and in time became the most eminent representative of Slovak nationalism. Although the People's Party received great help from non-Magyar priests and the Catholic laity, the Magyar leaders were in no way anxious to fulfill the nationalitypoint of their program either in the government or within 14 SLOVAKIA the framework of their own party. Rather they supported almost openly the assimilative pressure of the government upon nationalities and, therefore, upon the Slovaks. The deceived Slovak Catholics, therefore, left this party and formed their own Slovak People's Party under the leadership of Father Andrew Hlinka. This party appropriated the social and religious program of the original People's Party and immediately brought forth its claim to national rights for Slovaks. The introduction of the Slovak People's Party created the following situation in Slovakia: Slovak Catholics began to organize into the People's Party, whereas the existing Slovak National Party became only a political organ of Slovak Lutherans. It emphasized a political division according to religion, but no serious conflicts, in the sense of Catholic versus Lutheran, ensued at that time. Magyar pressure steadily created new suppositions for cooperation towards the same national goal. This political division along religious lines became the source of conflict between Catholics and Lutherans only when, in the new Czecho-Slovakia, the fight for national rights was replaced by the struggle to seize power. In this struggle the Lutherans were victorious, because they accepted willingly the centralizing efforts of Prague. The anti-ecclesiastical and Hussite-enrooted politics of the new Czecho-Slovakia meant a grave injury to the deeply religious-conscious Catholics, though it was, to a certain extent, welcomed by the Lutherans. For Catholics, it was a serious reason to fight uncompromisingly for an autonomous Slovakia; for Lutherans and a small group of liberals it was the foundation whereby they easily accepted the principle of the "Czechoslovak" nation and the centralization based on this principle. Prague, therefore, rewarded them with power, and did that without any regard for the vast majority of Slovak Catholics. Practically all of the more prominent politicians in Czecho-Slovakia from Slovakia were Lutherans. They formed a very narrow ruling class, because they were limited to a few chosen families. Out of their midst came a narrow circile of so-called "experts," whom Prague made good use of to govern in Slo- SLOVAKIA 15 vakia. The eminent English historian C. A. Macartney describes the situation thusly: The fact remains that the (Czechoslovak) government has been obliged more often than not to rule Slovakia against the wishes of most of its inhabitants, maintaining itself only by the expedients of restricting the powers of the self-governing bodies to within the narrowest possible limits, of filling the seats designated for "experts" with its own nominees, and utilizing freely weapons of censorship and police supervision(8). 4. The Reason For the Division It will not be hard to understand why the above-mentioned conflicts developed within the Slovak community if we bear in mind the two main obstacles which revived Slovak nationalism had to overcome. The one was of an internal character, while the other was due to external pressure. Internally, the Slovaks had at the beginning the ten- t dency to confuse their nationality with that of an imaginary Slav nation. This mixup arose from the Pan-Slavistic ideology that greatly appealed to some Slovak leaders, because it imbued them with the feeling of strength in view of the desperate situation in which they found themselves in Hungary. On the other hand, it hindered them from developing the consciousness of a distinct national Slovak character, because some readily accepted the idea of unity with the "closest" Slav nation, namely, th,e Czechs. The Slovaks who felt most strongly inclined to a union with the Czechs opposed the codification of a separate Slovak language. To them the Czech language seemed suitable even for those of their kin living in Hungary. Although these tendencies never took firm roots with majority of the population in Slovakia, they were, the ) nevertheless, strong enough to arouse conflicts and later to enable the Czechs to exploit the Slovaks politically. That I the Czechs have not succeeded can be attributed to the fact that the majority of the Slovaks have always felt \ and professed to be an ethnographically, historically, and culturally distinct nation from the Czechs, and have constantly endeavored to create for Slovakia such political conditions which would stress that distinct national character. I 16 SLOVAKIA The terms "Czechoslovak" and "Autonomist" are to be understood as political designations: the "Czechoslovaks" are those Slovaks who profess to be Czechs; the "Autonomists" are those who feel and act as Slovaks. The designation "Autonomist" comes from the Autonomist Party whose purpose was to assure an autonomous government for Slovakia as opposed to a centralized Czecho-Slovakia sought for by Czechoslovaks. The conflict "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" can best be expressed in the form of a question: Are we Czechs or are we Slovaks? To this question the Czechoslovak would answer: I am a Czech; the Autonomist: I am a Slovak. Realizing these basic differences, we can easily see that the "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict resemble the former "Slovak renegade (Magyarized Slovak) versus Pan-Slavist" conflict. The term "Czechoslovak" compares with the Slovak renegade, while the term "Autonomist" with the Pan-Slavist. The difference, however, lies in the fact that the Magyarized Slovak denied his Slovak nationality, while the Czechoslovak has always admitted his original Slovak ethnographical nationality. The former's denial flows from the lack of kinship between Slovaks and Magyars, whereas the Czechoslovak admission is based upon a close racial kinship between Czechs' and Slovaks. Thus, the latter would like to merge the Slovaks with the Czechs despite the fact that there is a sensitive difference between both these related nations. That these conflicts developed to such proportions as to endanger the survival of the Slovaks can be accounted for by the political pressure exerted first by Magyars and later by Czechs. With the removal of that pressure came the disappearance of these conflicts and a deeper understanding of a distinct national personality ensued. As of now, the "Magyarized Slovak versus Pan-Slavist" conflict belongs to history and has r.ceased to be of any importance in the politics of the country. Hardly any citizen of Slovak descent would long for the return of former Hungary, let alone to profess any kinship with the Magyars. The "Czechoslovak versus Autonomist" conflict is not yet dead. Nevertheless, it is losing its original "rai- SLOVAKIA 17 son d' etre." The Slovaks who still long for the preservation of Czecho-Slovakia, have abandoned the highly disputed fiction of the "Czechoslovak nation" and are accepting the realistic view that Czechs and Slovaks are ethnographically, politically, and historically distinct nations. Thus, these conflicts brought to an end discussions about national personality. The differences which still remain / revolve about the following problem: in what kind of an alliance or political form should Slovaks live to assure for themselves the best conditions for their future survival? (1) Sometimes a distinction has to be made between "Magyar" and "Hungarian" in dealing with the national problems of Hungary prior to World War I. The former Hungarian Kingdom was a country of many nationalities that in their capacity of citizens, were also Hungarians. The designation "Magyar" for "Hungarian" is, therefore, more appropriate whenever the ethnographic character of the problem is to be emphasized. Thus "Magyarizing process" is to denote the forceful methods used by the dominating Magyars or Hungarians to assimilate the other nationalities of Hungary with the view of creating a linguistically and ethnographically homogeneous state. (2) Joseph A. Mikus: La Slovaquie dans le Drame de !'Europe, Paris, 1955; p. 104. (3) Karol Sidor: Andrej Hlinka, Bratislava, 1934; p. 535. (4) Harrison Thomson: Czechoslovakia in European History, p. 292. ((5) K. Culen: Cesi a Slovaci vo Verejnej Sprave Cesko-Slo• venskej Republiky, Bratislava, 1944; p. 70. (6) Joseph A. Mikus: op. cit.; p. 66. (7) Kalendar Kanadskej Slovenskej Ligy, Winnipeg, 1953; p. 64. (8) Hungary and Her Successors, London, 1937; p. 145. • • • WHO SAID IT? "The on[y just and deimocira.tiic solution od' tJhe 'Cwchoslo,v ak' mess crnate'd by T. G. Masaryk and Benes and their foHorwers woudd be tJhe compl.ete freedom and .poliitica:l. inde-0 pendence of the nations inv;o1ved. No just and deimoeratic soluition will be arnived at as long as a 'CzechoslovaJkia' is a}iloiwed to ex,isit, becaiuse everything proposed in the direction of rea[i:zirug the fornldaimental rights of the Slovruk and Rlutihenian peoples would. he l'a be[ed 'aiccording to law' as anti~State and punishiable as such, as. it had been in the first (1918-1938) and third ReipUibJics (1945-1948) orf Czecho-Slo~ia." - (P. A. Hroibak, letter to Hon. Aivin M. Benltfo:y, Juliy 10, 1953).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovak Nationalism: Conflicts of Slovak Nationalism Description An account of the resource B. S. Buc, Ph.D.<br />Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), June 1958<br />pp. 1-17<br /><ol><li>Magyar Renegade vs. Pan-Slavist</li> <li>"Czechoslovak" vs. Autonomist</li> <li>Lutheran vs. Catholic</li> <li>The Reason for the Division</li> </ol> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Buc, B. S. (Bonaventure S.), 1910-1966 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cf3669d6bbadc58579366cbbb92662a6.pdf 4341a0d4822a40fc980ed57fbf53568e PDF Text Text ======= ======= == =====-=--JUNE, 1958 VOL . VIII NO. 2 (27} IN THIS ISSUE: SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" SLOVAK EMIGRATION THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: PGS. 17, 56, 64. • • • Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA �SLOV AKlA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'l'he chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understandi ng and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independenc e. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independenc e. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. 8ubscr1pt1on to Slovakia $1.00 per year iJ1 the U. S. A. -- $2.00 elsewhere. ~end subscription s to: SLOVA KIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletow'1 . Pa. � ======= ======= == =====-=--JUNE, 1958 VOL . VIII NO. 2 (27} IN THIS ISSUE: SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" SLOVAK EMIGRATION THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: PGS. 17, 56, 64. • • • Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA �SLOV AKlA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'l'he chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understandi ng and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independenc e. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independenc e. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. 8ubscr1pt1on to Slovakia $1.00 per year iJ1 the U. S. A. -- $2.00 elsewhere. ~end subscription s to: SLOVA KIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletow'1 . Pa. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ======= ======= == =====-=--JUNE, 1958 VOL . VIII NO. 2 (27} IN THIS ISSUE: SLOVAK NATIONALISM: CONFLICTS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM UNIVERSITY TRADITIONS IN SLOVAKIA THE ORIGIN OF "SLOVAN" AND "SLOVAK" SLOVAK EMIGRATION THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: PGS. 17, 56, 64. • • • Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA SLOV AKlA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. 'l'he chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understandi ng and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independenc e. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independenc e. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. 8ubscr1pt1on to Slovakia $1.00 per year iJ1 the U. S. A. -- $2.00 elsewhere. ~end subscription s to: SLOVA KIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Middletow'1 . Pa.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 2 (27) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/03eeaeda7072db4e699198fa2cb16345.pdf d9889ff31b7499950d1dbae0861f38b6 PDF Text Text Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Andrew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Wood land Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Ste ph en Msgr. F. J . Dubosh, P.A. 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio Elizab eth Andrejko President 551 Grove Avenue J ohnstown, P a. Philip A. Hrobak P. 0. Box 150 ~iiddletown, Pa . ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W. Krispinsky Michael J. 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio Ju I ia Vargovic National President First Catholic Slovak Union Krajcovic H e len Kocan 1648 W. 18th S tree t Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach M ila n V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic<tgo 38, Ill. National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Paul Dub i el 12210 Detroit Avenue Lakewood, Ohio Anna Sotak Nationa l President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union P. Jamriska 810 Montoo th Street Pittsb::rgh 10, Pa. John Josepl, G. Prusa 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril ationa l President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown , Pa. S cran ton , Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Clevela nd, Ohio Ch ica.go, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N . J. SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Whitaker, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIKE \Vhilitq; I nn Chicago, [II �SKALICA, SLOVAKIA: A Roman chapel (rotunda) of the 12th century � Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Andrew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Wood land Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Ste ph en Msgr. F. J . Dubosh, P.A. 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio Elizab eth Andrejko President 551 Grove Avenue J ohnstown, P a. Philip A. Hrobak P. 0. Box 150 ~iiddletown, Pa . ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W. Krispinsky Michael J. 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio Ju I ia Vargovic National President First Catholic Slovak Union Krajcovic H e len Kocan 1648 W. 18th S tree t Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach M ila n V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic<tgo 38, Ill. National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Paul Dub i el 12210 Detroit Avenue Lakewood, Ohio Anna Sotak Nationa l President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union P. Jamriska 810 Montoo th Street Pittsb::rgh 10, Pa. John Josepl, G. Prusa 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril ationa l President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown , Pa. S cran ton , Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Clevela nd, Ohio Ch ica.go, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N . J. SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Whitaker, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIKE \Vhilitq; I nn Chicago, [II �SKALICA, SLOVAKIA: A Roman chapel (rotunda) of the 12th century � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Officers of the Slovak League of America (Organized May 26, 1907, Cleveland, Ohio) Andrew J. Hamrock Honora1 y Presidents Dr. Peter P. H letko 61 Wood land Avenu e Campbell, Ohio Batavia Rd., Box 17 Warrenville, Ill. Ste ph en Msgr. F. J . Dubosh, P.A. 12608 Madison Avenue Lakewood 7, Ohio Elizab eth Andrejko President 551 Grove Avenue J ohnstown, P a. Philip A. Hrobak P. 0. Box 150 ~iiddletown, Pa . ADVISORY COUNCIL Vice-Presidents Rev. John W. Krispinsky Michael J. 2425 W. 11th Street Cleveland, Ohio Ju I ia Vargovic National President First Catholic Slovak Union Krajcovic H e len Kocan 1648 W. 18th S tree t Chicago 8, Ill. National President First Catholic Slovak Ladies Union Re cording Secretary Constantine Culen Paul 2900 East Boulevard Cleveland 4, Ohio Fallat National President Slovak Catholic Sokol Secretary-Treasurer Stephen J. Tkach M ila n V. Blazek 4922 S. Leclaire Avenue Chic<tgo 38, Ill. National President Pa. Catholic Slovak Union EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Paul Dub i el 12210 Detroit Avenue Lakewood, Ohio Anna Sotak Nationa l President Ladies Pennsylvania Slovak Catholic Union P. Jamriska 810 Montoo th Street Pittsb::rgh 10, Pa. John Josepl, G. Prusa 205 Madison Street Passaic, N. J. Rozboril ationa l President Slovak Catholic Cadet Union SLOVAK NEWSPAPERS (Affiliated with the Slovak League of America) JEDNOTA SLOVENSKA OBRANA ZENSKA JEDNOTA Middletown , Pa. S cran ton , Pa. Cleveland, Ohio BRATSTVO SLOVENSKE NOVINY ZORNICKA Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Clevela nd, Ohio Ch ica.go, Ill. KATOLiCKY SOKOL Passaic. N . J. SVORNOST OSADNE HLASY Whitaker, Pa. SLOVAK V AMERIKE \Vhilitq; I nn Chicago, [II SKALICA, SLOVAKIA: A Roman chapel (rotunda) of the 12th century  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Back Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26) Description An account of the resource includes photo of Skalica, Slovakia: A Roman chapel (rotunda) of the 12th century Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/25c6222e686d29376116b9467f446ab3.pdf 0e3370bce8d294dca51f3e0edbd2de47 PDF Text Text 60 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) 5. The city of Nitra was a significant crossroads in those times. An important highway went northward from the city, branched off into Trencin and connected the Nitra valley with the Vah river country. This road continued northward through Prievidza to Vysehrad on the Nitra and Turiec boundaries, then downriver towards the Vah where it connected with the Vah river road. This connection enabled Nitra to keep in touch with northern Slovakia and also with Poland. 6. Another road went out from Nitra towards the Danube to Ostrihom and Budin, and from there continued along the Danube to the Balkans. Two side roads branched off from this highway to the east: one turned from the mouth of the Ipel river, winding upstream into the valley of the Hornad, and then went into the valley of the Poprad river, and downstream to the Visla river into Poland; the other led from Budin along the southern foot of the Matra Mountain and the northern bank of the Tisa river into Zemplin and through the Saris country to the north. In addition to these main highways which connected Slovakia with the neighboring countries, numerous sideroads ran through the Slovak territory which connected individual Slovak regions and extended from valley to valley. These roads also went from castle to castle and, therefore, were called "castle roads" (hradske cesty). CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval castles is one of the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centuries during which Slovakia was a frontier bulwark of Western European civilization against the continuous encroachment of the rapacious Turks. Life in those days was full of romance and danger. The most ancient castles in Slovakia were already men- �SLOVAKIA 61 tioned in the times of the Great Moravian Empire. Foremost among these was the Devin Castle, the residential citadel of the rulers of Great Moravia, which was an important border fortress near the Danube Gate even after Slovakia was annexed by Hungary. In the historical development of Slovakia, a significant role was played by the Nitra Castle which retained its importance in the succeeding centuries because of its strategic position. Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edifices of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The disastrous Mongol incursion of 1241 proved the inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a period of intensive building of castles with stone. This building activity continued well into the seventeenth century and ended with the foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold I, which was closely modeled after Palma Nuova in Northern Italy. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, the medieval castles no longer fulfilled the demands of military technique and, as the danger of further Turkish invasions ceased, their owners abandoned them to live in more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced citadels. A few of the old castles were refashioned and to this day remain habitable. One of the largest and most interesting of the latter is at Bojnice which has no less than 218 halls and rooms, is encircled by wide moats, and has several massive, lofty towers. Near the Danube river, marking the southern border of Slovakia during the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, were the Ostrihom and Vysehrad castles which belonged to Slovakia even though situated on the right bank of the Danube. There were many fortresses along the Vah river, such as: ~intava, which guarded the passage across the Vah and which was later destroyed ; Hlohovec, which towers over the gorge that connects the Vah region with the Nitra country; and farther to the north, the castles Bana (today "Vesele' near Piesfany) , Beckov and Trencin. On the Nitra-Turiec frontier toward the extensive Vysehrad Castle which lost its importance in the 13th century, Tekov Castle was in the southern part of Slovakia, in the �62 SLOVAKIA Hron country, and Hont Castle was in the Ipel valley. The Budinec Castle was built on the northern slope of Mount Matra, and the Gerner Castle stood near the Bodrog river. In addition to these more significant castles of the 10-12th centuries, there were many other strongholds in Slovakia which provided protection and shelter for the people and their livestock in times of danger. As to the number and picturesquene ss of ruins, the Vah river compares favorably to the Rhine. The setting is possibly even more romantic and cer tainly more primitive. Many of the ruins are flanked by dense forests. There are some thirty of them, built mostly upon steep crags over looking the river. In the Middle Ages they were quite impregnable. Standing aloof from human habitations of today, their very isolation transports the visitor in spirit to bygone centuries of armored knights and robber barons, to the years when royal authority was rather difficult to enforce. The owner was truly lord over the land which his eye could survey. The mightiest and most accessible of the citadels on the Vah is at Trencin. Between the years 1301-1321 it was the residence of the famous Matthew Cak, "lord of Vah and of the Tatras, " who possessed more than thirty castles in different parts of the land. King Charles Robert of Hungary besieged him in vain. The only time the stronghold fell before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous siege. The large stone cannon balls from this siege are still visible in the walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but failed. Fire reduced it to ruins in 1790. The most extensive ruins in Slovakia is Spis Hrad, situated in the Spis region. Built of white limestone, it glistens six hundred feet above the sur rounding landscape. It is huge, having no less than five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has four stories. The walls are ten feet thick and reach an altitude of seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being mentioned already in the year 1120. It was abandoned in 1710 and devastated by fire in 1780. Undoubtedly the most memorable of the ruins of Slo- �SLOVAKIA 63 vakia is magnificent Devin, situated not far from Bratislava, some five miles towards Vienna. Devin is unique. It is unlike anything else to be seen in Europe. A romantic complex of ruins loom some 240 feet above the confluence of the Danube and Morava rivers, right on the frontier between Slovakia and Austria. Here end the Carpathians, and across the Danube commence the Alps. The view from Devin is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which penetrates the soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestic Danube flowing swiftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank are hills adorned with deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed to the southern sun, are vineyards, small and quiltlike, as are the fields on the more level opposite side of the stream. Also there are forests, restful to gaze upon, which ascend hills, the outposts of the Alps. During the first two centuries of our era Devin served as an outpost of the Roman Empire against the turbulent Marcomanni and Quadi, Germanic tribes living north of the Danube. It was fortified by the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth century, the place received its present appellation, named probably after the national godess "Deva" (girl, maiden). It became a refuge from the ruthless Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps. As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of the principal centers. It was here that King Louis the German besieged the Slovak Rastislav, ruler of the Great Moravian realm, without avail in the year 864. Right beneath the ruins lies the town of Devin, exetic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently flowing Morava than the more energetic Danube. Towards sunset you see the fertile plains of Austria, park-like scenery with villages and an occasional manor set in woods and fields. You see the Danube approaching, undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the south you behold the Austrian town of Hainburg nestled beneath the ruins of the historic fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the Romans, headquarters of one of their legions. Finally, on the horizon to the southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking about upon the wonder- �64 SLOVAKIA ful panorama, you forget the woes and worries of everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom the world is a paradise. Great Moravia, divided and embroiled, collapsed in 906 before the savage onrush of the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remained in the hands of the Slovaks well into the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully withstood a siege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed. Despite the fact that of the once mighty stone castle only two medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruins, nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That which remains is stately and imposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as well as its incomparable location, gives it majesty. The places where there were once lofty walls and wide moats can still be clearly distinguished. Devin is prehistoric as well as historic ground. Man was here long before the commencement of the Christian era. Bits of pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from the second La Tene period have been unearthed by archeologists, who have been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. The future is likely to further extend the past. For untold centuries it was strategically the most vital point of Central Europe. In its immediate vicinity were fought the battles which determined the fate of the heart of the continent. (To be continued) "The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia" - Farrar, Straus and Young, 360 pgs., $3.75. - The book tells the story of a Slovak nun who helped many Slovaks escape from their Communist-domin ated land to the west and then had to flee for her life herself, when the Reds learned about her activity. Sister Cecilia told her story to William Brinkley, assistant editor of LIFE magazine, who then wrote the book. Read this exciting book. Order your copy from SLOVAKIA. � 60 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) 5. The city of Nitra was a significant crossroads in those times. An important highway went northward from the city, branched off into Trencin and connected the Nitra valley with the Vah river country. This road continued northward through Prievidza to Vysehrad on the Nitra and Turiec boundaries, then downriver towards the Vah where it connected with the Vah river road. This connection enabled Nitra to keep in touch with northern Slovakia and also with Poland. 6. Another road went out from Nitra towards the Danube to Ostrihom and Budin, and from there continued along the Danube to the Balkans. Two side roads branched off from this highway to the east: one turned from the mouth of the Ipel river, winding upstream into the valley of the Hornad, and then went into the valley of the Poprad river, and downstream to the Visla river into Poland; the other led from Budin along the southern foot of the Matra Mountain and the northern bank of the Tisa river into Zemplin and through the Saris country to the north. In addition to these main highways which connected Slovakia with the neighboring countries, numerous sideroads ran through the Slovak territory which connected individual Slovak regions and extended from valley to valley. These roads also went from castle to castle and, therefore, were called "castle roads" (hradske cesty). CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval castles is one of the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centuries during which Slovakia was a frontier bulwark of Western European civilization against the continuous encroachment of the rapacious Turks. Life in those days was full of romance and danger. The most ancient castles in Slovakia were already men- �SLOVAKIA 61 tioned in the times of the Great Moravian Empire. Foremost among these was the Devin Castle, the residential citadel of the rulers of Great Moravia, which was an important border fortress near the Danube Gate even after Slovakia was annexed by Hungary. In the historical development of Slovakia, a significant role was played by the Nitra Castle which retained its importance in the succeeding centuries because of its strategic position. Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edifices of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The disastrous Mongol incursion of 1241 proved the inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a period of intensive building of castles with stone. This building activity continued well into the seventeenth century and ended with the foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold I, which was closely modeled after Palma Nuova in Northern Italy. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, the medieval castles no longer fulfilled the demands of military technique and, as the danger of further Turkish invasions ceased, their owners abandoned them to live in more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced citadels. A few of the old castles were refashioned and to this day remain habitable. One of the largest and most interesting of the latter is at Bojnice which has no less than 218 halls and rooms, is encircled by wide moats, and has several massive, lofty towers. Near the Danube river, marking the southern border of Slovakia during the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, were the Ostrihom and Vysehrad castles which belonged to Slovakia even though situated on the right bank of the Danube. There were many fortresses along the Vah river, such as: ~intava, which guarded the passage across the Vah and which was later destroyed ; Hlohovec, which towers over the gorge that connects the Vah region with the Nitra country; and farther to the north, the castles Bana (today "Vesele' near Piesfany) , Beckov and Trencin. On the Nitra-Turiec frontier toward the extensive Vysehrad Castle which lost its importance in the 13th century, Tekov Castle was in the southern part of Slovakia, in the �62 SLOVAKIA Hron country, and Hont Castle was in the Ipel valley. The Budinec Castle was built on the northern slope of Mount Matra, and the Gerner Castle stood near the Bodrog river. In addition to these more significant castles of the 10-12th centuries, there were many other strongholds in Slovakia which provided protection and shelter for the people and their livestock in times of danger. As to the number and picturesquene ss of ruins, the Vah river compares favorably to the Rhine. The setting is possibly even more romantic and cer tainly more primitive. Many of the ruins are flanked by dense forests. There are some thirty of them, built mostly upon steep crags over looking the river. In the Middle Ages they were quite impregnable. Standing aloof from human habitations of today, their very isolation transports the visitor in spirit to bygone centuries of armored knights and robber barons, to the years when royal authority was rather difficult to enforce. The owner was truly lord over the land which his eye could survey. The mightiest and most accessible of the citadels on the Vah is at Trencin. Between the years 1301-1321 it was the residence of the famous Matthew Cak, "lord of Vah and of the Tatras, " who possessed more than thirty castles in different parts of the land. King Charles Robert of Hungary besieged him in vain. The only time the stronghold fell before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous siege. The large stone cannon balls from this siege are still visible in the walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but failed. Fire reduced it to ruins in 1790. The most extensive ruins in Slovakia is Spis Hrad, situated in the Spis region. Built of white limestone, it glistens six hundred feet above the sur rounding landscape. It is huge, having no less than five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has four stories. The walls are ten feet thick and reach an altitude of seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being mentioned already in the year 1120. It was abandoned in 1710 and devastated by fire in 1780. Undoubtedly the most memorable of the ruins of Slo- �SLOVAKIA 63 vakia is magnificent Devin, situated not far from Bratislava, some five miles towards Vienna. Devin is unique. It is unlike anything else to be seen in Europe. A romantic complex of ruins loom some 240 feet above the confluence of the Danube and Morava rivers, right on the frontier between Slovakia and Austria. Here end the Carpathians, and across the Danube commence the Alps. The view from Devin is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which penetrates the soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestic Danube flowing swiftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank are hills adorned with deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed to the southern sun, are vineyards, small and quiltlike, as are the fields on the more level opposite side of the stream. Also there are forests, restful to gaze upon, which ascend hills, the outposts of the Alps. During the first two centuries of our era Devin served as an outpost of the Roman Empire against the turbulent Marcomanni and Quadi, Germanic tribes living north of the Danube. It was fortified by the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth century, the place received its present appellation, named probably after the national godess "Deva" (girl, maiden). It became a refuge from the ruthless Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps. As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of the principal centers. It was here that King Louis the German besieged the Slovak Rastislav, ruler of the Great Moravian realm, without avail in the year 864. Right beneath the ruins lies the town of Devin, exetic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently flowing Morava than the more energetic Danube. Towards sunset you see the fertile plains of Austria, park-like scenery with villages and an occasional manor set in woods and fields. You see the Danube approaching, undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the south you behold the Austrian town of Hainburg nestled beneath the ruins of the historic fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the Romans, headquarters of one of their legions. Finally, on the horizon to the southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking about upon the wonder- �64 SLOVAKIA ful panorama, you forget the woes and worries of everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom the world is a paradise. Great Moravia, divided and embroiled, collapsed in 906 before the savage onrush of the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remained in the hands of the Slovaks well into the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully withstood a siege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed. Despite the fact that of the once mighty stone castle only two medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruins, nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That which remains is stately and imposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as well as its incomparable location, gives it majesty. The places where there were once lofty walls and wide moats can still be clearly distinguished. Devin is prehistoric as well as historic ground. Man was here long before the commencement of the Christian era. Bits of pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from the second La Tene period have been unearthed by archeologists, who have been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. The future is likely to further extend the past. For untold centuries it was strategically the most vital point of Central Europe. In its immediate vicinity were fought the battles which determined the fate of the heart of the continent. (To be continued) "The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia" - Farrar, Straus and Young, 360 pgs., $3.75. - The book tells the story of a Slovak nun who helped many Slovaks escape from their Communist-domin ated land to the west and then had to flee for her life herself, when the Reds learned about her activity. Sister Cecilia told her story to William Brinkley, assistant editor of LIFE magazine, who then wrote the book. Read this exciting book. Order your copy from SLOVAKIA. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 60 SLOVAKIA The History of Slovakia: By PHILIP A. HROBAK (Continued) 5. The city of Nitra was a significant crossroads in those times. An important highway went northward from the city, branched off into Trencin and connected the Nitra valley with the Vah river country. This road continued northward through Prievidza to Vysehrad on the Nitra and Turiec boundaries, then downriver towards the Vah where it connected with the Vah river road. This connection enabled Nitra to keep in touch with northern Slovakia and also with Poland. 6. Another road went out from Nitra towards the Danube to Ostrihom and Budin, and from there continued along the Danube to the Balkans. Two side roads branched off from this highway to the east: one turned from the mouth of the Ipel river, winding upstream into the valley of the Hornad, and then went into the valley of the Poprad river, and downstream to the Visla river into Poland; the other led from Budin along the southern foot of the Matra Mountain and the northern bank of the Tisa river into Zemplin and through the Saris country to the north. In addition to these main highways which connected Slovakia with the neighboring countries, numerous sideroads ran through the Slovak territory which connected individual Slovak regions and extended from valley to valley. These roads also went from castle to castle and, therefore, were called "castle roads" (hradske cesty). CASTLES OF SLOVAKIA A multitude of picturesque ruins of medieval castles is one of the special attractions of Slovakia. They bear witness of the centuries during which Slovakia was a frontier bulwark of Western European civilization against the continuous encroachment of the rapacious Turks. Life in those days was full of romance and danger. The most ancient castles in Slovakia were already men- SLOVAKIA 61 tioned in the times of the Great Moravian Empire. Foremost among these was the Devin Castle, the residential citadel of the rulers of Great Moravia, which was an important border fortress near the Danube Gate even after Slovakia was annexed by Hungary. In the historical development of Slovakia, a significant role was played by the Nitra Castle which retained its importance in the succeeding centuries because of its strategic position. Wooden forts preceeded the mighty stone edifices of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The disastrous Mongol incursion of 1241 proved the inefficacy of the wooden structures and there followed a period of intensive building of castles with stone. This building activity continued well into the seventeenth century and ended with the foundation of Leopoldov in 1665 by Emperor Leopold I, which was closely modeled after Palma Nuova in Northern Italy. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, the medieval castles no longer fulfilled the demands of military technique and, as the danger of further Turkish invasions ceased, their owners abandoned them to live in more comfortable quarters. Palaces replaced citadels. A few of the old castles were refashioned and to this day remain habitable. One of the largest and most interesting of the latter is at Bojnice which has no less than 218 halls and rooms, is encircled by wide moats, and has several massive, lofty towers. Near the Danube river, marking the southern border of Slovakia during the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, were the Ostrihom and Vysehrad castles which belonged to Slovakia even though situated on the right bank of the Danube. There were many fortresses along the Vah river, such as: ~intava, which guarded the passage across the Vah and which was later destroyed ; Hlohovec, which towers over the gorge that connects the Vah region with the Nitra country; and farther to the north, the castles Bana (today "Vesele' near Piesfany) , Beckov and Trencin. On the Nitra-Turiec frontier toward the extensive Vysehrad Castle which lost its importance in the 13th century, Tekov Castle was in the southern part of Slovakia, in the 62 SLOVAKIA Hron country, and Hont Castle was in the Ipel valley. The Budinec Castle was built on the northern slope of Mount Matra, and the Gerner Castle stood near the Bodrog river. In addition to these more significant castles of the 10-12th centuries, there were many other strongholds in Slovakia which provided protection and shelter for the people and their livestock in times of danger. As to the number and picturesquene ss of ruins, the Vah river compares favorably to the Rhine. The setting is possibly even more romantic and cer tainly more primitive. Many of the ruins are flanked by dense forests. There are some thirty of them, built mostly upon steep crags over looking the river. In the Middle Ages they were quite impregnable. Standing aloof from human habitations of today, their very isolation transports the visitor in spirit to bygone centuries of armored knights and robber barons, to the years when royal authority was rather difficult to enforce. The owner was truly lord over the land which his eye could survey. The mightiest and most accessible of the citadels on the Vah is at Trencin. Between the years 1301-1321 it was the residence of the famous Matthew Cak, "lord of Vah and of the Tatras, " who possessed more than thirty castles in different parts of the land. King Charles Robert of Hungary besieged him in vain. The only time the stronghold fell before an enemy was in 1528 after a month's arduous siege. The large stone cannon balls from this siege are still visible in the walls of the ruined castle. In 1663 the Turks and in 1704 Francis Rakoczy II tried to capture it, but failed. Fire reduced it to ruins in 1790. The most extensive ruins in Slovakia is Spis Hrad, situated in the Spis region. Built of white limestone, it glistens six hundred feet above the sur rounding landscape. It is huge, having no less than five large courtyards and 135 halls and rooms. The lookout tower has four stories. The walls are ten feet thick and reach an altitude of seventy feet. It is also one of the oldest castles in Slovakia, being mentioned already in the year 1120. It was abandoned in 1710 and devastated by fire in 1780. Undoubtedly the most memorable of the ruins of Slo- SLOVAKIA 63 vakia is magnificent Devin, situated not far from Bratislava, some five miles towards Vienna. Devin is unique. It is unlike anything else to be seen in Europe. A romantic complex of ruins loom some 240 feet above the confluence of the Danube and Morava rivers, right on the frontier between Slovakia and Austria. Here end the Carpathians, and across the Danube commence the Alps. The view from Devin is exquisitely beautiful. Regardless of season and weather it rewards the visitor with a vista which penetrates the soul. Towards sunrise you behold the majestic Danube flowing swiftly towards the Black Sea. Along its left bank are hills adorned with deciduous forests, and on the slopes, exposed to the southern sun, are vineyards, small and quiltlike, as are the fields on the more level opposite side of the stream. Also there are forests, restful to gaze upon, which ascend hills, the outposts of the Alps. During the first two centuries of our era Devin served as an outpost of the Roman Empire against the turbulent Marcomanni and Quadi, Germanic tribes living north of the Danube. It was fortified by the fourteenth legion. With the advent of the Slovaks about the sixth century, the place received its present appellation, named probably after the national godess "Deva" (girl, maiden). It became a refuge from the ruthless Uralo-Altaic Avars who held to the plains and to the swamps. As the Slovaks became united and powerful, it became one of the principal centers. It was here that King Louis the German besieged the Slovak Rastislav, ruler of the Great Moravian realm, without avail in the year 864. Right beneath the ruins lies the town of Devin, exetic and appealing, where life is placid, more like the gently flowing Morava than the more energetic Danube. Towards sunset you see the fertile plains of Austria, park-like scenery with villages and an occasional manor set in woods and fields. You see the Danube approaching, undulating, and forming many wooded islets. Across the Danube to the south you behold the Austrian town of Hainburg nestled beneath the ruins of the historic fortress of Altenburg, the Carnuntum of the Romans, headquarters of one of their legions. Finally, on the horizon to the southwest, the real Alps meet your avid gaze. Looking about upon the wonder- 64 SLOVAKIA ful panorama, you forget the woes and worries of everyday life and for the moment become a poet to whom the world is a paradise. Great Moravia, divided and embroiled, collapsed in 906 before the savage onrush of the Magyar horsemen. Devin, however, remained in the hands of the Slovaks well into the eleventh century. In 1683 it successfully withstood a siege by the Turks. The destruction of the castle was due to Napoleon who, in 1809, ordered it to be razed. Despite the fact that of the once mighty stone castle only two medieval towers and a few walls have been preserved, the ruins, nevertheless, present a majestic appearance. That which remains is stately and imposing. The site of Devin is truly immense. Its expanse is large enough for a dozen ordinary castles or fortresses. That, as well as its incomparable location, gives it majesty. The places where there were once lofty walls and wide moats can still be clearly distinguished. Devin is prehistoric as well as historic ground. Man was here long before the commencement of the Christian era. Bits of pottery from the Hallstatt period and remains of abodes from the second La Tene period have been unearthed by archeologists, who have been carrying on extensive excavations since 1923. The future is likely to further extend the past. For untold centuries it was strategically the most vital point of Central Europe. In its immediate vicinity were fought the battles which determined the fate of the heart of the continent. (To be continued) "The Deliverance of Sister Cecilia" - Farrar, Straus and Young, 360 pgs., $3.75. - The book tells the story of a Slovak nun who helped many Slovaks escape from their Communist-domin ated land to the west and then had to flee for her life herself, when the Reds learned about her activity. Sister Cecilia told her story to William Brinkley, assistant editor of LIFE magazine, who then wrote the book. Read this exciting book. Order your copy from SLOVAKIA.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The History of Slovakia (5/9) Description An account of the resource Philip A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), March 1958 pp. 60-64 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 Relation A related resource continued from <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/229">Vol. 7, No. 3-4 (24-25), pp. 88-96</a><br />continues in <a href="https://slovakia.omeka.net/items/show/271">Vol. 8, No. 2 (27), pp. 56-64</a> LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/cd6fdeb7bf9c1e701006882fa9be89ea.pdf f0212d8b7ed16139def8efddc82bb212 PDF Text Text 46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During �SLOVAKIA 47 the First World War Western Democracies actually gave it physical support so that it could achieve partially the fulfillment of its ambitions. In the words of Don Luigi Sturza: "Once a country or a people has succeeded in developing a consciousness of its own personality and in affirming it in the struggles with which history has confronted it, there is no stopping."(!) Dissatisfied with only a partial fulfillment of its political ambitions, Slovak nationalism is endeavoring at the present time to attain the final goal sought by every nationalism, that is, complete national independence in its own state. Generally, under the term of nationalism fall most present political efforts that seek to alter the existing status quo which was formed in past centuries by great powers and the maintaining of which occupies their chief interests. The modern nationalistic movements seem to be governed more by sentiment than by realism in their outlook with regard to geographical, economic and strategic setups. From the standpoint of economy, they aim at breaking up time-tested, unified wholes and to form instead economically and strategically isolated inactive groups that easily succumb to one or another imperialism. The characteristic quality of these modern nationalistic movements is revolutionism. Under this term we must consider not only the violence that is perpetrated in the struggle for liberation, but above all the effort exerted to establish society upon new foundations. Such an arrangement cannot be realized in the present because its formation is always dependent upon a temporal and historical evolution. It is, however, difficult to condemn nationalistic movements from the standpoint of being guided more by sentiment than by realism. They are emotional only because they are striving to undo what we hold as sacred, accepted forms of the past; or they are realistic in that they endeavor to fulfill the modern principle of freedom and equality not only in the case of individuals, but also in the case of the organized groups that we call nations. �48 SLOVAKIA 2. Nature of Modern Nationalism Modern nationalism is very difficult to define precisely because its concept is not fixed and varies in scope and meaning. Nationalism is what the nationalists have made it; it is not a neat fixed concept, but a varying combination of beliefs and conditions. It may be in part founded on myth, but myths, like other errors, have a way of perpetuating themselves and of becoming not true but real. The fact is that myth and actuality, and truth and error, are inextricably intermixed in modern nationalism.. The only reasonable way to get at the nature of nationalism is to determine what beliefs - however true or false - and what conditions - however misinterpreted - are commonly present. The following ten are here hypothetically advanced. No claim is laid for their infallibility or finality. 1. A certain defined (often vaguely) unit of territory (whether possessed or coveted). 2. Some common cultural characteristics, such as language (or widely understood languages), customs, manners, and literature (folk tales and lore are the beginning). If an individual believes he shares these, and wishes to continue sharing them, he is usually said to be a member of the nationality. 3. Some common dominant social (as Christian) and economic (as capitalistic or recently communistic) institutions. 4. A common independent or sovereign government (type does not matter) or the desire for one. The "principle" that each nationality should be separate and independent is involved here. 5. A belief in a common history (it can be invented) and in a common origin (often mistakingly conceived to be racial in nature). 6. A love or esteem for fellow nationals (not necessarily as individuals). 7. A devotion to the entity (however little comprehended) called the nation, which embodies the common territory, culture, social and economic institutions, government, and fellow nationals, and which is at the same time (whether organism or not) more than their sum. 8. A common pride in the achievements (often military more than cultural) of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies (particularly its defeats). 9. A disregard for the hostility to other (not necessarily all) like groups, especially if these prevent or seem to threaten the separate national existence. 10. A hope that the nation will have a great and glorious future (usually in teritorial expansion) and become supreme in some way (in world power if the nation is already large) (2). Applying to the Slovaks, these ten characteristic points upon which all modern nationalisms are supposed to be based, we arrive at the conclusion that Slovak nationalism is based upon : �SLOVAKIA 49 1. a certain defined territory; 2. its own language and culture; 3. the Christian foundation of its society; 4. the "principle" that Slovaks must live in their own independent state; 5. the knowledge of its own long history; 6. a love for fellow nationals; 7. a devotion to their territory, 8. more upon a common sorrow for national tragedy than pride in national achievements; 9. a certain hostility to those who have attempted, or are attempting, to enslave the Slovak people; 10. a hope that the nation will be glorious, but definitely not an ambition to make Slovakia a decisive world power. 8. Geographical and Historical Suppositions of Slovak Nationalism The territory occupied by the Slovaks lies in the heart of Europe. Although Slovakia is a small country, it is, nevertheless, larger in area than Albania, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Holland, or Switzerland. Slovakia today comprises an area of 48,957 square kilometers, or 22,500 square miles, and approximates the size of Belgium and Holland combined, or the size of West Virginia in the U. S. A. Its present population is 3,800,000. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slovak historian, has described the political significance of the geographical position of Slovakia in the following words: "Slovakia lies along the northern shores of the Central Danube, where the eastern slopes of the Alps touch the western slopes of the Carpathian mountains, and its territory covers the northern part of the Danubian basin. Since the dawn of European history, a route has run through the gate of the Danube, connecting the West and the East. This important route was intersected at this very point by several routes which ran from south to north and linked the coasts of the Adriatic with those of the Baltic and North Seas. From earliest times, nations seeking new homelands have flowed over these routes which intersect along the Danube. Through the portals of the Danube marched aggressive conquerors, and the soil of this land frequently served as the stage for bloody conflicts. The nation which settled in such a bustling spot experienced little peace, continually having to defend itself to keep from being swept away by the raging �50 SLOVAKIA storms. In defending its life its strength was exhausted and hence could not grow and develop as it might have in a peaceful atmosphere where the catastrophe is not always imminent . . . When, at the end of the 4th Century, the Romans had to withdraw from the Danube, and when, subsequently, the German tribes also left that territory, the Slavs flooded Central Europe from the Baltic Sea to the Balkans" (3). Since the sixth century, therefore, the territory of Slovakia has been the homeland of the Slovaks and their forefathers. During the first two centuries the Slav (Slovanic) tribes, whose descendants are the present-day Slovaks, did not enjoy an independent life. For from the sixth to the eighth century, the entire central European sector suffered under the dominating sway of warring Avars who carried on attacks upon Western Europe. At the end of the eighth century, however, Charlemagne successfully destroyed the power of the Avar Empire. This victory enabled the tribes of the Slovanic races to begin efforts at unification and soon to establish the Greater Moravian Empire. This era then saw the definite beginning and unfolding of the history of the Slovaks, although most of the Slavs can trace from it the partial origins, if not of their political, at least of their cultural life. The brief but exceedingly rich history of the Greater Moravian Empire is a source of "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies"(4) for Slovak nationalism. Without a doubt, it would be difficult to prove that during the existence of the Greater Moravian Empire the Slovaks constituted an element independent and separate from the other Slav (Slovanic) races. They constituted a part of the Slav races who, during the migration of nations, crossed the Carpathian boundaries and settled in the valley of the Danube and Moravian rivers. Furthermore, no clearly defined boundaries of Greater Moravia existed. Nevertheless, we know that it covered a large part of the territory surrounding the Carpathian mountains. In this sector the interests of the Western Franks met with the interests of the Byzantine Empire. The empire of Great Moravia was located in the territories of present-day Slovakia and Moravia, which were inhabited at that time by �SLOVAKIA 51 the predecessors of the Slovaks, with the Czechs settling in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. The first documentary evidence of Great Moravia dates from the year 822. In that year a parliamentary gathering took place at Frankfurt-on-the-Main, which included representatives of Great Moravia. The leaders of Great Moravia had to maintain constant vigilance against the frequent attacks of the Franks who, under the guise of spreading Christianity, sought to make vassals of the Great Moravian rulers(5). For a time the inhabitants of Great Moravia were successful. But to the danger which threatened them from the part of the Franks was soon added the danger of harrassing Magyar nomads of Mongolian origin, who had then begun to make inroads into Central Europe. After many bitter and wearisome struggles they finally succumbed either in the year 906 or 908. Though short-lived, the Great Moravia's eventful life proved itself an inexhaustible source of heroic material for the poets of the budding Slovak nationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries. Faithful to the mythical tendencies of Romanticism and Pan-Slavism, Slovak authors exploited successfully Great Moravia's hidden past and thus created in the almost extinct group of Slovak people a feeling of greatness and national pride. Slovakia was made by them the cradle of all Slav (Slovanic) cultures and the Slovaks the leading Slav nation in the conversion of the other Slavs from backward paganism to the higher cultural life of Christianity. These conclusions were reached on the ground of two testimonials which, even at the present time, bear witness of Great Moravia's cultural role and political importance for the Slovanic nations. These testimonials are : a church built in 830 A.D., and the Slovanic liturgy with its Cyrillic alphabet. They represented two different tendencies that play a big role in Great Moravia's politics on account of her vital position between the German Franks and . the Byzantines, respectively between the Latin and Eastern (Greek) form of Christianity. The little church in the Slovak city of Nitra, portions of whose walls are still preserved in the foundations of the �52 SLOVAKIA Cathedral church, is a testimonal of German influence and of the Latin trend in the Great Moravian era. It was built by Pribina - one of the first known ru• lers on Slovak soil who chose Nitra as the seat of govern• ment - and blessed by Adalram, the Archbishop of Salzburg, in the year 833(6). From this fact it is evident that Pribina brought with him the Germanic influence which he absorbed under the rulers of the Frankish Empire. For Slovak nationalism, however, this church is an historical mdication of the bent of the forefathers of Slovakia to Western culture, so clearly manifested in the Latin form of Christianity. The culture-religious testimonial, linking Great Moravia with the present, is the Slovanic liturgy still faithfully followed in Orthodox churches and the Greek Catholic churches of the Eastern Rite. The alphabet of the Russians and other Slavs also has its origin in Great Moravia. Not all the rulers favored Germanic influences as freely and sympathetically as Pribina. Rather they opposed them because of their desire to preserve as great an independence as possible. This opposition led at first to internal dissensions and later manifested itself in sincere efforts to find means of christianizing the Slovak and other Slovanic tribes of Great Moravia other than that of Frankish missionaries. During the internal upheaval Mojmir replaced Pribina. The defeat and departure of Pribina signifies the removal of Frankish influence and a broader unification of all Slovak and other Slovanic tribes under one ruler. The rulers of the Franks, however, always used the matter of Christianizing the Slavs as an excuse to meddle in the internal affairs of Great Moravia. The rulers of Great Moravia were therefore left with but one choice: to seek out such means of christianizing their subjects which would enable them to restrain every occasion of the Frankish Empire to circumscribe Slovak independence and subject the people to vassalage. This was the aim of Rastislav, Mojmir's successor, when he turned to the Byzantine Emperor Michael Ill - according to a preserved legend - with a request to send a bishop and teacher, who would enlighten and instruct his �SLOVAKIA 53 people in the true faith and in their own tongue"(7). Emperor Michael III must have realized the political implications of Rastislav's request, for he sent at once, in the year 863, to Great Moravia two of his most worthy and learned men - the Saints Cyril and Methodius who are honored today not only as Slovak Apostles, but also as "Apostles of the Slavs." Though Saints Cyri land Methodius were Greeks, they nevertheless understood the language of the Slovaks. They began their missionary labors by introducing a new adphabet and by translating the Bible and other religious books into the language of the people. Thus, through their efforts, was founded the Slovanic liturgy. Frankish bishops, however, saw in these innovations an opportune occasion to cause discord, for at this time divisions appeared which eventually ended in schism and divided the people into two camps, namely, the western and eastern forms of Christianity. Saints Cyril and Methodius desired to safeguard their methods of christianization in the eyes of Rome and obtained permission from the Pope to conduct the liturgy in Slovanic. But the political pressure of the Franks upon Great Moravia steadily grew stronger and stronger. It sapped the strength of the Slovak rulers and succeeded in bringing about the catastrophe of 906, i.e., the downfall of Great Moravia. The missionary labors of Saints Cyril and Methodius in the central European sphere of activity came to an end. Their pupils wended their way to the Balkans and lived among the Bulgarians and other Slovanic races, who eventually became the heirs of that cultural seed first sown in the confines of present-day Slovakia. With the downfall of Great Moravia, new states gradually began to take form in Central Europe, namely, the Czech, Polish, and Hungarian. For a thousand years this well-established portion of Great Moravia became a part of Hungarian rule. When, however, new ideas in the far distant future offer new opportunities for organizing a society, Great Moravia once again comes to life in the minds of its present generations, and becomes for the Slovaks the source of their "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its �54 SLOVAKIA tragedies"(8). The brief but very dramatic events of Great Moravia play a very important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism: they give it an historical substance for its ambitions to statehood an doffer countless historical examples of past heroism as an incentive in its present attempts to acrieve these ambitions. The link between Great Moravia and present-day Slovak nationalism is more emotional than real, for the end of Great Moravia meant the end of its cultural and political influence within the area of Central Europe which is today called Slovakia. The Slovanic race residing at that time on the territory of what is iow Slovakia, the forefathers of the Slovaks, definitely came under the sphere of influence of Latin Christianity and politically became a part of the Hungarian State. That they were not wholly absorbed by the Magyars during the many centuries of their life in the Hungarian State can be attributed only to the cosmopolitan character of the Hungarian State and to the use of Latin as the official language in governmental and educational systems. The concepts "nation" and "nationality," as we know them today, probably did not exist at all at that time, and were certainly entirely different from the concept "state." 4. New Concepts: "People" and "Nation" The origin of modern Slovak nationalism, as well as of all nationalism in Central Europe, must be determined from that period when, under the influence of the Enlightenment, great masses of hitherto enslaved peoples began to be aware of their distinctive group characteristics. Medieval, feudal society itself felt that the end was near for its outmoded social system and clamored for reform. These reforms were to better the conditions and status of the "people" so that they could ascend the European political stage as new and revolutionary actors. As decisive political actors, these "people" first appeared in the American Revolution, where they laid the foundations of American democracy as opposed to European aristocracy and its autocratic form of government. A further and more radically revolutionary appearance of these actors occurred �SLOVAKIA 55 in the French Revolution which shook the foundations not only of France but of all Europe. Thanks to the military genius of Napoleon, the battlecry of these new revolutionary "people" flooded all of Europe with his soldiers. In the political millieu of the Slovaks, under the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, the revolutionary "people" obtained certain rights emanating from the drastic reforms inaugurated by the emperor of "Enlightenment," Joseph II. Although the greater portion of these reforms had to be repealed because of the opposition of the yet powerful upper class, nevertheless much agitation and reaction ensued with the result that this empire found itself embroiled in a revolutionary cauldron - the presentiment of its eventual downfall. In the language of the thinkers of the Enlightenment the concept "people" primarily denoted the social class of the poor as distinct from the class of aristocrats. It brought about revolutions of the poor against the rich, respectively of the underprivileged against the privileged. In this conflict, however, the established boundaries of the medieval states were not affected. When subsequently the German Romantic philosophers came to emphasize the importance of common history, language and culture, the cosmopolitan medieval European society started to split also along the new line of ethnographical groups, called nations. The result of it was that the long time established boundaries of the European states started to crack under the constant efforts of the ethnographical groups to emancipate themselves from the subjection of the other ethnographic groups that might have been predominating in their original states. In the case of "people" there was much more concern over the freedom of the individual, whereas in the case of "nation" the struggle for the freedom of the groups, called nations, is uppermost. In those places where language boundaries were consonant with the boundaries of the state, the concept "nation"(9), based upon a kinship of language, produced a greater national unity. Such was the situation in France and Germany. A homogeneous language produced among the Germans a strong feeling of fellowship and led to the unification of the Germans into a solid German state �56 SLOVAKIA under the leadership of Prussia. In the Austro-Hungarian Empire, however, the language question became the root of great discord and shook the foundations of this mighty territory. The many nationalities under its sway, after asserting their individuality, began to demand their own rights and, abetted by Western Democracies, brought Austro-Hungary to complete dissolution. This period of increasing European ferment brought forth also from the Slovaks their assertion for national independence from the other components of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, particularly from the Magyars. As the other nations under Austro-Hungarian domination, so too the Slovaks codified their national language and began to search for historical, ideological, and cultural evidence that would express their national individuality. At first this national reawakening bore the markings of Pan-Slavism, whereby the Slovaks sought to establish Slovakia as the cradle of all the Slovanic nations. Memories of Great Moravia played an important role in this regard, for in the minds of Pan-Slavism this empire was the first political manifestation of Slovaks as well as the other Slavs. PanSlavism was supported more by Slovak Lutherans rather than Catholics. The reason is that many Slovak Lutherans received their education in Germany where they had the opportunity of becoming acquainted with Hegelian philosophy, which laid a mystical foundation for the nation state on a high phi•losophical plane where God, the world-spirit, reason, nature, and history intermingled and became one. In the profound and seldom clear introductions to his Philosophy of Right and Philosophy of History he proclaimed that each people was imbued with a world force endowing it with peculiar spirit and special purpose, and that the state was the final embodiment of dialectic evolution flowing out of the historical experience and genius of a people (10). Basing himself on the philosopphical premises of Hegel, Herder came to the conclusion that the Roman and German nations had fulfilled their historical mission and that the future will belong to the Slovanic peoples. Because of their dove-like character, they will bring to the world a period of peace and gentleness. These claims were in complete opposition to historical facts, but as myths they were �SLOVAKIA 57 instrumental in g1vmg birth to a special heroic Pan-Slavistic literature. By exalting the mythological past of Slovanic nations this literature gave rise to national pride. On the other hand, the realistic politics in which the Slovaks had to engage in order to safeguard themselves from the Magyarizing efforts of the rulers of the Hungarian State, led them gradually to abandon the utopian idea of Pan-Slavism and to assert instead their distinct national individuality. From 1860 to the end of the First World War, they had to undergo a period of severe trials at the hands of the Magyars, who attempted to accomplish in a few decades what they had failed to attain in centuries, that is, the assimilation of non-Magyar nations in Hungary. It is difficult to say whether they could have succeeded in this venture, because the First World War disrupted their attempts. The Slovaks, as well as the other nations in Austro-Hunga ry, found themselves in new political circumstances, and gained more favorable opportunities to develop their distinct national traits. 5. Progress of Slovak Nationalism After the First World War The dissolution of the Austro-Hung arian Monarchy after the First World War opened up a great opportunity for the development of Slovak national sentiment. Slovakia was taken away from the Magyars. With its inclusion in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Slovakia for the first time in history obtained defined boundaries. The importance of this historical step cannot be minimized, for Slovak nationalism began to lean upon a certain well defined territory. The separation of the Slovaks from the Magyars broke also the tie binding the former to their feudal order and opened up opportunities for the near revolutionary development of a new democratic, Slovak society within the confines of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Through the medium of schools, the Magyar attempt to assimilate the Slovaks was halted. In the Czecho-Slovak Republic the national Slovak language became the language not only of the people but also of the schools and official business. Thus, for the first time in history, opportunities arose for the formation of a distinct �58 SLOVAKIA Slovak culture, even though the centralizing efforts of the new Czecho-Slovak state, dominated by the Czechs, were opposed to such a development. Although at the present time the vast majority of the Slovaks bears an unfriendly attitude toward inclusion in any form of Czecho-Slovakia, whether it be communist or democratic, it is self-evident that such was not the case during the First World War. Then the Slovaks accepted warm-hearted ly and hopefully the creation of Czecho-Slovakia, for together with the Czechs they possessed a mutual kinship of language and culture as well as similar political ambitions. The present unfavorable attitude toward the Czechs is attributed to the failure of Czechs to fulfill their promises and agreements, that is, the failure to grant autonomy to Slovakia and the refusal to concede to the Slovaks ethnical and racial rights belonging to them as a distinct nation. Instead, the Czech majority in the Prague parliament decided to form the so-called "Czechoslovak" nation by law, i.e., by maens of the Czechoslovak constitution, whereby the Slovaks in practice were identified racially with the Czechs, and Slovakia was made completely dependent upon the central government in Prague. Such an action was looked upon in Slovakia as a secret move to assimilate the Slovaks with the Czechs, and thus to deprive the Slovaks of their national individuality. Therefore, imediately after the creation of Czecho-Slovakia following the First World War, there arose in Slovakia a powerful movement for autonomy. This movement, warring against the concept "Czechoslovak nation" and the centralism based upon it, presents a new phase in the development of Slovak nationalism in the new and more favorable conditions of the Czechoslovak Republic. Even though this movement never had a clear majority of the Slovaks, but "this," as Mr. C. A. Macartney rightly points out, "does not necessarily mean that the majority of the Slovaks were in favor of a centralized Czechoslovak Republic. The elections were not fought on the issue of Autonomy versus Centralism, and material advantages were to be gained by voting for the Czechoslovak parties, especially for the always inoffice Agrarians. In fact, apart for the small and cultured Lutheran minority, most Slovaks who voted for the democratic Czechoslovak parties were probably opportunists. Those who felt most strongly were usually Autonomists or Communists" (11. ) �SLOVAKIA 59 Little wonder, therefore, that the majority of Slovaks displayed no sorrow at Hitler's overthrow of Czecho-Slovakia and accepted joyfully the idea of establishing a separate Slovak state, even though it was widely felt that the conditions for beginning a seprate existence during the revolutionary period of 1938-1939 were not very favorable. The existence of the Slovak Republic during the Second World War may appear to outside observers as the operation of those political elements is widely known as fascism, actually, however, the short-lived existence of the Slovak Republic indicates the final phase of the development of Slovak nationalism: the achieving of its own statehood. In spite of the situations in which the Slovaks have become involved since the last war, their efforts both in the free Western World and in Slovakia are concentrated as they never were before to restore independence to their country. (1) Nationalism and Internationalism, New York, 1946; p. 16. (2) Boyd C. Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality, New York, Harcourt, Brace Company, 1954, pp. 7-8. (3) This is Slovakia: Obrana Press, Scranton, 1955; pp. 2-6. (4) Shafer: op. cit.; p. 7. (5) Dr. Frantisek Bokes: Dejiny Slovenska a Slovakov, Bratislava, 1940; p. 31. (6) Bokes: op. cit., p. 33. (7) Dr. Uudovit Zachar: Borba za narodnu slobodu, Bratislava, 1931; p. 220. (8) Shafer: op. cit.; p . 7. (9) The reader should be reminded that the author of this treatise uses always the word "nation" to indicate an ethnographic group and not a nation-state. (10) Boyd Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality; p. 25. (11) Seton Watson: Eastern Europe Between the Wars 1918-1941, London, Hutchinson Co. , 1945; pp. 176-177 . • • • WHO SAID IT? ''Consemralive Catholic politics has no place in the twentieth century, noc can it exist in the proximity of the lJlSS!R. Politics of provocation is no positive politics. Denunciation of Comm unism, often supported by the shibboleth "For God and Country," can no longer be accepted even in view of the dem()ICratic evolution Olf the Slovak nation." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, DNESEK, 11-20-47). � 46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During �SLOVAKIA 47 the First World War Western Democracies actually gave it physical support so that it could achieve partially the fulfillment of its ambitions. In the words of Don Luigi Sturza: "Once a country or a people has succeeded in developing a consciousness of its own personality and in affirming it in the struggles with which history has confronted it, there is no stopping."(!) Dissatisfied with only a partial fulfillment of its political ambitions, Slovak nationalism is endeavoring at the present time to attain the final goal sought by every nationalism, that is, complete national independence in its own state. Generally, under the term of nationalism fall most present political efforts that seek to alter the existing status quo which was formed in past centuries by great powers and the maintaining of which occupies their chief interests. The modern nationalistic movements seem to be governed more by sentiment than by realism in their outlook with regard to geographical, economic and strategic setups. From the standpoint of economy, they aim at breaking up time-tested, unified wholes and to form instead economically and strategically isolated inactive groups that easily succumb to one or another imperialism. The characteristic quality of these modern nationalistic movements is revolutionism. Under this term we must consider not only the violence that is perpetrated in the struggle for liberation, but above all the effort exerted to establish society upon new foundations. Such an arrangement cannot be realized in the present because its formation is always dependent upon a temporal and historical evolution. It is, however, difficult to condemn nationalistic movements from the standpoint of being guided more by sentiment than by realism. They are emotional only because they are striving to undo what we hold as sacred, accepted forms of the past; or they are realistic in that they endeavor to fulfill the modern principle of freedom and equality not only in the case of individuals, but also in the case of the organized groups that we call nations. �48 SLOVAKIA 2. Nature of Modern Nationalism Modern nationalism is very difficult to define precisely because its concept is not fixed and varies in scope and meaning. Nationalism is what the nationalists have made it; it is not a neat fixed concept, but a varying combination of beliefs and conditions. It may be in part founded on myth, but myths, like other errors, have a way of perpetuating themselves and of becoming not true but real. The fact is that myth and actuality, and truth and error, are inextricably intermixed in modern nationalism.. The only reasonable way to get at the nature of nationalism is to determine what beliefs - however true or false - and what conditions - however misinterpreted - are commonly present. The following ten are here hypothetically advanced. No claim is laid for their infallibility or finality. 1. A certain defined (often vaguely) unit of territory (whether possessed or coveted). 2. Some common cultural characteristics, such as language (or widely understood languages), customs, manners, and literature (folk tales and lore are the beginning). If an individual believes he shares these, and wishes to continue sharing them, he is usually said to be a member of the nationality. 3. Some common dominant social (as Christian) and economic (as capitalistic or recently communistic) institutions. 4. A common independent or sovereign government (type does not matter) or the desire for one. The "principle" that each nationality should be separate and independent is involved here. 5. A belief in a common history (it can be invented) and in a common origin (often mistakingly conceived to be racial in nature). 6. A love or esteem for fellow nationals (not necessarily as individuals). 7. A devotion to the entity (however little comprehended) called the nation, which embodies the common territory, culture, social and economic institutions, government, and fellow nationals, and which is at the same time (whether organism or not) more than their sum. 8. A common pride in the achievements (often military more than cultural) of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies (particularly its defeats). 9. A disregard for the hostility to other (not necessarily all) like groups, especially if these prevent or seem to threaten the separate national existence. 10. A hope that the nation will have a great and glorious future (usually in teritorial expansion) and become supreme in some way (in world power if the nation is already large) (2). Applying to the Slovaks, these ten characteristic points upon which all modern nationalisms are supposed to be based, we arrive at the conclusion that Slovak nationalism is based upon : �SLOVAKIA 49 1. a certain defined territory; 2. its own language and culture; 3. the Christian foundation of its society; 4. the "principle" that Slovaks must live in their own independent state; 5. the knowledge of its own long history; 6. a love for fellow nationals; 7. a devotion to their territory, 8. more upon a common sorrow for national tragedy than pride in national achievements; 9. a certain hostility to those who have attempted, or are attempting, to enslave the Slovak people; 10. a hope that the nation will be glorious, but definitely not an ambition to make Slovakia a decisive world power. 8. Geographical and Historical Suppositions of Slovak Nationalism The territory occupied by the Slovaks lies in the heart of Europe. Although Slovakia is a small country, it is, nevertheless, larger in area than Albania, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Holland, or Switzerland. Slovakia today comprises an area of 48,957 square kilometers, or 22,500 square miles, and approximates the size of Belgium and Holland combined, or the size of West Virginia in the U. S. A. Its present population is 3,800,000. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slovak historian, has described the political significance of the geographical position of Slovakia in the following words: "Slovakia lies along the northern shores of the Central Danube, where the eastern slopes of the Alps touch the western slopes of the Carpathian mountains, and its territory covers the northern part of the Danubian basin. Since the dawn of European history, a route has run through the gate of the Danube, connecting the West and the East. This important route was intersected at this very point by several routes which ran from south to north and linked the coasts of the Adriatic with those of the Baltic and North Seas. From earliest times, nations seeking new homelands have flowed over these routes which intersect along the Danube. Through the portals of the Danube marched aggressive conquerors, and the soil of this land frequently served as the stage for bloody conflicts. The nation which settled in such a bustling spot experienced little peace, continually having to defend itself to keep from being swept away by the raging �50 SLOVAKIA storms. In defending its life its strength was exhausted and hence could not grow and develop as it might have in a peaceful atmosphere where the catastrophe is not always imminent . . . When, at the end of the 4th Century, the Romans had to withdraw from the Danube, and when, subsequently, the German tribes also left that territory, the Slavs flooded Central Europe from the Baltic Sea to the Balkans" (3). Since the sixth century, therefore, the territory of Slovakia has been the homeland of the Slovaks and their forefathers. During the first two centuries the Slav (Slovanic) tribes, whose descendants are the present-day Slovaks, did not enjoy an independent life. For from the sixth to the eighth century, the entire central European sector suffered under the dominating sway of warring Avars who carried on attacks upon Western Europe. At the end of the eighth century, however, Charlemagne successfully destroyed the power of the Avar Empire. This victory enabled the tribes of the Slovanic races to begin efforts at unification and soon to establish the Greater Moravian Empire. This era then saw the definite beginning and unfolding of the history of the Slovaks, although most of the Slavs can trace from it the partial origins, if not of their political, at least of their cultural life. The brief but exceedingly rich history of the Greater Moravian Empire is a source of "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies"(4) for Slovak nationalism. Without a doubt, it would be difficult to prove that during the existence of the Greater Moravian Empire the Slovaks constituted an element independent and separate from the other Slav (Slovanic) races. They constituted a part of the Slav races who, during the migration of nations, crossed the Carpathian boundaries and settled in the valley of the Danube and Moravian rivers. Furthermore, no clearly defined boundaries of Greater Moravia existed. Nevertheless, we know that it covered a large part of the territory surrounding the Carpathian mountains. In this sector the interests of the Western Franks met with the interests of the Byzantine Empire. The empire of Great Moravia was located in the territories of present-day Slovakia and Moravia, which were inhabited at that time by �SLOVAKIA 51 the predecessors of the Slovaks, with the Czechs settling in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. The first documentary evidence of Great Moravia dates from the year 822. In that year a parliamentary gathering took place at Frankfurt-on-the-Main, which included representatives of Great Moravia. The leaders of Great Moravia had to maintain constant vigilance against the frequent attacks of the Franks who, under the guise of spreading Christianity, sought to make vassals of the Great Moravian rulers(5). For a time the inhabitants of Great Moravia were successful. But to the danger which threatened them from the part of the Franks was soon added the danger of harrassing Magyar nomads of Mongolian origin, who had then begun to make inroads into Central Europe. After many bitter and wearisome struggles they finally succumbed either in the year 906 or 908. Though short-lived, the Great Moravia's eventful life proved itself an inexhaustible source of heroic material for the poets of the budding Slovak nationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries. Faithful to the mythical tendencies of Romanticism and Pan-Slavism, Slovak authors exploited successfully Great Moravia's hidden past and thus created in the almost extinct group of Slovak people a feeling of greatness and national pride. Slovakia was made by them the cradle of all Slav (Slovanic) cultures and the Slovaks the leading Slav nation in the conversion of the other Slavs from backward paganism to the higher cultural life of Christianity. These conclusions were reached on the ground of two testimonials which, even at the present time, bear witness of Great Moravia's cultural role and political importance for the Slovanic nations. These testimonials are : a church built in 830 A.D., and the Slovanic liturgy with its Cyrillic alphabet. They represented two different tendencies that play a big role in Great Moravia's politics on account of her vital position between the German Franks and . the Byzantines, respectively between the Latin and Eastern (Greek) form of Christianity. The little church in the Slovak city of Nitra, portions of whose walls are still preserved in the foundations of the �52 SLOVAKIA Cathedral church, is a testimonal of German influence and of the Latin trend in the Great Moravian era. It was built by Pribina - one of the first known ru• lers on Slovak soil who chose Nitra as the seat of govern• ment - and blessed by Adalram, the Archbishop of Salzburg, in the year 833(6). From this fact it is evident that Pribina brought with him the Germanic influence which he absorbed under the rulers of the Frankish Empire. For Slovak nationalism, however, this church is an historical mdication of the bent of the forefathers of Slovakia to Western culture, so clearly manifested in the Latin form of Christianity. The culture-religious testimonial, linking Great Moravia with the present, is the Slovanic liturgy still faithfully followed in Orthodox churches and the Greek Catholic churches of the Eastern Rite. The alphabet of the Russians and other Slavs also has its origin in Great Moravia. Not all the rulers favored Germanic influences as freely and sympathetically as Pribina. Rather they opposed them because of their desire to preserve as great an independence as possible. This opposition led at first to internal dissensions and later manifested itself in sincere efforts to find means of christianizing the Slovak and other Slovanic tribes of Great Moravia other than that of Frankish missionaries. During the internal upheaval Mojmir replaced Pribina. The defeat and departure of Pribina signifies the removal of Frankish influence and a broader unification of all Slovak and other Slovanic tribes under one ruler. The rulers of the Franks, however, always used the matter of Christianizing the Slavs as an excuse to meddle in the internal affairs of Great Moravia. The rulers of Great Moravia were therefore left with but one choice: to seek out such means of christianizing their subjects which would enable them to restrain every occasion of the Frankish Empire to circumscribe Slovak independence and subject the people to vassalage. This was the aim of Rastislav, Mojmir's successor, when he turned to the Byzantine Emperor Michael Ill - according to a preserved legend - with a request to send a bishop and teacher, who would enlighten and instruct his �SLOVAKIA 53 people in the true faith and in their own tongue"(7). Emperor Michael III must have realized the political implications of Rastislav's request, for he sent at once, in the year 863, to Great Moravia two of his most worthy and learned men - the Saints Cyril and Methodius who are honored today not only as Slovak Apostles, but also as "Apostles of the Slavs." Though Saints Cyri land Methodius were Greeks, they nevertheless understood the language of the Slovaks. They began their missionary labors by introducing a new adphabet and by translating the Bible and other religious books into the language of the people. Thus, through their efforts, was founded the Slovanic liturgy. Frankish bishops, however, saw in these innovations an opportune occasion to cause discord, for at this time divisions appeared which eventually ended in schism and divided the people into two camps, namely, the western and eastern forms of Christianity. Saints Cyril and Methodius desired to safeguard their methods of christianization in the eyes of Rome and obtained permission from the Pope to conduct the liturgy in Slovanic. But the political pressure of the Franks upon Great Moravia steadily grew stronger and stronger. It sapped the strength of the Slovak rulers and succeeded in bringing about the catastrophe of 906, i.e., the downfall of Great Moravia. The missionary labors of Saints Cyril and Methodius in the central European sphere of activity came to an end. Their pupils wended their way to the Balkans and lived among the Bulgarians and other Slovanic races, who eventually became the heirs of that cultural seed first sown in the confines of present-day Slovakia. With the downfall of Great Moravia, new states gradually began to take form in Central Europe, namely, the Czech, Polish, and Hungarian. For a thousand years this well-established portion of Great Moravia became a part of Hungarian rule. When, however, new ideas in the far distant future offer new opportunities for organizing a society, Great Moravia once again comes to life in the minds of its present generations, and becomes for the Slovaks the source of their "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its �54 SLOVAKIA tragedies"(8). The brief but very dramatic events of Great Moravia play a very important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism: they give it an historical substance for its ambitions to statehood an doffer countless historical examples of past heroism as an incentive in its present attempts to acrieve these ambitions. The link between Great Moravia and present-day Slovak nationalism is more emotional than real, for the end of Great Moravia meant the end of its cultural and political influence within the area of Central Europe which is today called Slovakia. The Slovanic race residing at that time on the territory of what is iow Slovakia, the forefathers of the Slovaks, definitely came under the sphere of influence of Latin Christianity and politically became a part of the Hungarian State. That they were not wholly absorbed by the Magyars during the many centuries of their life in the Hungarian State can be attributed only to the cosmopolitan character of the Hungarian State and to the use of Latin as the official language in governmental and educational systems. The concepts "nation" and "nationality," as we know them today, probably did not exist at all at that time, and were certainly entirely different from the concept "state." 4. New Concepts: "People" and "Nation" The origin of modern Slovak nationalism, as well as of all nationalism in Central Europe, must be determined from that period when, under the influence of the Enlightenment, great masses of hitherto enslaved peoples began to be aware of their distinctive group characteristics. Medieval, feudal society itself felt that the end was near for its outmoded social system and clamored for reform. These reforms were to better the conditions and status of the "people" so that they could ascend the European political stage as new and revolutionary actors. As decisive political actors, these "people" first appeared in the American Revolution, where they laid the foundations of American democracy as opposed to European aristocracy and its autocratic form of government. A further and more radically revolutionary appearance of these actors occurred �SLOVAKIA 55 in the French Revolution which shook the foundations not only of France but of all Europe. Thanks to the military genius of Napoleon, the battlecry of these new revolutionary "people" flooded all of Europe with his soldiers. In the political millieu of the Slovaks, under the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, the revolutionary "people" obtained certain rights emanating from the drastic reforms inaugurated by the emperor of "Enlightenment," Joseph II. Although the greater portion of these reforms had to be repealed because of the opposition of the yet powerful upper class, nevertheless much agitation and reaction ensued with the result that this empire found itself embroiled in a revolutionary cauldron - the presentiment of its eventual downfall. In the language of the thinkers of the Enlightenment the concept "people" primarily denoted the social class of the poor as distinct from the class of aristocrats. It brought about revolutions of the poor against the rich, respectively of the underprivileged against the privileged. In this conflict, however, the established boundaries of the medieval states were not affected. When subsequently the German Romantic philosophers came to emphasize the importance of common history, language and culture, the cosmopolitan medieval European society started to split also along the new line of ethnographical groups, called nations. The result of it was that the long time established boundaries of the European states started to crack under the constant efforts of the ethnographical groups to emancipate themselves from the subjection of the other ethnographic groups that might have been predominating in their original states. In the case of "people" there was much more concern over the freedom of the individual, whereas in the case of "nation" the struggle for the freedom of the groups, called nations, is uppermost. In those places where language boundaries were consonant with the boundaries of the state, the concept "nation"(9), based upon a kinship of language, produced a greater national unity. Such was the situation in France and Germany. A homogeneous language produced among the Germans a strong feeling of fellowship and led to the unification of the Germans into a solid German state �56 SLOVAKIA under the leadership of Prussia. In the Austro-Hungarian Empire, however, the language question became the root of great discord and shook the foundations of this mighty territory. The many nationalities under its sway, after asserting their individuality, began to demand their own rights and, abetted by Western Democracies, brought Austro-Hungary to complete dissolution. This period of increasing European ferment brought forth also from the Slovaks their assertion for national independence from the other components of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, particularly from the Magyars. As the other nations under Austro-Hungarian domination, so too the Slovaks codified their national language and began to search for historical, ideological, and cultural evidence that would express their national individuality. At first this national reawakening bore the markings of Pan-Slavism, whereby the Slovaks sought to establish Slovakia as the cradle of all the Slovanic nations. Memories of Great Moravia played an important role in this regard, for in the minds of Pan-Slavism this empire was the first political manifestation of Slovaks as well as the other Slavs. PanSlavism was supported more by Slovak Lutherans rather than Catholics. The reason is that many Slovak Lutherans received their education in Germany where they had the opportunity of becoming acquainted with Hegelian philosophy, which laid a mystical foundation for the nation state on a high phi•losophical plane where God, the world-spirit, reason, nature, and history intermingled and became one. In the profound and seldom clear introductions to his Philosophy of Right and Philosophy of History he proclaimed that each people was imbued with a world force endowing it with peculiar spirit and special purpose, and that the state was the final embodiment of dialectic evolution flowing out of the historical experience and genius of a people (10). Basing himself on the philosopphical premises of Hegel, Herder came to the conclusion that the Roman and German nations had fulfilled their historical mission and that the future will belong to the Slovanic peoples. Because of their dove-like character, they will bring to the world a period of peace and gentleness. These claims were in complete opposition to historical facts, but as myths they were �SLOVAKIA 57 instrumental in g1vmg birth to a special heroic Pan-Slavistic literature. By exalting the mythological past of Slovanic nations this literature gave rise to national pride. On the other hand, the realistic politics in which the Slovaks had to engage in order to safeguard themselves from the Magyarizing efforts of the rulers of the Hungarian State, led them gradually to abandon the utopian idea of Pan-Slavism and to assert instead their distinct national individuality. From 1860 to the end of the First World War, they had to undergo a period of severe trials at the hands of the Magyars, who attempted to accomplish in a few decades what they had failed to attain in centuries, that is, the assimilation of non-Magyar nations in Hungary. It is difficult to say whether they could have succeeded in this venture, because the First World War disrupted their attempts. The Slovaks, as well as the other nations in Austro-Hunga ry, found themselves in new political circumstances, and gained more favorable opportunities to develop their distinct national traits. 5. Progress of Slovak Nationalism After the First World War The dissolution of the Austro-Hung arian Monarchy after the First World War opened up a great opportunity for the development of Slovak national sentiment. Slovakia was taken away from the Magyars. With its inclusion in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Slovakia for the first time in history obtained defined boundaries. The importance of this historical step cannot be minimized, for Slovak nationalism began to lean upon a certain well defined territory. The separation of the Slovaks from the Magyars broke also the tie binding the former to their feudal order and opened up opportunities for the near revolutionary development of a new democratic, Slovak society within the confines of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Through the medium of schools, the Magyar attempt to assimilate the Slovaks was halted. In the Czecho-Slovak Republic the national Slovak language became the language not only of the people but also of the schools and official business. Thus, for the first time in history, opportunities arose for the formation of a distinct �58 SLOVAKIA Slovak culture, even though the centralizing efforts of the new Czecho-Slovak state, dominated by the Czechs, were opposed to such a development. Although at the present time the vast majority of the Slovaks bears an unfriendly attitude toward inclusion in any form of Czecho-Slovakia, whether it be communist or democratic, it is self-evident that such was not the case during the First World War. Then the Slovaks accepted warm-hearted ly and hopefully the creation of Czecho-Slovakia, for together with the Czechs they possessed a mutual kinship of language and culture as well as similar political ambitions. The present unfavorable attitude toward the Czechs is attributed to the failure of Czechs to fulfill their promises and agreements, that is, the failure to grant autonomy to Slovakia and the refusal to concede to the Slovaks ethnical and racial rights belonging to them as a distinct nation. Instead, the Czech majority in the Prague parliament decided to form the so-called "Czechoslovak" nation by law, i.e., by maens of the Czechoslovak constitution, whereby the Slovaks in practice were identified racially with the Czechs, and Slovakia was made completely dependent upon the central government in Prague. Such an action was looked upon in Slovakia as a secret move to assimilate the Slovaks with the Czechs, and thus to deprive the Slovaks of their national individuality. Therefore, imediately after the creation of Czecho-Slovakia following the First World War, there arose in Slovakia a powerful movement for autonomy. This movement, warring against the concept "Czechoslovak nation" and the centralism based upon it, presents a new phase in the development of Slovak nationalism in the new and more favorable conditions of the Czechoslovak Republic. Even though this movement never had a clear majority of the Slovaks, but "this," as Mr. C. A. Macartney rightly points out, "does not necessarily mean that the majority of the Slovaks were in favor of a centralized Czechoslovak Republic. The elections were not fought on the issue of Autonomy versus Centralism, and material advantages were to be gained by voting for the Czechoslovak parties, especially for the always inoffice Agrarians. In fact, apart for the small and cultured Lutheran minority, most Slovaks who voted for the democratic Czechoslovak parties were probably opportunists. Those who felt most strongly were usually Autonomists or Communists" (11. ) �SLOVAKIA 59 Little wonder, therefore, that the majority of Slovaks displayed no sorrow at Hitler's overthrow of Czecho-Slovakia and accepted joyfully the idea of establishing a separate Slovak state, even though it was widely felt that the conditions for beginning a seprate existence during the revolutionary period of 1938-1939 were not very favorable. The existence of the Slovak Republic during the Second World War may appear to outside observers as the operation of those political elements is widely known as fascism, actually, however, the short-lived existence of the Slovak Republic indicates the final phase of the development of Slovak nationalism: the achieving of its own statehood. In spite of the situations in which the Slovaks have become involved since the last war, their efforts both in the free Western World and in Slovakia are concentrated as they never were before to restore independence to their country. (1) Nationalism and Internationalism, New York, 1946; p. 16. (2) Boyd C. Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality, New York, Harcourt, Brace Company, 1954, pp. 7-8. (3) This is Slovakia: Obrana Press, Scranton, 1955; pp. 2-6. (4) Shafer: op. cit.; p. 7. (5) Dr. Frantisek Bokes: Dejiny Slovenska a Slovakov, Bratislava, 1940; p. 31. (6) Bokes: op. cit., p. 33. (7) Dr. Uudovit Zachar: Borba za narodnu slobodu, Bratislava, 1931; p. 220. (8) Shafer: op. cit.; p . 7. (9) The reader should be reminded that the author of this treatise uses always the word "nation" to indicate an ethnographic group and not a nation-state. (10) Boyd Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality; p. 25. (11) Seton Watson: Eastern Europe Between the Wars 1918-1941, London, Hutchinson Co. , 1945; pp. 176-177 . • • • WHO SAID IT? ''Consemralive Catholic politics has no place in the twentieth century, noc can it exist in the proximity of the lJlSS!R. Politics of provocation is no positive politics. Denunciation of Comm unism, often supported by the shibboleth "For God and Country," can no longer be accepted even in view of the dem()ICratic evolution Olf the Slovak nation." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, DNESEK, 11-20-47). � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During SLOVAKIA 47 the First World War Western Democracies actually gave it physical support so that it could achieve partially the fulfillment of its ambitions. In the words of Don Luigi Sturza: "Once a country or a people has succeeded in developing a consciousness of its own personality and in affirming it in the struggles with which history has confronted it, there is no stopping."(!) Dissatisfied with only a partial fulfillment of its political ambitions, Slovak nationalism is endeavoring at the present time to attain the final goal sought by every nationalism, that is, complete national independence in its own state. Generally, under the term of nationalism fall most present political efforts that seek to alter the existing status quo which was formed in past centuries by great powers and the maintaining of which occupies their chief interests. The modern nationalistic movements seem to be governed more by sentiment than by realism in their outlook with regard to geographical, economic and strategic setups. From the standpoint of economy, they aim at breaking up time-tested, unified wholes and to form instead economically and strategically isolated inactive groups that easily succumb to one or another imperialism. The characteristic quality of these modern nationalistic movements is revolutionism. Under this term we must consider not only the violence that is perpetrated in the struggle for liberation, but above all the effort exerted to establish society upon new foundations. Such an arrangement cannot be realized in the present because its formation is always dependent upon a temporal and historical evolution. It is, however, difficult to condemn nationalistic movements from the standpoint of being guided more by sentiment than by realism. They are emotional only because they are striving to undo what we hold as sacred, accepted forms of the past; or they are realistic in that they endeavor to fulfill the modern principle of freedom and equality not only in the case of individuals, but also in the case of the organized groups that we call nations. 48 SLOVAKIA 2. Nature of Modern Nationalism Modern nationalism is very difficult to define precisely because its concept is not fixed and varies in scope and meaning. Nationalism is what the nationalists have made it; it is not a neat fixed concept, but a varying combination of beliefs and conditions. It may be in part founded on myth, but myths, like other errors, have a way of perpetuating themselves and of becoming not true but real. The fact is that myth and actuality, and truth and error, are inextricably intermixed in modern nationalism.. The only reasonable way to get at the nature of nationalism is to determine what beliefs - however true or false - and what conditions - however misinterpreted - are commonly present. The following ten are here hypothetically advanced. No claim is laid for their infallibility or finality. 1. A certain defined (often vaguely) unit of territory (whether possessed or coveted). 2. Some common cultural characteristics, such as language (or widely understood languages), customs, manners, and literature (folk tales and lore are the beginning). If an individual believes he shares these, and wishes to continue sharing them, he is usually said to be a member of the nationality. 3. Some common dominant social (as Christian) and economic (as capitalistic or recently communistic) institutions. 4. A common independent or sovereign government (type does not matter) or the desire for one. The "principle" that each nationality should be separate and independent is involved here. 5. A belief in a common history (it can be invented) and in a common origin (often mistakingly conceived to be racial in nature). 6. A love or esteem for fellow nationals (not necessarily as individuals). 7. A devotion to the entity (however little comprehended) called the nation, which embodies the common territory, culture, social and economic institutions, government, and fellow nationals, and which is at the same time (whether organism or not) more than their sum. 8. A common pride in the achievements (often military more than cultural) of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies (particularly its defeats). 9. A disregard for the hostility to other (not necessarily all) like groups, especially if these prevent or seem to threaten the separate national existence. 10. A hope that the nation will have a great and glorious future (usually in teritorial expansion) and become supreme in some way (in world power if the nation is already large) (2). Applying to the Slovaks, these ten characteristic points upon which all modern nationalisms are supposed to be based, we arrive at the conclusion that Slovak nationalism is based upon : SLOVAKIA 49 1. a certain defined territory; 2. its own language and culture; 3. the Christian foundation of its society; 4. the "principle" that Slovaks must live in their own independent state; 5. the knowledge of its own long history; 6. a love for fellow nationals; 7. a devotion to their territory, 8. more upon a common sorrow for national tragedy than pride in national achievements; 9. a certain hostility to those who have attempted, or are attempting, to enslave the Slovak people; 10. a hope that the nation will be glorious, but definitely not an ambition to make Slovakia a decisive world power. 8. Geographical and Historical Suppositions of Slovak Nationalism The territory occupied by the Slovaks lies in the heart of Europe. Although Slovakia is a small country, it is, nevertheless, larger in area than Albania, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Holland, or Switzerland. Slovakia today comprises an area of 48,957 square kilometers, or 22,500 square miles, and approximates the size of Belgium and Holland combined, or the size of West Virginia in the U. S. A. Its present population is 3,800,000. Francis Hrusovsky, eminent Slovak historian, has described the political significance of the geographical position of Slovakia in the following words: "Slovakia lies along the northern shores of the Central Danube, where the eastern slopes of the Alps touch the western slopes of the Carpathian mountains, and its territory covers the northern part of the Danubian basin. Since the dawn of European history, a route has run through the gate of the Danube, connecting the West and the East. This important route was intersected at this very point by several routes which ran from south to north and linked the coasts of the Adriatic with those of the Baltic and North Seas. From earliest times, nations seeking new homelands have flowed over these routes which intersect along the Danube. Through the portals of the Danube marched aggressive conquerors, and the soil of this land frequently served as the stage for bloody conflicts. The nation which settled in such a bustling spot experienced little peace, continually having to defend itself to keep from being swept away by the raging 50 SLOVAKIA storms. In defending its life its strength was exhausted and hence could not grow and develop as it might have in a peaceful atmosphere where the catastrophe is not always imminent . . . When, at the end of the 4th Century, the Romans had to withdraw from the Danube, and when, subsequently, the German tribes also left that territory, the Slavs flooded Central Europe from the Baltic Sea to the Balkans" (3). Since the sixth century, therefore, the territory of Slovakia has been the homeland of the Slovaks and their forefathers. During the first two centuries the Slav (Slovanic) tribes, whose descendants are the present-day Slovaks, did not enjoy an independent life. For from the sixth to the eighth century, the entire central European sector suffered under the dominating sway of warring Avars who carried on attacks upon Western Europe. At the end of the eighth century, however, Charlemagne successfully destroyed the power of the Avar Empire. This victory enabled the tribes of the Slovanic races to begin efforts at unification and soon to establish the Greater Moravian Empire. This era then saw the definite beginning and unfolding of the history of the Slovaks, although most of the Slavs can trace from it the partial origins, if not of their political, at least of their cultural life. The brief but exceedingly rich history of the Greater Moravian Empire is a source of "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies"(4) for Slovak nationalism. Without a doubt, it would be difficult to prove that during the existence of the Greater Moravian Empire the Slovaks constituted an element independent and separate from the other Slav (Slovanic) races. They constituted a part of the Slav races who, during the migration of nations, crossed the Carpathian boundaries and settled in the valley of the Danube and Moravian rivers. Furthermore, no clearly defined boundaries of Greater Moravia existed. Nevertheless, we know that it covered a large part of the territory surrounding the Carpathian mountains. In this sector the interests of the Western Franks met with the interests of the Byzantine Empire. The empire of Great Moravia was located in the territories of present-day Slovakia and Moravia, which were inhabited at that time by SLOVAKIA 51 the predecessors of the Slovaks, with the Czechs settling in the land of the Boii, Bohemia. The first documentary evidence of Great Moravia dates from the year 822. In that year a parliamentary gathering took place at Frankfurt-on-the-Main, which included representatives of Great Moravia. The leaders of Great Moravia had to maintain constant vigilance against the frequent attacks of the Franks who, under the guise of spreading Christianity, sought to make vassals of the Great Moravian rulers(5). For a time the inhabitants of Great Moravia were successful. But to the danger which threatened them from the part of the Franks was soon added the danger of harrassing Magyar nomads of Mongolian origin, who had then begun to make inroads into Central Europe. After many bitter and wearisome struggles they finally succumbed either in the year 906 or 908. Though short-lived, the Great Moravia's eventful life proved itself an inexhaustible source of heroic material for the poets of the budding Slovak nationalism of the 17th and 18th centuries. Faithful to the mythical tendencies of Romanticism and Pan-Slavism, Slovak authors exploited successfully Great Moravia's hidden past and thus created in the almost extinct group of Slovak people a feeling of greatness and national pride. Slovakia was made by them the cradle of all Slav (Slovanic) cultures and the Slovaks the leading Slav nation in the conversion of the other Slavs from backward paganism to the higher cultural life of Christianity. These conclusions were reached on the ground of two testimonials which, even at the present time, bear witness of Great Moravia's cultural role and political importance for the Slovanic nations. These testimonials are : a church built in 830 A.D., and the Slovanic liturgy with its Cyrillic alphabet. They represented two different tendencies that play a big role in Great Moravia's politics on account of her vital position between the German Franks and . the Byzantines, respectively between the Latin and Eastern (Greek) form of Christianity. The little church in the Slovak city of Nitra, portions of whose walls are still preserved in the foundations of the 52 SLOVAKIA Cathedral church, is a testimonal of German influence and of the Latin trend in the Great Moravian era. It was built by Pribina - one of the first known ru• lers on Slovak soil who chose Nitra as the seat of govern• ment - and blessed by Adalram, the Archbishop of Salzburg, in the year 833(6). From this fact it is evident that Pribina brought with him the Germanic influence which he absorbed under the rulers of the Frankish Empire. For Slovak nationalism, however, this church is an historical mdication of the bent of the forefathers of Slovakia to Western culture, so clearly manifested in the Latin form of Christianity. The culture-religious testimonial, linking Great Moravia with the present, is the Slovanic liturgy still faithfully followed in Orthodox churches and the Greek Catholic churches of the Eastern Rite. The alphabet of the Russians and other Slavs also has its origin in Great Moravia. Not all the rulers favored Germanic influences as freely and sympathetically as Pribina. Rather they opposed them because of their desire to preserve as great an independence as possible. This opposition led at first to internal dissensions and later manifested itself in sincere efforts to find means of christianizing the Slovak and other Slovanic tribes of Great Moravia other than that of Frankish missionaries. During the internal upheaval Mojmir replaced Pribina. The defeat and departure of Pribina signifies the removal of Frankish influence and a broader unification of all Slovak and other Slovanic tribes under one ruler. The rulers of the Franks, however, always used the matter of Christianizing the Slavs as an excuse to meddle in the internal affairs of Great Moravia. The rulers of Great Moravia were therefore left with but one choice: to seek out such means of christianizing their subjects which would enable them to restrain every occasion of the Frankish Empire to circumscribe Slovak independence and subject the people to vassalage. This was the aim of Rastislav, Mojmir's successor, when he turned to the Byzantine Emperor Michael Ill - according to a preserved legend - with a request to send a bishop and teacher, who would enlighten and instruct his SLOVAKIA 53 people in the true faith and in their own tongue"(7). Emperor Michael III must have realized the political implications of Rastislav's request, for he sent at once, in the year 863, to Great Moravia two of his most worthy and learned men - the Saints Cyril and Methodius who are honored today not only as Slovak Apostles, but also as "Apostles of the Slavs." Though Saints Cyri land Methodius were Greeks, they nevertheless understood the language of the Slovaks. They began their missionary labors by introducing a new adphabet and by translating the Bible and other religious books into the language of the people. Thus, through their efforts, was founded the Slovanic liturgy. Frankish bishops, however, saw in these innovations an opportune occasion to cause discord, for at this time divisions appeared which eventually ended in schism and divided the people into two camps, namely, the western and eastern forms of Christianity. Saints Cyril and Methodius desired to safeguard their methods of christianization in the eyes of Rome and obtained permission from the Pope to conduct the liturgy in Slovanic. But the political pressure of the Franks upon Great Moravia steadily grew stronger and stronger. It sapped the strength of the Slovak rulers and succeeded in bringing about the catastrophe of 906, i.e., the downfall of Great Moravia. The missionary labors of Saints Cyril and Methodius in the central European sphere of activity came to an end. Their pupils wended their way to the Balkans and lived among the Bulgarians and other Slovanic races, who eventually became the heirs of that cultural seed first sown in the confines of present-day Slovakia. With the downfall of Great Moravia, new states gradually began to take form in Central Europe, namely, the Czech, Polish, and Hungarian. For a thousand years this well-established portion of Great Moravia became a part of Hungarian rule. When, however, new ideas in the far distant future offer new opportunities for organizing a society, Great Moravia once again comes to life in the minds of its present generations, and becomes for the Slovaks the source of their "common pride in the achievements of this nation and a common sorrow in its 54 SLOVAKIA tragedies"(8). The brief but very dramatic events of Great Moravia play a very important role in the reawakening of Slovak nationalism: they give it an historical substance for its ambitions to statehood an doffer countless historical examples of past heroism as an incentive in its present attempts to acrieve these ambitions. The link between Great Moravia and present-day Slovak nationalism is more emotional than real, for the end of Great Moravia meant the end of its cultural and political influence within the area of Central Europe which is today called Slovakia. The Slovanic race residing at that time on the territory of what is iow Slovakia, the forefathers of the Slovaks, definitely came under the sphere of influence of Latin Christianity and politically became a part of the Hungarian State. That they were not wholly absorbed by the Magyars during the many centuries of their life in the Hungarian State can be attributed only to the cosmopolitan character of the Hungarian State and to the use of Latin as the official language in governmental and educational systems. The concepts "nation" and "nationality," as we know them today, probably did not exist at all at that time, and were certainly entirely different from the concept "state." 4. New Concepts: "People" and "Nation" The origin of modern Slovak nationalism, as well as of all nationalism in Central Europe, must be determined from that period when, under the influence of the Enlightenment, great masses of hitherto enslaved peoples began to be aware of their distinctive group characteristics. Medieval, feudal society itself felt that the end was near for its outmoded social system and clamored for reform. These reforms were to better the conditions and status of the "people" so that they could ascend the European political stage as new and revolutionary actors. As decisive political actors, these "people" first appeared in the American Revolution, where they laid the foundations of American democracy as opposed to European aristocracy and its autocratic form of government. A further and more radically revolutionary appearance of these actors occurred SLOVAKIA 55 in the French Revolution which shook the foundations not only of France but of all Europe. Thanks to the military genius of Napoleon, the battlecry of these new revolutionary "people" flooded all of Europe with his soldiers. In the political millieu of the Slovaks, under the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, the revolutionary "people" obtained certain rights emanating from the drastic reforms inaugurated by the emperor of "Enlightenment," Joseph II. Although the greater portion of these reforms had to be repealed because of the opposition of the yet powerful upper class, nevertheless much agitation and reaction ensued with the result that this empire found itself embroiled in a revolutionary cauldron - the presentiment of its eventual downfall. In the language of the thinkers of the Enlightenment the concept "people" primarily denoted the social class of the poor as distinct from the class of aristocrats. It brought about revolutions of the poor against the rich, respectively of the underprivileged against the privileged. In this conflict, however, the established boundaries of the medieval states were not affected. When subsequently the German Romantic philosophers came to emphasize the importance of common history, language and culture, the cosmopolitan medieval European society started to split also along the new line of ethnographical groups, called nations. The result of it was that the long time established boundaries of the European states started to crack under the constant efforts of the ethnographical groups to emancipate themselves from the subjection of the other ethnographic groups that might have been predominating in their original states. In the case of "people" there was much more concern over the freedom of the individual, whereas in the case of "nation" the struggle for the freedom of the groups, called nations, is uppermost. In those places where language boundaries were consonant with the boundaries of the state, the concept "nation"(9), based upon a kinship of language, produced a greater national unity. Such was the situation in France and Germany. A homogeneous language produced among the Germans a strong feeling of fellowship and led to the unification of the Germans into a solid German state 56 SLOVAKIA under the leadership of Prussia. In the Austro-Hungarian Empire, however, the language question became the root of great discord and shook the foundations of this mighty territory. The many nationalities under its sway, after asserting their individuality, began to demand their own rights and, abetted by Western Democracies, brought Austro-Hungary to complete dissolution. This period of increasing European ferment brought forth also from the Slovaks their assertion for national independence from the other components of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, particularly from the Magyars. As the other nations under Austro-Hungarian domination, so too the Slovaks codified their national language and began to search for historical, ideological, and cultural evidence that would express their national individuality. At first this national reawakening bore the markings of Pan-Slavism, whereby the Slovaks sought to establish Slovakia as the cradle of all the Slovanic nations. Memories of Great Moravia played an important role in this regard, for in the minds of Pan-Slavism this empire was the first political manifestation of Slovaks as well as the other Slavs. PanSlavism was supported more by Slovak Lutherans rather than Catholics. The reason is that many Slovak Lutherans received their education in Germany where they had the opportunity of becoming acquainted with Hegelian philosophy, which laid a mystical foundation for the nation state on a high phi•losophical plane where God, the world-spirit, reason, nature, and history intermingled and became one. In the profound and seldom clear introductions to his Philosophy of Right and Philosophy of History he proclaimed that each people was imbued with a world force endowing it with peculiar spirit and special purpose, and that the state was the final embodiment of dialectic evolution flowing out of the historical experience and genius of a people (10). Basing himself on the philosopphical premises of Hegel, Herder came to the conclusion that the Roman and German nations had fulfilled their historical mission and that the future will belong to the Slovanic peoples. Because of their dove-like character, they will bring to the world a period of peace and gentleness. These claims were in complete opposition to historical facts, but as myths they were SLOVAKIA 57 instrumental in g1vmg birth to a special heroic Pan-Slavistic literature. By exalting the mythological past of Slovanic nations this literature gave rise to national pride. On the other hand, the realistic politics in which the Slovaks had to engage in order to safeguard themselves from the Magyarizing efforts of the rulers of the Hungarian State, led them gradually to abandon the utopian idea of Pan-Slavism and to assert instead their distinct national individuality. From 1860 to the end of the First World War, they had to undergo a period of severe trials at the hands of the Magyars, who attempted to accomplish in a few decades what they had failed to attain in centuries, that is, the assimilation of non-Magyar nations in Hungary. It is difficult to say whether they could have succeeded in this venture, because the First World War disrupted their attempts. The Slovaks, as well as the other nations in Austro-Hunga ry, found themselves in new political circumstances, and gained more favorable opportunities to develop their distinct national traits. 5. Progress of Slovak Nationalism After the First World War The dissolution of the Austro-Hung arian Monarchy after the First World War opened up a great opportunity for the development of Slovak national sentiment. Slovakia was taken away from the Magyars. With its inclusion in the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Slovakia for the first time in history obtained defined boundaries. The importance of this historical step cannot be minimized, for Slovak nationalism began to lean upon a certain well defined territory. The separation of the Slovaks from the Magyars broke also the tie binding the former to their feudal order and opened up opportunities for the near revolutionary development of a new democratic, Slovak society within the confines of the Czecho-Slovak Republic. Through the medium of schools, the Magyar attempt to assimilate the Slovaks was halted. In the Czecho-Slovak Republic the national Slovak language became the language not only of the people but also of the schools and official business. Thus, for the first time in history, opportunities arose for the formation of a distinct 58 SLOVAKIA Slovak culture, even though the centralizing efforts of the new Czecho-Slovak state, dominated by the Czechs, were opposed to such a development. Although at the present time the vast majority of the Slovaks bears an unfriendly attitude toward inclusion in any form of Czecho-Slovakia, whether it be communist or democratic, it is self-evident that such was not the case during the First World War. Then the Slovaks accepted warm-hearted ly and hopefully the creation of Czecho-Slovakia, for together with the Czechs they possessed a mutual kinship of language and culture as well as similar political ambitions. The present unfavorable attitude toward the Czechs is attributed to the failure of Czechs to fulfill their promises and agreements, that is, the failure to grant autonomy to Slovakia and the refusal to concede to the Slovaks ethnical and racial rights belonging to them as a distinct nation. Instead, the Czech majority in the Prague parliament decided to form the so-called "Czechoslovak" nation by law, i.e., by maens of the Czechoslovak constitution, whereby the Slovaks in practice were identified racially with the Czechs, and Slovakia was made completely dependent upon the central government in Prague. Such an action was looked upon in Slovakia as a secret move to assimilate the Slovaks with the Czechs, and thus to deprive the Slovaks of their national individuality. Therefore, imediately after the creation of Czecho-Slovakia following the First World War, there arose in Slovakia a powerful movement for autonomy. This movement, warring against the concept "Czechoslovak nation" and the centralism based upon it, presents a new phase in the development of Slovak nationalism in the new and more favorable conditions of the Czechoslovak Republic. Even though this movement never had a clear majority of the Slovaks, but "this," as Mr. C. A. Macartney rightly points out, "does not necessarily mean that the majority of the Slovaks were in favor of a centralized Czechoslovak Republic. The elections were not fought on the issue of Autonomy versus Centralism, and material advantages were to be gained by voting for the Czechoslovak parties, especially for the always inoffice Agrarians. In fact, apart for the small and cultured Lutheran minority, most Slovaks who voted for the democratic Czechoslovak parties were probably opportunists. Those who felt most strongly were usually Autonomists or Communists" (11. ) SLOVAKIA 59 Little wonder, therefore, that the majority of Slovaks displayed no sorrow at Hitler's overthrow of Czecho-Slovakia and accepted joyfully the idea of establishing a separate Slovak state, even though it was widely felt that the conditions for beginning a seprate existence during the revolutionary period of 1938-1939 were not very favorable. The existence of the Slovak Republic during the Second World War may appear to outside observers as the operation of those political elements is widely known as fascism, actually, however, the short-lived existence of the Slovak Republic indicates the final phase of the development of Slovak nationalism: the achieving of its own statehood. In spite of the situations in which the Slovaks have become involved since the last war, their efforts both in the free Western World and in Slovakia are concentrated as they never were before to restore independence to their country. (1) Nationalism and Internationalism, New York, 1946; p. 16. (2) Boyd C. Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality, New York, Harcourt, Brace Company, 1954, pp. 7-8. (3) This is Slovakia: Obrana Press, Scranton, 1955; pp. 2-6. (4) Shafer: op. cit.; p. 7. (5) Dr. Frantisek Bokes: Dejiny Slovenska a Slovakov, Bratislava, 1940; p. 31. (6) Bokes: op. cit., p. 33. (7) Dr. Uudovit Zachar: Borba za narodnu slobodu, Bratislava, 1931; p. 220. (8) Shafer: op. cit.; p . 7. (9) The reader should be reminded that the author of this treatise uses always the word "nation" to indicate an ethnographic group and not a nation-state. (10) Boyd Shafer: Nationalism: Myth and Reality; p. 25. (11) Seton Watson: Eastern Europe Between the Wars 1918-1941, London, Hutchinson Co. , 1945; pp. 176-177 . • • • WHO SAID IT? ''Consemralive Catholic politics has no place in the twentieth century, noc can it exist in the proximity of the lJlSS!R. Politics of provocation is no positive politics. Denunciation of Comm unism, often supported by the shibboleth "For God and Country," can no longer be accepted even in view of the dem()ICratic evolution Olf the Slovak nation." - (Ferdinand Peroutka, a Benes Czech, DNESEK, 11-20-47).  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Slovak Nationalism: The Origins of Slovak Nationalism Description An account of the resource B. S. Buc, Ph.D.<br />Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), March 1958<br />pp. 46-59<br /><ol><li>Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo"</li> <li>Nature of Modern Nationalism</li> <li>Geographical and Historical Suppositions of Slovak Nationalism</li> <li>New Concepts: "People" and "Nation"</li> <li>Progress of Slovak Nationalism After the First World War</li> </ol> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Buc, B. S. (Bonaventure S.), 1910-1966 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/01a4e4d4fde256155ccb3b6c5e635ae8.pdf 0f5e5ddbc0d87b87d78e8d67237eebbb PDF Text Text 28 SLOVAKIA "MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA EXILES" Th.is memorandum deals with political aspects ,o f CzechoslovaJk exrile groups only, especially so far ,a s their anticommunism and its motilves are concerned. Politically European anti-communism i,s not a united movement ; it contains factions and tendencies democratically not qualified or even disqualified. I1t has to ibe emphasized that yesterday's enemies of democracy (nacism and its friends), whicih are offering themselves as allies todlay, could easily become an acute iand fatal problem for democracy, in case not sufficient aJttention iis paid to the implications. Anti-communism as sucll is merely a potential ally oif democracy. In our opinion, all ,political emigration should be clasSlified alreadry now as to the real motives of its anti-communist attitude. We, in Czeoho-sio.vaJkia, who hawe lived to see the destruction of democracy first ·b y fascism and lat-er by communism, know only too well that these two contrasting ideologies, irreconcilaible ideologicaHy, are quite ridenitical insofar as their psychology and ethi:cs are concerned. Intermediate and .fresh as the experience with the Communists lives among politic:al exiles, it is very dangerous for democratic thin1king and feeling and tends to extremism and primirtiive radi'calism. The irritative camip psychology diminishes 1Jhe aJbility for finer distinctions and, as a consequence, anti--c01m:mwrism turns into the criticism of a very primitive, sometimes of quite fascist character. This tendency, which in the end would ,b ecome hiarmful to the cause of world democracy, is not very acute in CzeclloslovaJk camps unless it is left to develOip entirely in its own way. CzeohoslovaJk political emigration can be classified according to the motives of its anti-communism as follows : 1. Political Catholics: opponents of Communism for religious and confessional reasons. This g1roup has to be soodilvided into two parts: Czech and Slovak. Czeich Catholics are well equdipped ideologically; they are in contact with and influenced by modern Catholic movements in the West, �29 SLOVAKIA especially by that of F1rance. Their orientation is universal, hllimanitarian and, thrroug,h Masarytk's influence, also democrat.ic. They idenltify CommUll!ism with !Marxism and interpret it as a logical consequence of materialism and atheism. To a certain ex.tent their faith is liberal, at least it used to be so in Czechoslovakia. This feature, however, is weaken-, ing here in exile and is ,being replaced ,by one that is more conse.r,vaJtirve and confessional. The activities of this group are ca>rried on with the help of Catholic clergy which, in its turn, is supported by the VaJtrican throug,h .t!he Pax Romana org,anizatiOiil. The work of this group is, for that rea son, much easier and it is visilble everyiwhere. .Some movements of our emigirants from Ge11many had almost an exclusive Catholic character. So the transfer to Italy, for instance, consisted mainly of Catholics. The political Catholics are very expansive and so they may get into conflict with the above mentioned tiradition which is of lay, liberal and democratic character. The representatives, of this ,group are: Mr. Bohdan Chudoba, MP, Mrs. Kozeluhova, Mr. Prochazka, former Minister of Health, Mr. Tigrid, Chief Editor of (the Czech) Catholic Party Pre.s s. fu spite of the faot tha:t Bohemia is to a great e·x tent (96 % ) a Catholic country, the religious affiliation has never been identified with the political one; that is why the Oatholic Party has enjoyed no ,great significance since 1918, and it is hardly to be expected that it will be otherwise fn the future democratic Czechoslovakia. 1 The movement of political Catholicism in Slovakia, with the exception of a small groUJp of moderni sts, is of a mo•r e primitive nature and it has al,ways pursued policies which were in permanent conflict with the Czechoslovak democracy since the end of World War One. The Slovruk population is SO% Catholic; in 1938 election HSLS - (the Hlinka Slovruk Peoiple's Party) - polled rubout 40 % of all rvotes and, was relatively the strongest party. 'Dhi,s grolllp has two ,political cente115 outside Czechoslovakia. T,he first is in USA among the Slovak spooking American citizens, popularly spoiken of in C~hoslovakia 1 �30 SLOVAKIA as American Slovaiks. Their press (e. g. Slova:k Defense, Slovalk in America, Catholic) vehemently campailgns against the new ipoliltiC'al exiles who left their home-country after February 1948 only. They stand openly for legal continuity of the so-called SlOWJk State, campaign for it in pwblic and declare at the same tirme their intention to taike revenge on all participants in the 1944 anti-German rising at Banska Bystrica in the middle of Slovatkia, further on all politicians who have shown good will in cooperation with the Soviets during or after the war. Under the pressure of this kind of propaganda many SloviaJk,s succumb, become indifd:erent to the cause .o f CzechoslovaJkia, or even turn hostile to it. This political war-fare against Czechosl()IVakia is going on under the guise of Christian charity which appears to have been led until recently ,by an American citizen of Slovak origin, Father Billy. As ,the Ciharacter of the SloW!lk exiles is to a much smaller exitent ,p olitical than it is the case with the Czech emigTees, 8111d as it contains elements of very poor social and intellectual level, the kind .o f propaganda mentioned aJbove has had consideralble success. If the promises of material help, ,by which F1ather Billy has been able to influence the political minds of Slova;k emigrants in Germany, are Ito realize, it will certainly oreate another obstacle on the way of harmonious coo,peration of Czechs and Slovaks in exile. The other center of politioal Catholioism, which is in contact wilth t:lhe first, is the V1atican and is dommated by the former minister of Czechoslovakia at the time of Munich Agreement who Jailer held the post of Amb~dor of the Slovak State to the Holy Seat, Mr. Karol Sidor. He himself has been away frO!ffi Siov.rukia since 1939 and is profiting out od: a legend which has grown around him. Mr. Karol Sidor was a 'b ig man in the HSI.IS; he was lOQlked upon as a successor of Father Andrej Hlinka to the highest offioe in the Pairty. He was a leader of the most radical fri8tion of the young party followers and the founder as well as the Commander-in-Chief of HG (Hldnlka Guards, rurnied trooips of the ·P arty, formed on the pattern ·of the Gerrfiah SA or SS) . During the Munich crisis and after the resignation of President Benes, he became Minister in Prague Government �SLOVAKIA 31 and - as the consequence of this he lost corutact with the separatist wing of the Party, which in the meantime passed under the control of Flather Tiso, later president of an :independent SlovaJk State. Influenced .by Pra,gue and •b y his master Father Hilnika, w'ho died already in 1936, he believed in a solution whi_c h was based on the principle of tervitorial inltegrity of the Republic. His hesitation at the critical moment before the estia:blishment of Protectorate ()lVer Bohemia (Mairch 13, 1939) ca,used tlhat he lost all the German sympathies and facilitated the .r ise of Tiso. Later he was aippointed Am'bassador to Vlatican where he has ~en since. His ,attitude to Czechoslovalkia is equiivocal; until not long ago he stood for SlovaJk Staite; now, after some months of international development, he is more reserved and the latest news suggest that he almost reversed his mi.ti.al position. In spiite of the fact that Sidor has not engaged himself for certain reasons in the fascist regime in Slovalkira during the war, he is not without responsibi.Lity for what was going on there dru:ring his aJbserrce. His responsiibility is, in our opinion, essentia,L As the Chief of the Hlinlka Party press, leader of radicals and an important Party ,b oss - all in one person - he was the most characteristic representative of Slovak nationalism. He was in a pernnanent opposition to the democratic form of Cz;ecfuosloivrukia. He did his best to mruke the SloV'aJk national movement more radical and V1ulgar and, in this way, he induced the movement to• take the shaipe it did and .to end as it did, that is in the destruction of Czechoslova!kia, su:ppression of democracy and strengthening of fascist power in Burope. Sidor a:s a politician is without sufficient education, foresight, and sense of responsibility; he is unacceptable to the democrats in spite of the fact that his stay in Vatican has had a positive influence on him. Long emigrartion has made him to develop a Fuhrer-complex and a harmful sense of SQIVereignty. Even if his political conception has ~come more democratic, as a consequeil'ce of his contact with Vatican, there is nothing by which he could contribute to the cause of democracy. "With Sidor against the Jews" is the quintessence of his legend in Slovaikia. He has no other fol- �32 SLOVAKIA lowers there; if he switched over to different slogans, he would have to give up his o,w:n pa.sit and aJbandon those political and psychological forces which adoire him now. It cannot be sufficiently oouphasized that the whole emotional and ideological back,g round of Slovak separatism is giiven absolutely by the SloivaJk State, its inner spirit, its values and prejudices, and :if .Sidor did not serve these forces, he would be coI11Sidered as a traitor and opportunist. 2. Anti-communism as an expression of Czech or Slovak nationalism: On the Czech side, it is General Prchala who can be :termed as its representative. General Prcihala is a Czech afficer who did not return home after the last war because of political differences with Dr. Benes. His followers ma.Ike Ulp a tiny group among our exiles. The judgemenrts on General's qualities as a soldier run diametrioo.Uy, but there is no doulbt about his poliitical capaJbilities among the democratic exiles. The legend tha,t grew around him, as an immediate consequence of the first disruppointment after FeJbruary, has mostly eva;poraJted since. General Prchala is said by the peo,ple who know him to be a man of very limited views who has no political sense; he is said to hruve no democratic coI11Victions, and, besides, he suffers from something lilke megalomania. His political reasoning is emlbryonic and naive. He refuses to recognize .the necessity of political parties in democr.acy; he f101tters the Sudeten Germans for reasons of his personal amlbition, which iis ,b oth -u nreasona!ble and irresponsrble. His negotiations with the SlovaJk 5elparatist fraction which Mr. P. Pridavok in London, are too hasty to be considered seriously. His followers in CzechosloviaJkia are scanty and the democratic exile group do not oount with him ei,t her. His worshippers do not know him personally ; they regard him as the most outspoken anti-Communist and from their own illusions aJbout his personality which ilisappear as soon as they come in contact with reality. It is our opinion that General Prchala will go to the history of our emigration as a little episode. General Prchala's group is exploiting the fact of his long emig,raJtion and absence from his own country and has some financial means at dis posal. lit has its own paper "Cesky boj" published in London. His followers are recuit- �SLOVAKIA 33 ed from emigr.ants who left Czechoslovakia partly before the last war, but mostly who left between the years 194'51947. It is characteristic that they generally live outside the caimps. They founded in London The Czech National Committee which operates also .in the US Zone and has nothing in c01Inmon with Czechoslovakia Relief Committee. Prchala's group acceipts the Slovak seiparati,s m, supports ilt on account of common ideological affinity, and they plan to gather a Central European Federation. General Prchlala acts entirely with the ,peoip le of his kind. They are nationalists by outlook, their emotional and ideological background is, quite opposed to the ideas on which a healthy and organic federation could arise. The real motirves behind Prchala's federational plans iare opportunist in character. The idea of federation, if the latter is to be workable, pre-supposes Slljpra-inaitionalizing and democratic thuillcing, it presU!pposes the super nationalism not its ,a ssertion which, in sulbstance, is national egoism. On the Sl()I\Tlaik side, the nationlist group with the movement of poliitical Catholicism, insofar as the representatives and t>heiir folloiWers are concerned, has always been so since 1•918, aJ11d the best eXipression since was the Slwak State with a priest as president and a third of members of parliament also priests. The real leader of this groUJp is Mr. Durcansky, who is sometimes cOIIl:Sidered as successor of Father Tiso. As the fiTst Foreign Minister of the Slovaik Puippet Government, he is on the liist of war criminals and, consequently, the Slovak nationalists are more or less olbliged to accept Mr. Sidor, who represents the policy of tJhe Vatican as their leader. But for this fact, the position of Mr. Durcansky would be dominant beyond any doub:t, because of his relatitvely gireater erudition (he was professor of international laiw at ,the Bratislaivia University from 1939 till 1944), Intelligence, and because of Ms political skill. The gross of the Slovalk separatist group consists of young people (around 19 or 20 years of age). These people harve no personal experience of democracy. They are not sUJfficiently educated, inexperienced in all respects, they �34 SLOVAKIA ,s uccumb to the ,p ropaganda of the more radical, noisy and vulgar it is. This kind of propaganda exerts influence even on ipeople who left CzechoslovaJkia for quite apolitic.al reasons. MT. Durfansky had h4; organization built uip already at the time when the Czechoslovakia exile movement was yet non-existent. Lacking all the means, it is very difficult for the democratic exiles to catch up with him in thjs respect. DUT.fansky has his agents in all Czechoslovak camps, canv~ing for him both openly and secretly. It is· sad, and characteristic as well, tlhait these agents use all meians at their disposal, including bribes ( cigarettes, food packages from USA, promises of visa to Argentin,a, which is the country of residence of Mr. Durcansky). In spite af the ban on all political actiiVities in refugee caimps, the agents of Mr. Durcansky exercise great moral presswre on democratic Slovaiks by propaganda of revenge for the execution of Father Tiso and for the Bystrica rising in 1944, by campaigning oipenly for the Sl01VaJk State, which is 1being treated as a fait aiccompli in Catholic nationalistic preiss of .AJIIlerican Slovak,s in USA, Slovak refugees are instilled 1zy fear and used for political plans of Mr. Durcansky. An illegal pa-per by n,ame of "1Slova1k Struggle" is being pulb1ished lb y "Tiso's Society" somewhere in Munich. This mimeographe d paper stands openly for the Slovak State, for its idea a,,nd its fascist representative s, some of whom were listed as the war CTiminals still during •t he war (Tiso, Durca.nsky) . 3. Fascism in exile: It is implied in the former movements where it exists potentially for the present. It does not exist as ,a clear-cut cxrientation, hut its expression can be detected on different tendencies. It emerges on the surface indiividually without the couvage to appear as an open o.vga.ruzation. The real danger begins there where the anticommunist attitude turns into sheer passion and irrationalism, naJtional, religious, or racial. This danger is not acute for the present and would lbe easily neutralized by a clearer moral support to b,e accorded to the Czechoslovak democratic exiles 1b y the Western democracies. ½. Conservatives : One can count here the followers of �SLOVAKIA 35 all political parties which: were not admitted by the Third Reipulblic (1945) and were recognized now in exile: Peasant's Party, National Democrats, and the party defending the interests of small business and handwork. Those ,parties can serve well to the cause of democracy in CzechoslovaJkia, especially the Peasant's Party, if it strikes roots in Slovakia and turns the Party Politics into another direction leading out of the present dead-loclc situation created by the nationalist complex. This would contribute to the political intergration of both ,p ar.ts of the Republic, even if on the basis of a more conserviaUve character. In general, these parties represent vested interests · rather than ideologies. They stand for economic liberalism which best favors the interests of their followers. 1 It is 1known that the Peasant's Party was well received by all political groups, especially lby (the Czech) Social Democrats. The initia,l mutual resipect and good will of the two latter parties gives rise to speculations on an eventual coalition in the future which was well known in -t he party politics of the First Republic, ,w hen it was characteristically called "red-green coalition." 5. Decomratic exile groups: It is difficult to speaik a/bout the •pol-itic<al parties in connection with this group which reyresents the Czechoslovak tradition of universal and moral humanism as formulat,ed by Masaryk. In general, is can be said that the political .g rouping of tJhis block coincides with the parties forming the Government Coalition of the ,First Republic ( up till 1938) , the parties which stood b,y Masaryk without any reservation and later backed ,h is successor to the presidency, Mr. Benes; one can include into this growp (Czech) National Socialists (Czech) Social ~9CI"ats and, to a certain extent, the Czech Catholic Party and the old Peasant's Party. -, '·The opposition of this democratic block t.o Communism is motivated by humanitarian philosophy, cultural and moral universalism. This group opposes all na1Jional, confessional and class exclusiveness, its faith is undogmatic, lay ,and social in character. In European politics is stands for "troisieme force" with the democracy as a dominant �36 SLOVAKIA feature. It represents the best Czechoslovak tradition (Hus, Comenius, Masaryk), its orientation is universal, essentially related to or even identical with the democratic spirit of the West. It is a natural, unopportunistic ally of the West and an exclusive representative of Western orientation in Czechoslovakia in every respect. . '11he representatives of this group haive suffered most thI1ough the Oommunist cowp d'etat in February this yeaT. They tried their best to cooperate with the Communists, following the lines of policy laid do,w n by Yalta and other aJgreements, and now they pay dear for the failure of their "mission of good will" by inner chaos and repercussions caused hy tJhe political demagogy of the undemocratic antiCommunism. The democratic block, which still represents the majority of rpu!blic opinion in CzechosloV!aikia, is in a state of fermentation, revaluation, revision and heaJrt-searchmg. The visilble signs for this search for new policies can 'b e traced in the attempt to estalblish a single Socialist Party in CzechoslovaJkia on the pattern of Western Labour Parti~, in the retrospectirve criticism of our ,p ast policies towards the national minorities, in the reconstruction of _political status quo ante Munich, in the sympathies with the federatiOIIl :plans in Europe, and in many other tendencies. The personalities belonging to this group may be listed as follo,w s : Mr. Ferdinand Peroutka, Editor of the most influential non-1party weekly review "Dnesek; former ministers :Zen.kl, Majer, Stransky, Ripka; generals: Basal, Ingr; Slovaks: Osusky, Papanek, Slavik, Kocvara, General Feriencik. Franek, and others. Out of all groups this democratic bloclk is at the greatest disadvantage insofor as their position in refugee camps is concerned; it has no, press except "Svobodny Zitrek" published in Paris; it is without any visible material, financial, and moral support which is iacc0irded : more or less to all other exile groups, especially to our older exiles (1008, 1944-1947), which are rather defective, from the point of view of pure democracy. In general it can be 1 �SLOVAKIA 37 said that the democratic exiles h:we suppoI'ted Benes's policy from 1945 : they stood for the policy of understanding with the Communists, partly spontaneously and partly under the pressure of both internal political situation, and left <JSR only in Febl'uary when they were threatened by physical force. They do not consider the policy of Benes as a mistake, but rather as failure of good will and personal tragedy. The illusion of Benes is often compared to that of Roosevelt. The democrats feel that their experiment was an honest attempt which, from the pont of view of world democracy, was absolutely necessary .. The failure is not received with satisfaction by the genuine democrats; they rather feel disa,ppointed and deceived. 'Dhe disa,ppointme nt becomes aH the more ,pairuf.ul for them as they reconsider their mistaJkes and ,s acrifices. The democratic self-criticism aims in the first place at their own political parties and politicians. They admit shortsightedness, lao'k of foresight, and carelessness in respect of the real aims hidden behind the com..'TI unist activities, and, finally, they confess to helplessness and hesitation at the time when the communist intentions become evident. The most painful are the concessions made to the Communists in what concerns the integrity of democracy, such as the inhumanities colDJilltted during the expulsion of the Sudenten-Ger mans and Hungarians, the misuse of political trials and purges, excesses of .s ecret police, and the like. Under the pressure of ideological disunity and self-criticism, some princilples, as regards the future political system, crystalize: the preservation of state continuity on a new basis, enlarged politically (by the reintroduction of some of the old parties), and personally (1b y the admittance to the political life of the country of non-ipa,rty personalities) . The persons of some ,p restige, who were not engaged in party politics and whose attitude to the past regime (1945-48) is merely critical not a priori negatirve, are the following: Peroutka, Papanek, Osusky, Hasal, Feriencik, and a few others. In general, one cay say the exile resistance movement which is being born outside Czoohoslovak ia is not motivated by negation or contempt, but by understanding and criticism of Benes's Republic. In the ey~ of democratic 1 �38 SLOVAKIA exiles this attitude becomes the chief criterion of a democratic qualification. After the death of Benes and Masaryk, junior, C:rechoslovak exiles are without a recognized leader and it is doubtful whether such a person will arise in a spontaneous way. The aibsen<!e of a leading personality is being felt everywhere, especially while our resistance organization is at its beginning. 'Dhe choice of democratic representatives is, at this time of recession of European democracy, very acute and more responsible than ever •b efore. It is quite clear that the judgement of Western governments will 1be essential in this choice; their responsilbility for the future of European democracy wiH be very large. We think it would be desirruble that the charitable character of the assistance to our refugees should be repla,ced, within the limits given by the ,policies of Western democracies, by a support of a more political character. We are convinced that such a revision of our "refugee status" would play an important role from the military point of view as well. The apolitical character of the aid to our refugees has a harmful influence on the moral of the people concerned, especially on the younger refugees, who left their homes mostly on the basis of false information and supposition that they would be immediately drafted into the Czechoslovak or other military forces. The present camps are for many emigrants an education for political indifiference and the only interest that remains is to emigrate and to settle down. The emigrants, who are living outside the camps •b eyond the reach of political or other control authority, S1Uccumb to harmful orientations and other influences. Czech@slovak emigrants, wtho are living outside the Czechoslovalk camps in Austria and South Germany, mostly left Czechoslovakia long before February 1948 and are very often guilty of collaboration with nacism. The Sudeten-German problem: It was said already that the excesses committed in connection with the transfer of Sudeten-Ge.ranans were a very paJinful affair for the democrats. Many of them came over to Gernnany with the intention of opening a new chapter in �SLOVAKIA 39 CzeohoslovaJk-German relations, a chapter of cooperation and understanding , which was to be based on mutual concessions and compromises. This tendency is waning in contact with the every-day German reality, even if the original intention is not being aJbandoned entirely. Germany of today is democratic on the surface only and any cooperation with her seems to be still very risky. For that reason thP transfer of the Gernnan minority in 1945-46 it as present considered generally to have been the only possible solution under the circumstances . This attitude is accepted generally by tihe whole (Czech) democratic block, though it is often felt to •be o:f rather an emergency and unfinished character. The Slovak Problem: The Slovalk exiles, who left Czechoslovak ia between the time of liberation and February 1948, had an exclusively collaborationist character; the nationalist and fascist feature of this exile movement grew more intense under the influence olf exile p.sychology and with the gradual failure of the Czechoslovak democratic experiment. H this democratic experiment with the Communism had succeeded, these exiles would ha,ve never gained any significance. New possibilities for them are opening only nOIW after Ozech and Slovak democrats had to resign their "good will mission" and have compromised to a certain degree with the Communists. As these fascist and half-fascist exiles have been coming over to Germany now for more than three years and ha'Ve 1been supported not only by the Slovalk charity org,anizations in the USA, but by the Germans as well - which is characteristic in itself - they are numerically stronger than the recent democratic groups. To illustrate the quality and intelleotual level olf the people concerned, we gi,ve the total number of university graduates in iboth opposing groups of 'SlQIV,aks as it Q<!mtrs in the greatest Czechoslovak refugee camp in Ludwigsiburg (•J age:rihofkaser n) : Among 200 SlovaJks in .t he camp, there ,are 14 university graduates, out of which 1 (one) is nationalist-se paratist, while the other thirteen are democrats standing for the unity of Czechoslovakia. The average age of the members belonging to the democratic group is albout 33, in the separatists group it maJkes only 22 years. �40 SLOVAKIA The number of democratic Slovruks in exile increases raipidly since Febraury 1948 and amounts to aJbout 30 or 40% in aH the camps. This is caused by the fact that, until recently, the Communists refrained from wholesale persecution of the democrats in Slovia!kia 1beoause of the relative werukness of the COIIIlmunists in this part of the Republic. The political representation and importance of the Slovaks in exile politics outside Germany is so strong and great as never before. One of the candidates for chairmanship of the Czechoslovak National Council in the UISA is a SlovaJk, Mr. Osusky, Professor at Colgate University, USA, and fomner Ambassador oif Ozechoslovaikia to France. In the United Nations, it is a Slova!k, Mr. Papanek, who defends the cause of the Czechoslovak people there. He is assisted 1b y the former ambassador to US Government, Mr. Slavik, who is also a Slovalk. The strong Democratic Party (the majority ,p arty which polled 62 % of all votes recorded in the ,l ast free elections in SlolV'~kia in 1946) stands for a united but decentralized CzechoslovaJkia and its democracy (except for 2 dissidents: Dr. Bohm and Mr. Blasko, MPs) . It is to be emphasized that the underlying idea of nationalist and separatist movement has been a democratic one. It was represented by HSLIS ( The Hlinka SlOIV~ People's Party) which was lbanned after the defeat of Germany in 194!5, because of its wholehearted collaboration with nacism during the war. This party has /been in the full sense oif the word the pioneer, the spearhead and an exclusiive representative of fascism already long before 1938. Since 1921 and 1933, respectively, the movement sympathized quite openly and unambiguously with Mussolini and Hitler; it was already so at the time when, thanks to the maigic personal i.nifl:uence of president Masaryik, there were no pro-fascist tendencies in Czechoslovak political life. The nationalist and separatist press, from ~o,re or after Munich, sup.plies a mass of evidence slllpporting fully the foregoing sba.tements. This concerns the Party's official organ "Slovak" and "The Slovak Truth," just as well as the mo,re radical papers "Gardista" and especially "Nastup," the organ of Sidor extremists, edited then ,b y Dr. Durcansky. The ,Slovak nationalist and separatist movement has �SLOVAKIA 41 done its best to bring a,bout a situation suitaible for the destruction of CzechoslovaJkia and suppression of democracy. The so-called SlovaJk State, the full acceptance of its ideology and recognition of its leaders by Hitler was only a logical consequence. Tille present -leaders of Slovak separatists in exile are all mem1bevs of the HSI.JS and belong to the second or third garniturc (except Sidor and Durcanslky who belong to the first), which is the most radical and fanatical. 'I1hey are mostly young people belonging to the generation which has grown up at the time of Hitler expansion and had no opportunity to assimilate the democratic spirit, which in any case was too young in Slovakia. It is necessary to emiphasize that the Slovaks entered history as a nation only in 1918; this single fact explains almost everything aJbout the nature and quality of Slo,valk nationalism and separatism. In genera,!, the problem of Slovruk nationalism is a problem of democracy. In many a respect it resemJbles the problem of German nationalism and democracy. There is not question of refusing the recognition of the Slovaiks as a nation, with its equal rights; there is no difference between the nationalists and democrats in this point. The conflict is idoologica,l, moral, and cultural. Essentially it is a conflict between fascism and democracy. The Slo,vaks-Democrats are standing automatically for OOR, because they see in it a guarantee of democracy also for Slovakia. They are without any nationalist prejudice. and the question of CzechSlovak relations is for them lbut a question of governmental and administrative technique. 'Dhe motives ,b ehind the Slova!k separatism is political immaturity, nationalist passions, anti-Czech, anti-Hungavian, anti-Jewish hatred, lacking all objective foundations. 'I1he Sloviruk separatism is !basically an rubsence of ,correct political thiniking, lack of education, democratic tradition, humanitarian feeling, and a want of culture in general. It is based on psychic complexes and it is a kind of primitivism. The Western democracies may not make any compromise with it if they do not wish to weaken the democracy of Slovakia and if their aim is the reconstruction of democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. The only political goal of Slov8Jk nationalism is a re-establish- �42 SLOVAKIA ment of an independent -Slo1Va:k State with the same underlying ideology as that which prevailed under Tiso. Any compromise in 1Jhls respect would mean an irrevocaJble step backward and a retreat a,way from democracy. Their attitude toward federation plans, in which they see a good Oipportunity, is motivated by naked political opportunism. They are inc3!pa!ble of any federation because of their deep nationalist prejudice and complex. Their aim is the destruction of OSR, the seizure of power which would be otherwise impossible, because of the fascist past of all leaders oif nationalist separatism. The criticism of the foregoing passage .should not be interpretd as prejudice. H is not al,w ays easy for Western olbservers to understand fully the d.ifif.ioult position of democratic ideas in the countries where, in albsence of a strong tradition, they are e~sed to the inroads not only of communism, but also of another ikind of political primitivism ( nationalism, church confessionalism). The present criticism is based on the results of a thorough analysis of the so-called "Slovak Problem." It is only because of the lack of space that the fads are accumulated without adequate basis of objective evidence. May we stress, too, that the authors of the most critical parts and passages on the Slovaik nationalism contained in the present memo,r,andum are Slovaks and Catholics as well. The significance of Dr. Benes: A negative attitude towards the personality of Benes is held by two political groups only : Prchala and Slovak nationalists. The attitude of a small minority of Conserwatives, Catholics and some other Right Wing Politicians is also more or less revered. The democrats in general are rather united in their relations to Benes. The doubts aibout his policies, which arose in exile following immediately the communist overthrow of the democracy regimes, hawe disappeared, so that after his refusal to add his signature to the · new communist-'Siponsored Constitution, which was later follO!Wed 'by his resignation, Benes slowly became the symbol of democratic struggle against the Communism. Before his death, he was virtually expected to resume his leadership of the third resistance struggle for a new, free, and d ~ cratic Czechoslovakia in exile. �SLOVAKIA 43 iHis death was mourned ,b y all quarters. The devotion to his idea.ls grew more intense everywhere, partly as a result of pressure of demagogic and rough propaganda by the two groups mentioned a'bove. In general, it can be said that Czechoslovak democratic exile block follows the path of Masarytk's tradition of Human democracy, which is in no way o.pposed to Benes's policies, even if they are criticized in some very important aspects, such as national state, .regulated democracy, the prdl>lem of national minorities in OSR, and especially the practical politics since the liberation (194'5). Benes remains an authority for all the democrats at home and in exile as a theoretician of democracy; for the majority of emigrants he represents the symbol of national independence. His prestige has been growing continuously since his resignation, and his departure is being felt every.where as irreplaceable. It is recognized almost generally that Benes acted under the pressure and responsibility which was historic and which eliminates any attempt at an objective judgement in the present moment. Political aspirations of democratic exile block: CzechoslovaJk democratic political groups in exile regret the state of non-existence of a recognized representiati,ve body; the general disappointment, too, is 'being felt in respect of the undiscriminating, apolitical, refugee status accorded to Czechoslovak political exiles. Czechoslovak political e::iciles feel they are no emigrants and they are inclined to accept the emigration possi!bilities given only insofar as they offer the basis for political activities in the broadest possible extent, directed to the ultimat.e goal of all exiles to the re-establishment of a free and democratic Czechosloivaikia. This "Refugee Status" is disliiked most of all by the Czechoslovak democratic exiles which consider themse1ves as true allies of the West and as the real representatives of an allied Nation which is democratically so qualified as no other nation of Central and Eastern Europe. Ozechoslovak democratic exiles would be very happy to see the change in their status and their general position. Frankfurt-Main, in November 1948. �44 SLOVAKIA Taking into account what has happened since 1948, particularly the "special" treatment accorded the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings by our State Department, I believe it is safe to say that " In our issue of February 19 (p. 531) we wondered what sort of information the State Department has been provided with in choosing members for the Czechoslovak Council recently formed in Washington. The reserves we expressed on that occasion are confirmed by a letter sent us since then by a distinguished statesman prominent in Czechoslovakia's political life previous to the communist coup. We quote a few lines from his letter: In this new Czecho-Slovak Council there are no Slovak Catholics (the three Slovaks who are nominally Catholics never took part in the religious and cultural life of the country), and the Czech People's Party is represented by three persons of doubtful moral standing who had always been friends of Soviet domination. The rest are Marxian Socialists - who are presumably in great favor at Washington and three Czech Agrarians( who are perhaps the only Catholics in the whole assembly. Perhaps the State Department officials are right in thinking that a council, whatever may be its composition, is better than no council. From the standpoint of American political strategy no objection can be raised. But my own view of these things is a bit different. The leaders of the newly formed Council are Marxists can Bolshevism be defeated by its own ideas? They are freethinkers and opponents of any religious instruction. What Cultural ideas will they give to my unhappy people? They will have to rule in Slovakia by sheer force - could that be called democracy? Their conception of foreign policy is that of military alliances a la Benes and hatred towards all the neighbors - does that mean peace? Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that men who were bitter enemies of the Marshall Plan are now invited by the State Department to America. "Czechoslovakia is a Catholic country (Bohemia and Moravia 75 percent, Slovakia 80 percent), and yet the principal men in this Council are either Protestants or atheists. It is certainly not raising a religious issue to ask if such an arrangement is equitable. Again the question arises: whose advice, if any, is being followed by the State Department in this strange procedure?"-(AM ERICA, March 19, 1949) . the "memorandum" has proved its usefulness for the Benes Czechs, serving as a criterion or guide for "policy makers" in the United �SLOVAKIA 45 States Government, particularly in regard to the question of what exiles from Czecho-Slovakia could be considered "trustworthy and reliable experts" on Czecho-Slovakian matters. In 1949, after our State Department (Acheson) invited the Benes Czechs to the U. S. A. and gave a batch of blank visas to Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Benes, at that time in Paris, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings were brought to the United States at taxpayers' expense to advise our Government and its various departments and agencies on the matter of how to fight Communism and the Communists and outsmart Soviet Russia in the field of psychological warfare! The NEW YORK TIMES stated at that time (Feb. 6, 1949) that "they plan to set up what will be, in effect, a Czechoslovak Government in exile" - and previous to that date (Jan. 5, 1949), the same source reported the arrival of a "High Escaped Czech" - Arnost Heidrich - who, according to well-informed Czechs is neither of Slovak nor Czech origin, as follows: "Arnost Heidrich, Secretary General of the Czechoslovak Foreign Office and for fourteen years legal and political adviser to the late Dr. Edward Benes, has escaped from Prague and came to Washington with a detailed story of Communist activities and plans in Eastern Europe. M. Heidrich, a white-haired 59-year-old civil servant who is well known and trusted by the United States Government, was brought here by United States authorities and has made a full report of conditions in Czechoslovakia to the State Department." Apparently, Mr. Heidrich, like Dr. Eduard Benes, knew all about Communist activities and plans! After their arrival in the U. S., the Benes Czechs, (Ripka Zenkl, Taborsky, Peroutka, Ingr, Majer, Firt, Prochazka, etc.) and their Slovak hirelin&_s (Lettrich, Kocvara, Hodfa, Papanek, Franek, Slavik, Krno, Mudry-Sebik, etc.) organized the "COUNCIL OF FREE CZECHOSLOVAKIA" and set up headquarters in Washington. As "experts," they were soon employed by the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe), various universities, the VOA (USIA), CIA, Library of Congress, the Pentagon, and other agencies of U. S. Government in one capacity or another. I have said it before and I repeat it again that I am convinced that the Benes Czechs exercise great influence and practically control the so-called "Czechoslovak" unit or division of both the RFE and also the VOA (USIA) in regard to "reliability" of personnel, exile and otherwise, employed. In the light of the facts uncovered during the past nine years, why are they still tolerated in 1958? The Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings have been discredited by their own peoples at home, so why should we curry their favor? The Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it have brought this to the attention of our Government, the Free Europe Committee, and the USIA (VOA) on several occasions, but practically nothing was done to remedy the situation. Someone, it seems, has decreed that patriotic Slovaks must be ignored and discriminated against; and this applies practhey simply are not tically to Slovak and Czech Catholics wanted; Hence, I am strongly inclined to believe that the 1948 "MEMORANDUM" of the Benes Czechs is still considered valid by some VIP in official Washington. So the "expert" advisers to de- �46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During � 28 SLOVAKIA "MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA EXILES" Th.is memorandum deals with political aspects ,o f CzechoslovaJk exrile groups only, especially so far ,a s their anticommunism and its motilves are concerned. Politically European anti-communism i,s not a united movement ; it contains factions and tendencies democratically not qualified or even disqualified. I1t has to ibe emphasized that yesterday's enemies of democracy (nacism and its friends), whicih are offering themselves as allies todlay, could easily become an acute iand fatal problem for democracy, in case not sufficient aJttention iis paid to the implications. Anti-communism as sucll is merely a potential ally oif democracy. In our opinion, all ,political emigration should be clasSlified alreadry now as to the real motives of its anti-communist attitude. We, in Czeoho-sio.vaJkia, who hawe lived to see the destruction of democracy first ·b y fascism and lat-er by communism, know only too well that these two contrasting ideologies, irreconcilaible ideologicaHy, are quite ridenitical insofar as their psychology and ethi:cs are concerned. Intermediate and .fresh as the experience with the Communists lives among politic:al exiles, it is very dangerous for democratic thin1king and feeling and tends to extremism and primirtiive radi'calism. The irritative camip psychology diminishes 1Jhe aJbility for finer distinctions and, as a consequence, anti--c01m:mwrism turns into the criticism of a very primitive, sometimes of quite fascist character. This tendency, which in the end would ,b ecome hiarmful to the cause of world democracy, is not very acute in CzeclloslovaJk camps unless it is left to develOip entirely in its own way. CzeohoslovaJk political emigration can be classified according to the motives of its anti-communism as follows : 1. Political Catholics: opponents of Communism for religious and confessional reasons. This g1roup has to be soodilvided into two parts: Czech and Slovak. Czeich Catholics are well equdipped ideologically; they are in contact with and influenced by modern Catholic movements in the West, �29 SLOVAKIA especially by that of F1rance. Their orientation is universal, hllimanitarian and, thrroug,h Masarytk's influence, also democrat.ic. They idenltify CommUll!ism with !Marxism and interpret it as a logical consequence of materialism and atheism. To a certain ex.tent their faith is liberal, at least it used to be so in Czechoslovakia. This feature, however, is weaken-, ing here in exile and is ,being replaced ,by one that is more conse.r,vaJtirve and confessional. The activities of this group are ca>rried on with the help of Catholic clergy which, in its turn, is supported by the VaJtrican throug,h .t!he Pax Romana org,anizatiOiil. The work of this group is, for that rea son, much easier and it is visilble everyiwhere. .Some movements of our emigirants from Ge11many had almost an exclusive Catholic character. So the transfer to Italy, for instance, consisted mainly of Catholics. The political Catholics are very expansive and so they may get into conflict with the above mentioned tiradition which is of lay, liberal and democratic character. The representatives, of this ,group are: Mr. Bohdan Chudoba, MP, Mrs. Kozeluhova, Mr. Prochazka, former Minister of Health, Mr. Tigrid, Chief Editor of (the Czech) Catholic Party Pre.s s. fu spite of the faot tha:t Bohemia is to a great e·x tent (96 % ) a Catholic country, the religious affiliation has never been identified with the political one; that is why the Oatholic Party has enjoyed no ,great significance since 1918, and it is hardly to be expected that it will be otherwise fn the future democratic Czechoslovakia. 1 The movement of political Catholicism in Slovakia, with the exception of a small groUJp of moderni sts, is of a mo•r e primitive nature and it has al,ways pursued policies which were in permanent conflict with the Czechoslovak democracy since the end of World War One. The Slovruk population is SO% Catholic; in 1938 election HSLS - (the Hlinka Slovruk Peoiple's Party) - polled rubout 40 % of all rvotes and, was relatively the strongest party. 'Dhi,s grolllp has two ,political cente115 outside Czechoslovakia. T,he first is in USA among the Slovak spooking American citizens, popularly spoiken of in C~hoslovakia 1 �30 SLOVAKIA as American Slovaiks. Their press (e. g. Slova:k Defense, Slovalk in America, Catholic) vehemently campailgns against the new ipoliltiC'al exiles who left their home-country after February 1948 only. They stand openly for legal continuity of the so-called SlOWJk State, campaign for it in pwblic and declare at the same tirme their intention to taike revenge on all participants in the 1944 anti-German rising at Banska Bystrica in the middle of Slovatkia, further on all politicians who have shown good will in cooperation with the Soviets during or after the war. Under the pressure of this kind of propaganda many SloviaJk,s succumb, become indifd:erent to the cause .o f CzechoslovaJkia, or even turn hostile to it. This political war-fare against Czechosl()IVakia is going on under the guise of Christian charity which appears to have been led until recently ,by an American citizen of Slovak origin, Father Billy. As ,the Ciharacter of the SloW!lk exiles is to a much smaller exitent ,p olitical than it is the case with the Czech emigTees, 8111d as it contains elements of very poor social and intellectual level, the kind .o f propaganda mentioned aJbove has had consideralble success. If the promises of material help, ,by which F1ather Billy has been able to influence the political minds of Slova;k emigrants in Germany, are Ito realize, it will certainly oreate another obstacle on the way of harmonious coo,peration of Czechs and Slovaks in exile. The other center of politioal Catholioism, which is in contact wilth t:lhe first, is the V1atican and is dommated by the former minister of Czechoslovakia at the time of Munich Agreement who Jailer held the post of Amb~dor of the Slovak State to the Holy Seat, Mr. Karol Sidor. He himself has been away frO!ffi Siov.rukia since 1939 and is profiting out od: a legend which has grown around him. Mr. Karol Sidor was a 'b ig man in the HSI.IS; he was lOQlked upon as a successor of Father Andrej Hlinka to the highest offioe in the Pairty. He was a leader of the most radical fri8tion of the young party followers and the founder as well as the Commander-in-Chief of HG (Hldnlka Guards, rurnied trooips of the ·P arty, formed on the pattern ·of the Gerrfiah SA or SS) . During the Munich crisis and after the resignation of President Benes, he became Minister in Prague Government �SLOVAKIA 31 and - as the consequence of this he lost corutact with the separatist wing of the Party, which in the meantime passed under the control of Flather Tiso, later president of an :independent SlovaJk State. Influenced .by Pra,gue and •b y his master Father Hilnika, w'ho died already in 1936, he believed in a solution whi_c h was based on the principle of tervitorial inltegrity of the Republic. His hesitation at the critical moment before the estia:blishment of Protectorate ()lVer Bohemia (Mairch 13, 1939) ca,used tlhat he lost all the German sympathies and facilitated the .r ise of Tiso. Later he was aippointed Am'bassador to Vlatican where he has ~en since. His ,attitude to Czechoslovalkia is equiivocal; until not long ago he stood for SlovaJk Staite; now, after some months of international development, he is more reserved and the latest news suggest that he almost reversed his mi.ti.al position. In spiite of the fact that Sidor has not engaged himself for certain reasons in the fascist regime in Slovalkira during the war, he is not without responsibi.Lity for what was going on there dru:ring his aJbserrce. His responsiibility is, in our opinion, essentia,L As the Chief of the Hlinlka Party press, leader of radicals and an important Party ,b oss - all in one person - he was the most characteristic representative of Slovak nationalism. He was in a pernnanent opposition to the democratic form of Cz;ecfuosloivrukia. He did his best to mruke the SloV'aJk national movement more radical and V1ulgar and, in this way, he induced the movement to• take the shaipe it did and .to end as it did, that is in the destruction of Czechoslova!kia, su:ppression of democracy and strengthening of fascist power in Burope. Sidor a:s a politician is without sufficient education, foresight, and sense of responsibility; he is unacceptable to the democrats in spite of the fact that his stay in Vatican has had a positive influence on him. Long emigrartion has made him to develop a Fuhrer-complex and a harmful sense of SQIVereignty. Even if his political conception has ~come more democratic, as a consequeil'ce of his contact with Vatican, there is nothing by which he could contribute to the cause of democracy. "With Sidor against the Jews" is the quintessence of his legend in Slovaikia. He has no other fol- �32 SLOVAKIA lowers there; if he switched over to different slogans, he would have to give up his o,w:n pa.sit and aJbandon those political and psychological forces which adoire him now. It cannot be sufficiently oouphasized that the whole emotional and ideological back,g round of Slovak separatism is giiven absolutely by the SloivaJk State, its inner spirit, its values and prejudices, and :if .Sidor did not serve these forces, he would be coI11Sidered as a traitor and opportunist. 2. Anti-communism as an expression of Czech or Slovak nationalism: On the Czech side, it is General Prchala who can be :termed as its representative. General Prcihala is a Czech afficer who did not return home after the last war because of political differences with Dr. Benes. His followers ma.Ike Ulp a tiny group among our exiles. The judgemenrts on General's qualities as a soldier run diametrioo.Uy, but there is no doulbt about his poliitical capaJbilities among the democratic exiles. The legend tha,t grew around him, as an immediate consequence of the first disruppointment after FeJbruary, has mostly eva;poraJted since. General Prchala is said by the peo,ple who know him to be a man of very limited views who has no political sense; he is said to hruve no democratic coI11Victions, and, besides, he suffers from something lilke megalomania. His political reasoning is emlbryonic and naive. He refuses to recognize .the necessity of political parties in democr.acy; he f101tters the Sudeten Germans for reasons of his personal amlbition, which iis ,b oth -u nreasona!ble and irresponsrble. His negotiations with the SlovaJk 5elparatist fraction which Mr. P. Pridavok in London, are too hasty to be considered seriously. His followers in CzechosloviaJkia are scanty and the democratic exile group do not oount with him ei,t her. His worshippers do not know him personally ; they regard him as the most outspoken anti-Communist and from their own illusions aJbout his personality which ilisappear as soon as they come in contact with reality. It is our opinion that General Prchala will go to the history of our emigration as a little episode. General Prchala's group is exploiting the fact of his long emig,raJtion and absence from his own country and has some financial means at dis posal. lit has its own paper "Cesky boj" published in London. His followers are recuit- �SLOVAKIA 33 ed from emigr.ants who left Czechoslovakia partly before the last war, but mostly who left between the years 194'51947. It is characteristic that they generally live outside the caimps. They founded in London The Czech National Committee which operates also .in the US Zone and has nothing in c01Inmon with Czechoslovakia Relief Committee. Prchala's group acceipts the Slovak seiparati,s m, supports ilt on account of common ideological affinity, and they plan to gather a Central European Federation. General Prchlala acts entirely with the ,peoip le of his kind. They are nationalists by outlook, their emotional and ideological background is, quite opposed to the ideas on which a healthy and organic federation could arise. The real motirves behind Prchala's federational plans iare opportunist in character. The idea of federation, if the latter is to be workable, pre-supposes Slljpra-inaitionalizing and democratic thuillcing, it presU!pposes the super nationalism not its ,a ssertion which, in sulbstance, is national egoism. On the Sl()I\Tlaik side, the nationlist group with the movement of poliitical Catholicism, insofar as the representatives and t>heiir folloiWers are concerned, has always been so since 1•918, aJ11d the best eXipression since was the Slwak State with a priest as president and a third of members of parliament also priests. The real leader of this groUJp is Mr. Durcansky, who is sometimes cOIIl:Sidered as successor of Father Tiso. As the fiTst Foreign Minister of the Slovaik Puippet Government, he is on the liist of war criminals and, consequently, the Slovak nationalists are more or less olbliged to accept Mr. Sidor, who represents the policy of tJhe Vatican as their leader. But for this fact, the position of Mr. Durcansky would be dominant beyond any doub:t, because of his relatitvely gireater erudition (he was professor of international laiw at ,the Bratislaivia University from 1939 till 1944), Intelligence, and because of Ms political skill. The gross of the Slovalk separatist group consists of young people (around 19 or 20 years of age). These people harve no personal experience of democracy. They are not sUJfficiently educated, inexperienced in all respects, they �34 SLOVAKIA ,s uccumb to the ,p ropaganda of the more radical, noisy and vulgar it is. This kind of propaganda exerts influence even on ipeople who left CzechoslovaJkia for quite apolitic.al reasons. MT. Durfansky had h4; organization built uip already at the time when the Czechoslovakia exile movement was yet non-existent. Lacking all the means, it is very difficult for the democratic exiles to catch up with him in thjs respect. DUT.fansky has his agents in all Czechoslovak camps, canv~ing for him both openly and secretly. It is· sad, and characteristic as well, tlhait these agents use all meians at their disposal, including bribes ( cigarettes, food packages from USA, promises of visa to Argentin,a, which is the country of residence of Mr. Durcansky). In spite af the ban on all political actiiVities in refugee caimps, the agents of Mr. Durcansky exercise great moral presswre on democratic Slovaiks by propaganda of revenge for the execution of Father Tiso and for the Bystrica rising in 1944, by campaigning oipenly for the Sl01VaJk State, which is 1being treated as a fait aiccompli in Catholic nationalistic preiss of .AJIIlerican Slovak,s in USA, Slovak refugees are instilled 1zy fear and used for political plans of Mr. Durcansky. An illegal pa-per by n,ame of "1Slova1k Struggle" is being pulb1ished lb y "Tiso's Society" somewhere in Munich. This mimeographe d paper stands openly for the Slovak State, for its idea a,,nd its fascist representative s, some of whom were listed as the war CTiminals still during •t he war (Tiso, Durca.nsky) . 3. Fascism in exile: It is implied in the former movements where it exists potentially for the present. It does not exist as ,a clear-cut cxrientation, hut its expression can be detected on different tendencies. It emerges on the surface indiividually without the couvage to appear as an open o.vga.ruzation. The real danger begins there where the anticommunist attitude turns into sheer passion and irrationalism, naJtional, religious, or racial. This danger is not acute for the present and would lbe easily neutralized by a clearer moral support to b,e accorded to the Czechoslovak democratic exiles 1b y the Western democracies. ½. Conservatives : One can count here the followers of �SLOVAKIA 35 all political parties which: were not admitted by the Third Reipulblic (1945) and were recognized now in exile: Peasant's Party, National Democrats, and the party defending the interests of small business and handwork. Those ,parties can serve well to the cause of democracy in CzechoslovaJkia, especially the Peasant's Party, if it strikes roots in Slovakia and turns the Party Politics into another direction leading out of the present dead-loclc situation created by the nationalist complex. This would contribute to the political intergration of both ,p ar.ts of the Republic, even if on the basis of a more conserviaUve character. In general, these parties represent vested interests · rather than ideologies. They stand for economic liberalism which best favors the interests of their followers. 1 It is 1known that the Peasant's Party was well received by all political groups, especially lby (the Czech) Social Democrats. The initia,l mutual resipect and good will of the two latter parties gives rise to speculations on an eventual coalition in the future which was well known in -t he party politics of the First Republic, ,w hen it was characteristically called "red-green coalition." 5. Decomratic exile groups: It is difficult to speaik a/bout the •pol-itic<al parties in connection with this group which reyresents the Czechoslovak tradition of universal and moral humanism as formulat,ed by Masaryk. In general, is can be said that the political .g rouping of tJhis block coincides with the parties forming the Government Coalition of the ,First Republic ( up till 1938) , the parties which stood b,y Masaryk without any reservation and later backed ,h is successor to the presidency, Mr. Benes; one can include into this growp (Czech) National Socialists (Czech) Social ~9CI"ats and, to a certain extent, the Czech Catholic Party and the old Peasant's Party. -, '·The opposition of this democratic block t.o Communism is motivated by humanitarian philosophy, cultural and moral universalism. This group opposes all na1Jional, confessional and class exclusiveness, its faith is undogmatic, lay ,and social in character. In European politics is stands for "troisieme force" with the democracy as a dominant �36 SLOVAKIA feature. It represents the best Czechoslovak tradition (Hus, Comenius, Masaryk), its orientation is universal, essentially related to or even identical with the democratic spirit of the West. It is a natural, unopportunistic ally of the West and an exclusive representative of Western orientation in Czechoslovakia in every respect. . '11he representatives of this group haive suffered most thI1ough the Oommunist cowp d'etat in February this yeaT. They tried their best to cooperate with the Communists, following the lines of policy laid do,w n by Yalta and other aJgreements, and now they pay dear for the failure of their "mission of good will" by inner chaos and repercussions caused hy tJhe political demagogy of the undemocratic antiCommunism. The democratic block, which still represents the majority of rpu!blic opinion in CzechosloV!aikia, is in a state of fermentation, revaluation, revision and heaJrt-searchmg. The visilble signs for this search for new policies can 'b e traced in the attempt to estalblish a single Socialist Party in CzechoslovaJkia on the pattern of Western Labour Parti~, in the retrospectirve criticism of our ,p ast policies towards the national minorities, in the reconstruction of _political status quo ante Munich, in the sympathies with the federatiOIIl :plans in Europe, and in many other tendencies. The personalities belonging to this group may be listed as follo,w s : Mr. Ferdinand Peroutka, Editor of the most influential non-1party weekly review "Dnesek; former ministers :Zen.kl, Majer, Stransky, Ripka; generals: Basal, Ingr; Slovaks: Osusky, Papanek, Slavik, Kocvara, General Feriencik. Franek, and others. Out of all groups this democratic bloclk is at the greatest disadvantage insofor as their position in refugee camps is concerned; it has no, press except "Svobodny Zitrek" published in Paris; it is without any visible material, financial, and moral support which is iacc0irded : more or less to all other exile groups, especially to our older exiles (1008, 1944-1947), which are rather defective, from the point of view of pure democracy. In general it can be 1 �SLOVAKIA 37 said that the democratic exiles h:we suppoI'ted Benes's policy from 1945 : they stood for the policy of understanding with the Communists, partly spontaneously and partly under the pressure of both internal political situation, and left <JSR only in Febl'uary when they were threatened by physical force. They do not consider the policy of Benes as a mistake, but rather as failure of good will and personal tragedy. The illusion of Benes is often compared to that of Roosevelt. The democrats feel that their experiment was an honest attempt which, from the pont of view of world democracy, was absolutely necessary .. The failure is not received with satisfaction by the genuine democrats; they rather feel disa,ppointed and deceived. 'Dhe disa,ppointme nt becomes aH the more ,pairuf.ul for them as they reconsider their mistaJkes and ,s acrifices. The democratic self-criticism aims in the first place at their own political parties and politicians. They admit shortsightedness, lao'k of foresight, and carelessness in respect of the real aims hidden behind the com..'TI unist activities, and, finally, they confess to helplessness and hesitation at the time when the communist intentions become evident. The most painful are the concessions made to the Communists in what concerns the integrity of democracy, such as the inhumanities colDJilltted during the expulsion of the Sudenten-Ger mans and Hungarians, the misuse of political trials and purges, excesses of .s ecret police, and the like. Under the pressure of ideological disunity and self-criticism, some princilples, as regards the future political system, crystalize: the preservation of state continuity on a new basis, enlarged politically (by the reintroduction of some of the old parties), and personally (1b y the admittance to the political life of the country of non-ipa,rty personalities) . The persons of some ,p restige, who were not engaged in party politics and whose attitude to the past regime (1945-48) is merely critical not a priori negatirve, are the following: Peroutka, Papanek, Osusky, Hasal, Feriencik, and a few others. In general, one cay say the exile resistance movement which is being born outside Czoohoslovak ia is not motivated by negation or contempt, but by understanding and criticism of Benes's Republic. In the ey~ of democratic 1 �38 SLOVAKIA exiles this attitude becomes the chief criterion of a democratic qualification. After the death of Benes and Masaryk, junior, C:rechoslovak exiles are without a recognized leader and it is doubtful whether such a person will arise in a spontaneous way. The aibsen<!e of a leading personality is being felt everywhere, especially while our resistance organization is at its beginning. 'Dhe choice of democratic representatives is, at this time of recession of European democracy, very acute and more responsible than ever •b efore. It is quite clear that the judgement of Western governments will 1be essential in this choice; their responsilbility for the future of European democracy wiH be very large. We think it would be desirruble that the charitable character of the assistance to our refugees should be repla,ced, within the limits given by the ,policies of Western democracies, by a support of a more political character. We are convinced that such a revision of our "refugee status" would play an important role from the military point of view as well. The apolitical character of the aid to our refugees has a harmful influence on the moral of the people concerned, especially on the younger refugees, who left their homes mostly on the basis of false information and supposition that they would be immediately drafted into the Czechoslovak or other military forces. The present camps are for many emigrants an education for political indifiference and the only interest that remains is to emigrate and to settle down. The emigrants, who are living outside the camps •b eyond the reach of political or other control authority, S1Uccumb to harmful orientations and other influences. Czech@slovak emigrants, wtho are living outside the Czechoslovalk camps in Austria and South Germany, mostly left Czechoslovakia long before February 1948 and are very often guilty of collaboration with nacism. The Sudeten-German problem: It was said already that the excesses committed in connection with the transfer of Sudeten-Ge.ranans were a very paJinful affair for the democrats. Many of them came over to Gernnany with the intention of opening a new chapter in �SLOVAKIA 39 CzeohoslovaJk-German relations, a chapter of cooperation and understanding , which was to be based on mutual concessions and compromises. This tendency is waning in contact with the every-day German reality, even if the original intention is not being aJbandoned entirely. Germany of today is democratic on the surface only and any cooperation with her seems to be still very risky. For that reason thP transfer of the Gernnan minority in 1945-46 it as present considered generally to have been the only possible solution under the circumstances . This attitude is accepted generally by tihe whole (Czech) democratic block, though it is often felt to •be o:f rather an emergency and unfinished character. The Slovak Problem: The Slovalk exiles, who left Czechoslovak ia between the time of liberation and February 1948, had an exclusively collaborationist character; the nationalist and fascist feature of this exile movement grew more intense under the influence olf exile p.sychology and with the gradual failure of the Czechoslovak democratic experiment. H this democratic experiment with the Communism had succeeded, these exiles would ha,ve never gained any significance. New possibilities for them are opening only nOIW after Ozech and Slovak democrats had to resign their "good will mission" and have compromised to a certain degree with the Communists. As these fascist and half-fascist exiles have been coming over to Germany now for more than three years and ha'Ve 1been supported not only by the Slovalk charity org,anizations in the USA, but by the Germans as well - which is characteristic in itself - they are numerically stronger than the recent democratic groups. To illustrate the quality and intelleotual level olf the people concerned, we gi,ve the total number of university graduates in iboth opposing groups of 'SlQIV,aks as it Q<!mtrs in the greatest Czechoslovak refugee camp in Ludwigsiburg (•J age:rihofkaser n) : Among 200 SlovaJks in .t he camp, there ,are 14 university graduates, out of which 1 (one) is nationalist-se paratist, while the other thirteen are democrats standing for the unity of Czechoslovakia. The average age of the members belonging to the democratic group is albout 33, in the separatists group it maJkes only 22 years. �40 SLOVAKIA The number of democratic Slovruks in exile increases raipidly since Febraury 1948 and amounts to aJbout 30 or 40% in aH the camps. This is caused by the fact that, until recently, the Communists refrained from wholesale persecution of the democrats in Slovia!kia 1beoause of the relative werukness of the COIIIlmunists in this part of the Republic. The political representation and importance of the Slovaks in exile politics outside Germany is so strong and great as never before. One of the candidates for chairmanship of the Czechoslovak National Council in the UISA is a SlovaJk, Mr. Osusky, Professor at Colgate University, USA, and fomner Ambassador oif Ozechoslovaikia to France. In the United Nations, it is a Slova!k, Mr. Papanek, who defends the cause of the Czechoslovak people there. He is assisted 1b y the former ambassador to US Government, Mr. Slavik, who is also a Slovalk. The strong Democratic Party (the majority ,p arty which polled 62 % of all votes recorded in the ,l ast free elections in SlolV'~kia in 1946) stands for a united but decentralized CzechoslovaJkia and its democracy (except for 2 dissidents: Dr. Bohm and Mr. Blasko, MPs) . It is to be emphasized that the underlying idea of nationalist and separatist movement has been a democratic one. It was represented by HSLIS ( The Hlinka SlOIV~ People's Party) which was lbanned after the defeat of Germany in 194!5, because of its wholehearted collaboration with nacism during the war. This party has /been in the full sense oif the word the pioneer, the spearhead and an exclusiive representative of fascism already long before 1938. Since 1921 and 1933, respectively, the movement sympathized quite openly and unambiguously with Mussolini and Hitler; it was already so at the time when, thanks to the maigic personal i.nifl:uence of president Masaryik, there were no pro-fascist tendencies in Czechoslovak political life. The nationalist and separatist press, from ~o,re or after Munich, sup.plies a mass of evidence slllpporting fully the foregoing sba.tements. This concerns the Party's official organ "Slovak" and "The Slovak Truth," just as well as the mo,re radical papers "Gardista" and especially "Nastup," the organ of Sidor extremists, edited then ,b y Dr. Durcansky. The ,Slovak nationalist and separatist movement has �SLOVAKIA 41 done its best to bring a,bout a situation suitaible for the destruction of CzechoslovaJkia and suppression of democracy. The so-called SlovaJk State, the full acceptance of its ideology and recognition of its leaders by Hitler was only a logical consequence. Tille present -leaders of Slovak separatists in exile are all mem1bevs of the HSI.JS and belong to the second or third garniturc (except Sidor and Durcanslky who belong to the first), which is the most radical and fanatical. 'I1hey are mostly young people belonging to the generation which has grown up at the time of Hitler expansion and had no opportunity to assimilate the democratic spirit, which in any case was too young in Slovakia. It is necessary to emiphasize that the Slovaks entered history as a nation only in 1918; this single fact explains almost everything aJbout the nature and quality of Slo,valk nationalism and separatism. In genera,!, the problem of Slovruk nationalism is a problem of democracy. In many a respect it resemJbles the problem of German nationalism and democracy. There is not question of refusing the recognition of the Slovaiks as a nation, with its equal rights; there is no difference between the nationalists and democrats in this point. The conflict is idoologica,l, moral, and cultural. Essentially it is a conflict between fascism and democracy. The Slo,vaks-Democrats are standing automatically for OOR, because they see in it a guarantee of democracy also for Slovakia. They are without any nationalist prejudice. and the question of CzechSlovak relations is for them lbut a question of governmental and administrative technique. 'Dhe motives ,b ehind the Slova!k separatism is political immaturity, nationalist passions, anti-Czech, anti-Hungavian, anti-Jewish hatred, lacking all objective foundations. 'I1he Sloviruk separatism is !basically an rubsence of ,correct political thiniking, lack of education, democratic tradition, humanitarian feeling, and a want of culture in general. It is based on psychic complexes and it is a kind of primitivism. The Western democracies may not make any compromise with it if they do not wish to weaken the democracy of Slovakia and if their aim is the reconstruction of democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. The only political goal of Slov8Jk nationalism is a re-establish- �42 SLOVAKIA ment of an independent -Slo1Va:k State with the same underlying ideology as that which prevailed under Tiso. Any compromise in 1Jhls respect would mean an irrevocaJble step backward and a retreat a,way from democracy. Their attitude toward federation plans, in which they see a good Oipportunity, is motivated by naked political opportunism. They are inc3!pa!ble of any federation because of their deep nationalist prejudice and complex. Their aim is the destruction of OSR, the seizure of power which would be otherwise impossible, because of the fascist past of all leaders oif nationalist separatism. The criticism of the foregoing passage .should not be interpretd as prejudice. H is not al,w ays easy for Western olbservers to understand fully the d.ifif.ioult position of democratic ideas in the countries where, in albsence of a strong tradition, they are e~sed to the inroads not only of communism, but also of another ikind of political primitivism ( nationalism, church confessionalism). The present criticism is based on the results of a thorough analysis of the so-called "Slovak Problem." It is only because of the lack of space that the fads are accumulated without adequate basis of objective evidence. May we stress, too, that the authors of the most critical parts and passages on the Slovaik nationalism contained in the present memo,r,andum are Slovaks and Catholics as well. The significance of Dr. Benes: A negative attitude towards the personality of Benes is held by two political groups only : Prchala and Slovak nationalists. The attitude of a small minority of Conserwatives, Catholics and some other Right Wing Politicians is also more or less revered. The democrats in general are rather united in their relations to Benes. The doubts aibout his policies, which arose in exile following immediately the communist overthrow of the democracy regimes, hawe disappeared, so that after his refusal to add his signature to the · new communist-'Siponsored Constitution, which was later follO!Wed 'by his resignation, Benes slowly became the symbol of democratic struggle against the Communism. Before his death, he was virtually expected to resume his leadership of the third resistance struggle for a new, free, and d ~ cratic Czechoslovakia in exile. �SLOVAKIA 43 iHis death was mourned ,b y all quarters. The devotion to his idea.ls grew more intense everywhere, partly as a result of pressure of demagogic and rough propaganda by the two groups mentioned a'bove. In general, it can be said that Czechoslovak democratic exile block follows the path of Masarytk's tradition of Human democracy, which is in no way o.pposed to Benes's policies, even if they are criticized in some very important aspects, such as national state, .regulated democracy, the prdl>lem of national minorities in OSR, and especially the practical politics since the liberation (194'5). Benes remains an authority for all the democrats at home and in exile as a theoretician of democracy; for the majority of emigrants he represents the symbol of national independence. His prestige has been growing continuously since his resignation, and his departure is being felt every.where as irreplaceable. It is recognized almost generally that Benes acted under the pressure and responsibility which was historic and which eliminates any attempt at an objective judgement in the present moment. Political aspirations of democratic exile block: CzechoslovaJk democratic political groups in exile regret the state of non-existence of a recognized representiati,ve body; the general disappointment, too, is 'being felt in respect of the undiscriminating, apolitical, refugee status accorded to Czechoslovak political exiles. Czechoslovak political e::iciles feel they are no emigrants and they are inclined to accept the emigration possi!bilities given only insofar as they offer the basis for political activities in the broadest possible extent, directed to the ultimat.e goal of all exiles to the re-establishment of a free and democratic Czechosloivaikia. This "Refugee Status" is disliiked most of all by the Czechoslovak democratic exiles which consider themse1ves as true allies of the West and as the real representatives of an allied Nation which is democratically so qualified as no other nation of Central and Eastern Europe. Ozechoslovak democratic exiles would be very happy to see the change in their status and their general position. Frankfurt-Main, in November 1948. �44 SLOVAKIA Taking into account what has happened since 1948, particularly the "special" treatment accorded the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings by our State Department, I believe it is safe to say that " In our issue of February 19 (p. 531) we wondered what sort of information the State Department has been provided with in choosing members for the Czechoslovak Council recently formed in Washington. The reserves we expressed on that occasion are confirmed by a letter sent us since then by a distinguished statesman prominent in Czechoslovakia's political life previous to the communist coup. We quote a few lines from his letter: In this new Czecho-Slovak Council there are no Slovak Catholics (the three Slovaks who are nominally Catholics never took part in the religious and cultural life of the country), and the Czech People's Party is represented by three persons of doubtful moral standing who had always been friends of Soviet domination. The rest are Marxian Socialists - who are presumably in great favor at Washington and three Czech Agrarians( who are perhaps the only Catholics in the whole assembly. Perhaps the State Department officials are right in thinking that a council, whatever may be its composition, is better than no council. From the standpoint of American political strategy no objection can be raised. But my own view of these things is a bit different. The leaders of the newly formed Council are Marxists can Bolshevism be defeated by its own ideas? They are freethinkers and opponents of any religious instruction. What Cultural ideas will they give to my unhappy people? They will have to rule in Slovakia by sheer force - could that be called democracy? Their conception of foreign policy is that of military alliances a la Benes and hatred towards all the neighbors - does that mean peace? Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that men who were bitter enemies of the Marshall Plan are now invited by the State Department to America. "Czechoslovakia is a Catholic country (Bohemia and Moravia 75 percent, Slovakia 80 percent), and yet the principal men in this Council are either Protestants or atheists. It is certainly not raising a religious issue to ask if such an arrangement is equitable. Again the question arises: whose advice, if any, is being followed by the State Department in this strange procedure?"-(AM ERICA, March 19, 1949) . the "memorandum" has proved its usefulness for the Benes Czechs, serving as a criterion or guide for "policy makers" in the United �SLOVAKIA 45 States Government, particularly in regard to the question of what exiles from Czecho-Slovakia could be considered "trustworthy and reliable experts" on Czecho-Slovakian matters. In 1949, after our State Department (Acheson) invited the Benes Czechs to the U. S. A. and gave a batch of blank visas to Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Benes, at that time in Paris, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings were brought to the United States at taxpayers' expense to advise our Government and its various departments and agencies on the matter of how to fight Communism and the Communists and outsmart Soviet Russia in the field of psychological warfare! The NEW YORK TIMES stated at that time (Feb. 6, 1949) that "they plan to set up what will be, in effect, a Czechoslovak Government in exile" - and previous to that date (Jan. 5, 1949), the same source reported the arrival of a "High Escaped Czech" - Arnost Heidrich - who, according to well-informed Czechs is neither of Slovak nor Czech origin, as follows: "Arnost Heidrich, Secretary General of the Czechoslovak Foreign Office and for fourteen years legal and political adviser to the late Dr. Edward Benes, has escaped from Prague and came to Washington with a detailed story of Communist activities and plans in Eastern Europe. M. Heidrich, a white-haired 59-year-old civil servant who is well known and trusted by the United States Government, was brought here by United States authorities and has made a full report of conditions in Czechoslovakia to the State Department." Apparently, Mr. Heidrich, like Dr. Eduard Benes, knew all about Communist activities and plans! After their arrival in the U. S., the Benes Czechs, (Ripka Zenkl, Taborsky, Peroutka, Ingr, Majer, Firt, Prochazka, etc.) and their Slovak hirelin&_s (Lettrich, Kocvara, Hodfa, Papanek, Franek, Slavik, Krno, Mudry-Sebik, etc.) organized the "COUNCIL OF FREE CZECHOSLOVAKIA" and set up headquarters in Washington. As "experts," they were soon employed by the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe), various universities, the VOA (USIA), CIA, Library of Congress, the Pentagon, and other agencies of U. S. Government in one capacity or another. I have said it before and I repeat it again that I am convinced that the Benes Czechs exercise great influence and practically control the so-called "Czechoslovak" unit or division of both the RFE and also the VOA (USIA) in regard to "reliability" of personnel, exile and otherwise, employed. In the light of the facts uncovered during the past nine years, why are they still tolerated in 1958? The Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings have been discredited by their own peoples at home, so why should we curry their favor? The Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it have brought this to the attention of our Government, the Free Europe Committee, and the USIA (VOA) on several occasions, but practically nothing was done to remedy the situation. Someone, it seems, has decreed that patriotic Slovaks must be ignored and discriminated against; and this applies practhey simply are not tically to Slovak and Czech Catholics wanted; Hence, I am strongly inclined to believe that the 1948 "MEMORANDUM" of the Benes Czechs is still considered valid by some VIP in official Washington. So the "expert" advisers to de- �46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document 28 SLOVAKIA "MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA EXILES" Th.is memorandum deals with political aspects ,o f CzechoslovaJk exrile groups only, especially so far ,a s their anticommunism and its motilves are concerned. Politically European anti-communism i,s not a united movement ; it contains factions and tendencies democratically not qualified or even disqualified. I1t has to ibe emphasized that yesterday's enemies of democracy (nacism and its friends), whicih are offering themselves as allies todlay, could easily become an acute iand fatal problem for democracy, in case not sufficient aJttention iis paid to the implications. Anti-communism as sucll is merely a potential ally oif democracy. In our opinion, all ,political emigration should be clasSlified alreadry now as to the real motives of its anti-communist attitude. We, in Czeoho-sio.vaJkia, who hawe lived to see the destruction of democracy first ·b y fascism and lat-er by communism, know only too well that these two contrasting ideologies, irreconcilaible ideologicaHy, are quite ridenitical insofar as their psychology and ethi:cs are concerned. Intermediate and .fresh as the experience with the Communists lives among politic:al exiles, it is very dangerous for democratic thin1king and feeling and tends to extremism and primirtiive radi'calism. The irritative camip psychology diminishes 1Jhe aJbility for finer distinctions and, as a consequence, anti--c01m:mwrism turns into the criticism of a very primitive, sometimes of quite fascist character. This tendency, which in the end would ,b ecome hiarmful to the cause of world democracy, is not very acute in CzeclloslovaJk camps unless it is left to develOip entirely in its own way. CzeohoslovaJk political emigration can be classified according to the motives of its anti-communism as follows : 1. Political Catholics: opponents of Communism for religious and confessional reasons. This g1roup has to be soodilvided into two parts: Czech and Slovak. Czeich Catholics are well equdipped ideologically; they are in contact with and influenced by modern Catholic movements in the West, 29 SLOVAKIA especially by that of F1rance. Their orientation is universal, hllimanitarian and, thrroug,h Masarytk's influence, also democrat.ic. They idenltify CommUll!ism with !Marxism and interpret it as a logical consequence of materialism and atheism. To a certain ex.tent their faith is liberal, at least it used to be so in Czechoslovakia. This feature, however, is weaken-, ing here in exile and is ,being replaced ,by one that is more conse.r,vaJtirve and confessional. The activities of this group are ca>rried on with the help of Catholic clergy which, in its turn, is supported by the VaJtrican throug,h .t!he Pax Romana org,anizatiOiil. The work of this group is, for that rea son, much easier and it is visilble everyiwhere. .Some movements of our emigirants from Ge11many had almost an exclusive Catholic character. So the transfer to Italy, for instance, consisted mainly of Catholics. The political Catholics are very expansive and so they may get into conflict with the above mentioned tiradition which is of lay, liberal and democratic character. The representatives, of this ,group are: Mr. Bohdan Chudoba, MP, Mrs. Kozeluhova, Mr. Prochazka, former Minister of Health, Mr. Tigrid, Chief Editor of (the Czech) Catholic Party Pre.s s. fu spite of the faot tha:t Bohemia is to a great e·x tent (96 % ) a Catholic country, the religious affiliation has never been identified with the political one; that is why the Oatholic Party has enjoyed no ,great significance since 1918, and it is hardly to be expected that it will be otherwise fn the future democratic Czechoslovakia. 1 The movement of political Catholicism in Slovakia, with the exception of a small groUJp of moderni sts, is of a mo•r e primitive nature and it has al,ways pursued policies which were in permanent conflict with the Czechoslovak democracy since the end of World War One. The Slovruk population is SO% Catholic; in 1938 election HSLS - (the Hlinka Slovruk Peoiple's Party) - polled rubout 40 % of all rvotes and, was relatively the strongest party. 'Dhi,s grolllp has two ,political cente115 outside Czechoslovakia. T,he first is in USA among the Slovak spooking American citizens, popularly spoiken of in C~hoslovakia 1 30 SLOVAKIA as American Slovaiks. Their press (e. g. Slova:k Defense, Slovalk in America, Catholic) vehemently campailgns against the new ipoliltiC'al exiles who left their home-country after February 1948 only. They stand openly for legal continuity of the so-called SlOWJk State, campaign for it in pwblic and declare at the same tirme their intention to taike revenge on all participants in the 1944 anti-German rising at Banska Bystrica in the middle of Slovatkia, further on all politicians who have shown good will in cooperation with the Soviets during or after the war. Under the pressure of this kind of propaganda many SloviaJk,s succumb, become indifd:erent to the cause .o f CzechoslovaJkia, or even turn hostile to it. This political war-fare against Czechosl()IVakia is going on under the guise of Christian charity which appears to have been led until recently ,by an American citizen of Slovak origin, Father Billy. As ,the Ciharacter of the SloW!lk exiles is to a much smaller exitent ,p olitical than it is the case with the Czech emigTees, 8111d as it contains elements of very poor social and intellectual level, the kind .o f propaganda mentioned aJbove has had consideralble success. If the promises of material help, ,by which F1ather Billy has been able to influence the political minds of Slova;k emigrants in Germany, are Ito realize, it will certainly oreate another obstacle on the way of harmonious coo,peration of Czechs and Slovaks in exile. The other center of politioal Catholioism, which is in contact wilth t:lhe first, is the V1atican and is dommated by the former minister of Czechoslovakia at the time of Munich Agreement who Jailer held the post of Amb~dor of the Slovak State to the Holy Seat, Mr. Karol Sidor. He himself has been away frO!ffi Siov.rukia since 1939 and is profiting out od: a legend which has grown around him. Mr. Karol Sidor was a 'b ig man in the HSI.IS; he was lOQlked upon as a successor of Father Andrej Hlinka to the highest offioe in the Pairty. He was a leader of the most radical fri8tion of the young party followers and the founder as well as the Commander-in-Chief of HG (Hldnlka Guards, rurnied trooips of the ·P arty, formed on the pattern ·of the Gerrfiah SA or SS) . During the Munich crisis and after the resignation of President Benes, he became Minister in Prague Government SLOVAKIA 31 and - as the consequence of this he lost corutact with the separatist wing of the Party, which in the meantime passed under the control of Flather Tiso, later president of an :independent SlovaJk State. Influenced .by Pra,gue and •b y his master Father Hilnika, w'ho died already in 1936, he believed in a solution whi_c h was based on the principle of tervitorial inltegrity of the Republic. His hesitation at the critical moment before the estia:blishment of Protectorate ()lVer Bohemia (Mairch 13, 1939) ca,used tlhat he lost all the German sympathies and facilitated the .r ise of Tiso. Later he was aippointed Am'bassador to Vlatican where he has ~en since. His ,attitude to Czechoslovalkia is equiivocal; until not long ago he stood for SlovaJk Staite; now, after some months of international development, he is more reserved and the latest news suggest that he almost reversed his mi.ti.al position. In spiite of the fact that Sidor has not engaged himself for certain reasons in the fascist regime in Slovalkira during the war, he is not without responsibi.Lity for what was going on there dru:ring his aJbserrce. His responsiibility is, in our opinion, essentia,L As the Chief of the Hlinlka Party press, leader of radicals and an important Party ,b oss - all in one person - he was the most characteristic representative of Slovak nationalism. He was in a pernnanent opposition to the democratic form of Cz;ecfuosloivrukia. He did his best to mruke the SloV'aJk national movement more radical and V1ulgar and, in this way, he induced the movement to• take the shaipe it did and .to end as it did, that is in the destruction of Czechoslova!kia, su:ppression of democracy and strengthening of fascist power in Burope. Sidor a:s a politician is without sufficient education, foresight, and sense of responsibility; he is unacceptable to the democrats in spite of the fact that his stay in Vatican has had a positive influence on him. Long emigrartion has made him to develop a Fuhrer-complex and a harmful sense of SQIVereignty. Even if his political conception has ~come more democratic, as a consequeil'ce of his contact with Vatican, there is nothing by which he could contribute to the cause of democracy. "With Sidor against the Jews" is the quintessence of his legend in Slovaikia. He has no other fol- 32 SLOVAKIA lowers there; if he switched over to different slogans, he would have to give up his o,w:n pa.sit and aJbandon those political and psychological forces which adoire him now. It cannot be sufficiently oouphasized that the whole emotional and ideological back,g round of Slovak separatism is giiven absolutely by the SloivaJk State, its inner spirit, its values and prejudices, and :if .Sidor did not serve these forces, he would be coI11Sidered as a traitor and opportunist. 2. Anti-communism as an expression of Czech or Slovak nationalism: On the Czech side, it is General Prchala who can be :termed as its representative. General Prcihala is a Czech afficer who did not return home after the last war because of political differences with Dr. Benes. His followers ma.Ike Ulp a tiny group among our exiles. The judgemenrts on General's qualities as a soldier run diametrioo.Uy, but there is no doulbt about his poliitical capaJbilities among the democratic exiles. The legend tha,t grew around him, as an immediate consequence of the first disruppointment after FeJbruary, has mostly eva;poraJted since. General Prchala is said by the peo,ple who know him to be a man of very limited views who has no political sense; he is said to hruve no democratic coI11Victions, and, besides, he suffers from something lilke megalomania. His political reasoning is emlbryonic and naive. He refuses to recognize .the necessity of political parties in democr.acy; he f101tters the Sudeten Germans for reasons of his personal amlbition, which iis ,b oth -u nreasona!ble and irresponsrble. His negotiations with the SlovaJk 5elparatist fraction which Mr. P. Pridavok in London, are too hasty to be considered seriously. His followers in CzechosloviaJkia are scanty and the democratic exile group do not oount with him ei,t her. His worshippers do not know him personally ; they regard him as the most outspoken anti-Communist and from their own illusions aJbout his personality which ilisappear as soon as they come in contact with reality. It is our opinion that General Prchala will go to the history of our emigration as a little episode. General Prchala's group is exploiting the fact of his long emig,raJtion and absence from his own country and has some financial means at dis posal. lit has its own paper "Cesky boj" published in London. His followers are recuit- SLOVAKIA 33 ed from emigr.ants who left Czechoslovakia partly before the last war, but mostly who left between the years 194'51947. It is characteristic that they generally live outside the caimps. They founded in London The Czech National Committee which operates also .in the US Zone and has nothing in c01Inmon with Czechoslovakia Relief Committee. Prchala's group acceipts the Slovak seiparati,s m, supports ilt on account of common ideological affinity, and they plan to gather a Central European Federation. General Prchlala acts entirely with the ,peoip le of his kind. They are nationalists by outlook, their emotional and ideological background is, quite opposed to the ideas on which a healthy and organic federation could arise. The real motirves behind Prchala's federational plans iare opportunist in character. The idea of federation, if the latter is to be workable, pre-supposes Slljpra-inaitionalizing and democratic thuillcing, it presU!pposes the super nationalism not its ,a ssertion which, in sulbstance, is national egoism. On the Sl()I\Tlaik side, the nationlist group with the movement of poliitical Catholicism, insofar as the representatives and t>heiir folloiWers are concerned, has always been so since 1•918, aJ11d the best eXipression since was the Slwak State with a priest as president and a third of members of parliament also priests. The real leader of this groUJp is Mr. Durcansky, who is sometimes cOIIl:Sidered as successor of Father Tiso. As the fiTst Foreign Minister of the Slovaik Puippet Government, he is on the liist of war criminals and, consequently, the Slovak nationalists are more or less olbliged to accept Mr. Sidor, who represents the policy of tJhe Vatican as their leader. But for this fact, the position of Mr. Durcansky would be dominant beyond any doub:t, because of his relatitvely gireater erudition (he was professor of international laiw at ,the Bratislaivia University from 1939 till 1944), Intelligence, and because of Ms political skill. The gross of the Slovalk separatist group consists of young people (around 19 or 20 years of age). These people harve no personal experience of democracy. They are not sUJfficiently educated, inexperienced in all respects, they 34 SLOVAKIA ,s uccumb to the ,p ropaganda of the more radical, noisy and vulgar it is. This kind of propaganda exerts influence even on ipeople who left CzechoslovaJkia for quite apolitic.al reasons. MT. Durfansky had h4; organization built uip already at the time when the Czechoslovakia exile movement was yet non-existent. Lacking all the means, it is very difficult for the democratic exiles to catch up with him in thjs respect. DUT.fansky has his agents in all Czechoslovak camps, canv~ing for him both openly and secretly. It is· sad, and characteristic as well, tlhait these agents use all meians at their disposal, including bribes ( cigarettes, food packages from USA, promises of visa to Argentin,a, which is the country of residence of Mr. Durcansky). In spite af the ban on all political actiiVities in refugee caimps, the agents of Mr. Durcansky exercise great moral presswre on democratic Slovaiks by propaganda of revenge for the execution of Father Tiso and for the Bystrica rising in 1944, by campaigning oipenly for the Sl01VaJk State, which is 1being treated as a fait aiccompli in Catholic nationalistic preiss of .AJIIlerican Slovak,s in USA, Slovak refugees are instilled 1zy fear and used for political plans of Mr. Durcansky. An illegal pa-per by n,ame of "1Slova1k Struggle" is being pulb1ished lb y "Tiso's Society" somewhere in Munich. This mimeographe d paper stands openly for the Slovak State, for its idea a,,nd its fascist representative s, some of whom were listed as the war CTiminals still during •t he war (Tiso, Durca.nsky) . 3. Fascism in exile: It is implied in the former movements where it exists potentially for the present. It does not exist as ,a clear-cut cxrientation, hut its expression can be detected on different tendencies. It emerges on the surface indiividually without the couvage to appear as an open o.vga.ruzation. The real danger begins there where the anticommunist attitude turns into sheer passion and irrationalism, naJtional, religious, or racial. This danger is not acute for the present and would lbe easily neutralized by a clearer moral support to b,e accorded to the Czechoslovak democratic exiles 1b y the Western democracies. ½. Conservatives : One can count here the followers of SLOVAKIA 35 all political parties which: were not admitted by the Third Reipulblic (1945) and were recognized now in exile: Peasant's Party, National Democrats, and the party defending the interests of small business and handwork. Those ,parties can serve well to the cause of democracy in CzechoslovaJkia, especially the Peasant's Party, if it strikes roots in Slovakia and turns the Party Politics into another direction leading out of the present dead-loclc situation created by the nationalist complex. This would contribute to the political intergration of both ,p ar.ts of the Republic, even if on the basis of a more conserviaUve character. In general, these parties represent vested interests · rather than ideologies. They stand for economic liberalism which best favors the interests of their followers. 1 It is 1known that the Peasant's Party was well received by all political groups, especially lby (the Czech) Social Democrats. The initia,l mutual resipect and good will of the two latter parties gives rise to speculations on an eventual coalition in the future which was well known in -t he party politics of the First Republic, ,w hen it was characteristically called "red-green coalition." 5. Decomratic exile groups: It is difficult to speaik a/bout the •pol-itic<al parties in connection with this group which reyresents the Czechoslovak tradition of universal and moral humanism as formulat,ed by Masaryk. In general, is can be said that the political .g rouping of tJhis block coincides with the parties forming the Government Coalition of the ,First Republic ( up till 1938) , the parties which stood b,y Masaryk without any reservation and later backed ,h is successor to the presidency, Mr. Benes; one can include into this growp (Czech) National Socialists (Czech) Social ~9CI"ats and, to a certain extent, the Czech Catholic Party and the old Peasant's Party. -, '·The opposition of this democratic block t.o Communism is motivated by humanitarian philosophy, cultural and moral universalism. This group opposes all na1Jional, confessional and class exclusiveness, its faith is undogmatic, lay ,and social in character. In European politics is stands for "troisieme force" with the democracy as a dominant 36 SLOVAKIA feature. It represents the best Czechoslovak tradition (Hus, Comenius, Masaryk), its orientation is universal, essentially related to or even identical with the democratic spirit of the West. It is a natural, unopportunistic ally of the West and an exclusive representative of Western orientation in Czechoslovakia in every respect. . '11he representatives of this group haive suffered most thI1ough the Oommunist cowp d'etat in February this yeaT. They tried their best to cooperate with the Communists, following the lines of policy laid do,w n by Yalta and other aJgreements, and now they pay dear for the failure of their "mission of good will" by inner chaos and repercussions caused hy tJhe political demagogy of the undemocratic antiCommunism. The democratic block, which still represents the majority of rpu!blic opinion in CzechosloV!aikia, is in a state of fermentation, revaluation, revision and heaJrt-searchmg. The visilble signs for this search for new policies can 'b e traced in the attempt to estalblish a single Socialist Party in CzechoslovaJkia on the pattern of Western Labour Parti~, in the retrospectirve criticism of our ,p ast policies towards the national minorities, in the reconstruction of _political status quo ante Munich, in the sympathies with the federatiOIIl :plans in Europe, and in many other tendencies. The personalities belonging to this group may be listed as follo,w s : Mr. Ferdinand Peroutka, Editor of the most influential non-1party weekly review "Dnesek; former ministers :Zen.kl, Majer, Stransky, Ripka; generals: Basal, Ingr; Slovaks: Osusky, Papanek, Slavik, Kocvara, General Feriencik. Franek, and others. Out of all groups this democratic bloclk is at the greatest disadvantage insofor as their position in refugee camps is concerned; it has no, press except "Svobodny Zitrek" published in Paris; it is without any visible material, financial, and moral support which is iacc0irded : more or less to all other exile groups, especially to our older exiles (1008, 1944-1947), which are rather defective, from the point of view of pure democracy. In general it can be 1 SLOVAKIA 37 said that the democratic exiles h:we suppoI'ted Benes's policy from 1945 : they stood for the policy of understanding with the Communists, partly spontaneously and partly under the pressure of both internal political situation, and left <JSR only in Febl'uary when they were threatened by physical force. They do not consider the policy of Benes as a mistake, but rather as failure of good will and personal tragedy. The illusion of Benes is often compared to that of Roosevelt. The democrats feel that their experiment was an honest attempt which, from the pont of view of world democracy, was absolutely necessary .. The failure is not received with satisfaction by the genuine democrats; they rather feel disa,ppointed and deceived. 'Dhe disa,ppointme nt becomes aH the more ,pairuf.ul for them as they reconsider their mistaJkes and ,s acrifices. The democratic self-criticism aims in the first place at their own political parties and politicians. They admit shortsightedness, lao'k of foresight, and carelessness in respect of the real aims hidden behind the com..'TI unist activities, and, finally, they confess to helplessness and hesitation at the time when the communist intentions become evident. The most painful are the concessions made to the Communists in what concerns the integrity of democracy, such as the inhumanities colDJilltted during the expulsion of the Sudenten-Ger mans and Hungarians, the misuse of political trials and purges, excesses of .s ecret police, and the like. Under the pressure of ideological disunity and self-criticism, some princilples, as regards the future political system, crystalize: the preservation of state continuity on a new basis, enlarged politically (by the reintroduction of some of the old parties), and personally (1b y the admittance to the political life of the country of non-ipa,rty personalities) . The persons of some ,p restige, who were not engaged in party politics and whose attitude to the past regime (1945-48) is merely critical not a priori negatirve, are the following: Peroutka, Papanek, Osusky, Hasal, Feriencik, and a few others. In general, one cay say the exile resistance movement which is being born outside Czoohoslovak ia is not motivated by negation or contempt, but by understanding and criticism of Benes's Republic. In the ey~ of democratic 1 38 SLOVAKIA exiles this attitude becomes the chief criterion of a democratic qualification. After the death of Benes and Masaryk, junior, C:rechoslovak exiles are without a recognized leader and it is doubtful whether such a person will arise in a spontaneous way. The aibsen<!e of a leading personality is being felt everywhere, especially while our resistance organization is at its beginning. 'Dhe choice of democratic representatives is, at this time of recession of European democracy, very acute and more responsible than ever •b efore. It is quite clear that the judgement of Western governments will 1be essential in this choice; their responsilbility for the future of European democracy wiH be very large. We think it would be desirruble that the charitable character of the assistance to our refugees should be repla,ced, within the limits given by the ,policies of Western democracies, by a support of a more political character. We are convinced that such a revision of our "refugee status" would play an important role from the military point of view as well. The apolitical character of the aid to our refugees has a harmful influence on the moral of the people concerned, especially on the younger refugees, who left their homes mostly on the basis of false information and supposition that they would be immediately drafted into the Czechoslovak or other military forces. The present camps are for many emigrants an education for political indifiference and the only interest that remains is to emigrate and to settle down. The emigrants, who are living outside the camps •b eyond the reach of political or other control authority, S1Uccumb to harmful orientations and other influences. Czech@slovak emigrants, wtho are living outside the Czechoslovalk camps in Austria and South Germany, mostly left Czechoslovakia long before February 1948 and are very often guilty of collaboration with nacism. The Sudeten-German problem: It was said already that the excesses committed in connection with the transfer of Sudeten-Ge.ranans were a very paJinful affair for the democrats. Many of them came over to Gernnany with the intention of opening a new chapter in SLOVAKIA 39 CzeohoslovaJk-German relations, a chapter of cooperation and understanding , which was to be based on mutual concessions and compromises. This tendency is waning in contact with the every-day German reality, even if the original intention is not being aJbandoned entirely. Germany of today is democratic on the surface only and any cooperation with her seems to be still very risky. For that reason thP transfer of the Gernnan minority in 1945-46 it as present considered generally to have been the only possible solution under the circumstances . This attitude is accepted generally by tihe whole (Czech) democratic block, though it is often felt to •be o:f rather an emergency and unfinished character. The Slovak Problem: The Slovalk exiles, who left Czechoslovak ia between the time of liberation and February 1948, had an exclusively collaborationist character; the nationalist and fascist feature of this exile movement grew more intense under the influence olf exile p.sychology and with the gradual failure of the Czechoslovak democratic experiment. H this democratic experiment with the Communism had succeeded, these exiles would ha,ve never gained any significance. New possibilities for them are opening only nOIW after Ozech and Slovak democrats had to resign their "good will mission" and have compromised to a certain degree with the Communists. As these fascist and half-fascist exiles have been coming over to Germany now for more than three years and ha'Ve 1been supported not only by the Slovalk charity org,anizations in the USA, but by the Germans as well - which is characteristic in itself - they are numerically stronger than the recent democratic groups. To illustrate the quality and intelleotual level olf the people concerned, we gi,ve the total number of university graduates in iboth opposing groups of 'SlQIV,aks as it Q<!mtrs in the greatest Czechoslovak refugee camp in Ludwigsiburg (•J age:rihofkaser n) : Among 200 SlovaJks in .t he camp, there ,are 14 university graduates, out of which 1 (one) is nationalist-se paratist, while the other thirteen are democrats standing for the unity of Czechoslovakia. The average age of the members belonging to the democratic group is albout 33, in the separatists group it maJkes only 22 years. 40 SLOVAKIA The number of democratic Slovruks in exile increases raipidly since Febraury 1948 and amounts to aJbout 30 or 40% in aH the camps. This is caused by the fact that, until recently, the Communists refrained from wholesale persecution of the democrats in Slovia!kia 1beoause of the relative werukness of the COIIIlmunists in this part of the Republic. The political representation and importance of the Slovaks in exile politics outside Germany is so strong and great as never before. One of the candidates for chairmanship of the Czechoslovak National Council in the UISA is a SlovaJk, Mr. Osusky, Professor at Colgate University, USA, and fomner Ambassador oif Ozechoslovaikia to France. In the United Nations, it is a Slova!k, Mr. Papanek, who defends the cause of the Czechoslovak people there. He is assisted 1b y the former ambassador to US Government, Mr. Slavik, who is also a Slovalk. The strong Democratic Party (the majority ,p arty which polled 62 % of all votes recorded in the ,l ast free elections in SlolV'~kia in 1946) stands for a united but decentralized CzechoslovaJkia and its democracy (except for 2 dissidents: Dr. Bohm and Mr. Blasko, MPs) . It is to be emphasized that the underlying idea of nationalist and separatist movement has been a democratic one. It was represented by HSLIS ( The Hlinka SlOIV~ People's Party) which was lbanned after the defeat of Germany in 194!5, because of its wholehearted collaboration with nacism during the war. This party has /been in the full sense oif the word the pioneer, the spearhead and an exclusiive representative of fascism already long before 1938. Since 1921 and 1933, respectively, the movement sympathized quite openly and unambiguously with Mussolini and Hitler; it was already so at the time when, thanks to the maigic personal i.nifl:uence of president Masaryik, there were no pro-fascist tendencies in Czechoslovak political life. The nationalist and separatist press, from ~o,re or after Munich, sup.plies a mass of evidence slllpporting fully the foregoing sba.tements. This concerns the Party's official organ "Slovak" and "The Slovak Truth," just as well as the mo,re radical papers "Gardista" and especially "Nastup," the organ of Sidor extremists, edited then ,b y Dr. Durcansky. The ,Slovak nationalist and separatist movement has SLOVAKIA 41 done its best to bring a,bout a situation suitaible for the destruction of CzechoslovaJkia and suppression of democracy. The so-called SlovaJk State, the full acceptance of its ideology and recognition of its leaders by Hitler was only a logical consequence. Tille present -leaders of Slovak separatists in exile are all mem1bevs of the HSI.JS and belong to the second or third garniturc (except Sidor and Durcanslky who belong to the first), which is the most radical and fanatical. 'I1hey are mostly young people belonging to the generation which has grown up at the time of Hitler expansion and had no opportunity to assimilate the democratic spirit, which in any case was too young in Slovakia. It is necessary to emiphasize that the Slovaks entered history as a nation only in 1918; this single fact explains almost everything aJbout the nature and quality of Slo,valk nationalism and separatism. In genera,!, the problem of Slovruk nationalism is a problem of democracy. In many a respect it resemJbles the problem of German nationalism and democracy. There is not question of refusing the recognition of the Slovaiks as a nation, with its equal rights; there is no difference between the nationalists and democrats in this point. The conflict is idoologica,l, moral, and cultural. Essentially it is a conflict between fascism and democracy. The Slo,vaks-Democrats are standing automatically for OOR, because they see in it a guarantee of democracy also for Slovakia. They are without any nationalist prejudice. and the question of CzechSlovak relations is for them lbut a question of governmental and administrative technique. 'Dhe motives ,b ehind the Slova!k separatism is political immaturity, nationalist passions, anti-Czech, anti-Hungavian, anti-Jewish hatred, lacking all objective foundations. 'I1he Sloviruk separatism is !basically an rubsence of ,correct political thiniking, lack of education, democratic tradition, humanitarian feeling, and a want of culture in general. It is based on psychic complexes and it is a kind of primitivism. The Western democracies may not make any compromise with it if they do not wish to weaken the democracy of Slovakia and if their aim is the reconstruction of democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. The only political goal of Slov8Jk nationalism is a re-establish- 42 SLOVAKIA ment of an independent -Slo1Va:k State with the same underlying ideology as that which prevailed under Tiso. Any compromise in 1Jhls respect would mean an irrevocaJble step backward and a retreat a,way from democracy. Their attitude toward federation plans, in which they see a good Oipportunity, is motivated by naked political opportunism. They are inc3!pa!ble of any federation because of their deep nationalist prejudice and complex. Their aim is the destruction of OSR, the seizure of power which would be otherwise impossible, because of the fascist past of all leaders oif nationalist separatism. The criticism of the foregoing passage .should not be interpretd as prejudice. H is not al,w ays easy for Western olbservers to understand fully the d.ifif.ioult position of democratic ideas in the countries where, in albsence of a strong tradition, they are e~sed to the inroads not only of communism, but also of another ikind of political primitivism ( nationalism, church confessionalism). The present criticism is based on the results of a thorough analysis of the so-called "Slovak Problem." It is only because of the lack of space that the fads are accumulated without adequate basis of objective evidence. May we stress, too, that the authors of the most critical parts and passages on the Slovaik nationalism contained in the present memo,r,andum are Slovaks and Catholics as well. The significance of Dr. Benes: A negative attitude towards the personality of Benes is held by two political groups only : Prchala and Slovak nationalists. The attitude of a small minority of Conserwatives, Catholics and some other Right Wing Politicians is also more or less revered. The democrats in general are rather united in their relations to Benes. The doubts aibout his policies, which arose in exile following immediately the communist overthrow of the democracy regimes, hawe disappeared, so that after his refusal to add his signature to the · new communist-'Siponsored Constitution, which was later follO!Wed 'by his resignation, Benes slowly became the symbol of democratic struggle against the Communism. Before his death, he was virtually expected to resume his leadership of the third resistance struggle for a new, free, and d ~ cratic Czechoslovakia in exile. SLOVAKIA 43 iHis death was mourned ,b y all quarters. The devotion to his idea.ls grew more intense everywhere, partly as a result of pressure of demagogic and rough propaganda by the two groups mentioned a'bove. In general, it can be said that Czechoslovak democratic exile block follows the path of Masarytk's tradition of Human democracy, which is in no way o.pposed to Benes's policies, even if they are criticized in some very important aspects, such as national state, .regulated democracy, the prdl>lem of national minorities in OSR, and especially the practical politics since the liberation (194'5). Benes remains an authority for all the democrats at home and in exile as a theoretician of democracy; for the majority of emigrants he represents the symbol of national independence. His prestige has been growing continuously since his resignation, and his departure is being felt every.where as irreplaceable. It is recognized almost generally that Benes acted under the pressure and responsibility which was historic and which eliminates any attempt at an objective judgement in the present moment. Political aspirations of democratic exile block: CzechoslovaJk democratic political groups in exile regret the state of non-existence of a recognized representiati,ve body; the general disappointment, too, is 'being felt in respect of the undiscriminating, apolitical, refugee status accorded to Czechoslovak political exiles. Czechoslovak political e::iciles feel they are no emigrants and they are inclined to accept the emigration possi!bilities given only insofar as they offer the basis for political activities in the broadest possible extent, directed to the ultimat.e goal of all exiles to the re-establishment of a free and democratic Czechosloivaikia. This "Refugee Status" is disliiked most of all by the Czechoslovak democratic exiles which consider themse1ves as true allies of the West and as the real representatives of an allied Nation which is democratically so qualified as no other nation of Central and Eastern Europe. Ozechoslovak democratic exiles would be very happy to see the change in their status and their general position. Frankfurt-Main, in November 1948. 44 SLOVAKIA Taking into account what has happened since 1948, particularly the "special" treatment accorded the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings by our State Department, I believe it is safe to say that " In our issue of February 19 (p. 531) we wondered what sort of information the State Department has been provided with in choosing members for the Czechoslovak Council recently formed in Washington. The reserves we expressed on that occasion are confirmed by a letter sent us since then by a distinguished statesman prominent in Czechoslovakia's political life previous to the communist coup. We quote a few lines from his letter: In this new Czecho-Slovak Council there are no Slovak Catholics (the three Slovaks who are nominally Catholics never took part in the religious and cultural life of the country), and the Czech People's Party is represented by three persons of doubtful moral standing who had always been friends of Soviet domination. The rest are Marxian Socialists - who are presumably in great favor at Washington and three Czech Agrarians( who are perhaps the only Catholics in the whole assembly. Perhaps the State Department officials are right in thinking that a council, whatever may be its composition, is better than no council. From the standpoint of American political strategy no objection can be raised. But my own view of these things is a bit different. The leaders of the newly formed Council are Marxists can Bolshevism be defeated by its own ideas? They are freethinkers and opponents of any religious instruction. What Cultural ideas will they give to my unhappy people? They will have to rule in Slovakia by sheer force - could that be called democracy? Their conception of foreign policy is that of military alliances a la Benes and hatred towards all the neighbors - does that mean peace? Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that men who were bitter enemies of the Marshall Plan are now invited by the State Department to America. "Czechoslovakia is a Catholic country (Bohemia and Moravia 75 percent, Slovakia 80 percent), and yet the principal men in this Council are either Protestants or atheists. It is certainly not raising a religious issue to ask if such an arrangement is equitable. Again the question arises: whose advice, if any, is being followed by the State Department in this strange procedure?"-(AM ERICA, March 19, 1949) . the "memorandum" has proved its usefulness for the Benes Czechs, serving as a criterion or guide for "policy makers" in the United SLOVAKIA 45 States Government, particularly in regard to the question of what exiles from Czecho-Slovakia could be considered "trustworthy and reliable experts" on Czecho-Slovakian matters. In 1949, after our State Department (Acheson) invited the Benes Czechs to the U. S. A. and gave a batch of blank visas to Dr. Hubert Ripka, right-hand man of Dr. Benes, at that time in Paris, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings were brought to the United States at taxpayers' expense to advise our Government and its various departments and agencies on the matter of how to fight Communism and the Communists and outsmart Soviet Russia in the field of psychological warfare! The NEW YORK TIMES stated at that time (Feb. 6, 1949) that "they plan to set up what will be, in effect, a Czechoslovak Government in exile" - and previous to that date (Jan. 5, 1949), the same source reported the arrival of a "High Escaped Czech" - Arnost Heidrich - who, according to well-informed Czechs is neither of Slovak nor Czech origin, as follows: "Arnost Heidrich, Secretary General of the Czechoslovak Foreign Office and for fourteen years legal and political adviser to the late Dr. Edward Benes, has escaped from Prague and came to Washington with a detailed story of Communist activities and plans in Eastern Europe. M. Heidrich, a white-haired 59-year-old civil servant who is well known and trusted by the United States Government, was brought here by United States authorities and has made a full report of conditions in Czechoslovakia to the State Department." Apparently, Mr. Heidrich, like Dr. Eduard Benes, knew all about Communist activities and plans! After their arrival in the U. S., the Benes Czechs, (Ripka Zenkl, Taborsky, Peroutka, Ingr, Majer, Firt, Prochazka, etc.) and their Slovak hirelin&_s (Lettrich, Kocvara, Hodfa, Papanek, Franek, Slavik, Krno, Mudry-Sebik, etc.) organized the "COUNCIL OF FREE CZECHOSLOVAKIA" and set up headquarters in Washington. As "experts," they were soon employed by the Free Europe Committee (Radio Free Europe), various universities, the VOA (USIA), CIA, Library of Congress, the Pentagon, and other agencies of U. S. Government in one capacity or another. I have said it before and I repeat it again that I am convinced that the Benes Czechs exercise great influence and practically control the so-called "Czechoslovak" unit or division of both the RFE and also the VOA (USIA) in regard to "reliability" of personnel, exile and otherwise, employed. In the light of the facts uncovered during the past nine years, why are they still tolerated in 1958? The Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings have been discredited by their own peoples at home, so why should we curry their favor? The Slovak League of America and the Slovak organizations affiliated with it have brought this to the attention of our Government, the Free Europe Committee, and the USIA (VOA) on several occasions, but practically nothing was done to remedy the situation. Someone, it seems, has decreed that patriotic Slovaks must be ignored and discriminated against; and this applies practhey simply are not tically to Slovak and Czech Catholics wanted; Hence, I am strongly inclined to believe that the 1948 "MEMORANDUM" of the Benes Czechs is still considered valid by some VIP in official Washington. So the "expert" advisers to de- 46 SLOVAKIA partment heads of U. S. Government on all Slovak and Czech matters still remain at their posts at our expense on the strength of a memorandum prepared by the Benes Czechs a memorandum whose language reveals that its authors just as well might have been the Czech Reds, or their "comrades" in Moscow! • • • SLOVAK NATIONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM B. S. Bue, Ph.D. 1. Nationalism and the Existing "Status Quo" To speak of the Slovaks is to touch upon a problem which at the present time has assumed vital and worldwide proportions, namely, the problem of nationalism. Nationalism is one of the most discussed issues in the modern political world. The reason lies in the more extensive definition by which nationalism refers not only to the lofty devotion of citizens towards their native country, also known as patriotism, but especially to a revolutionary movement of our modern society. Thus, nationalism is giving rise to dangerous political tensions in various sectors of the globe and threatening to disintegrate the political status quo of many long established nations. There is need, therefore, of a thorough understanding of all its components, motives, and objectives. Slovak nationalism involves a lofty devotion to a native land, but as yet has not developed serious revolutionary characteristics. It has not, therefore, attracted significant attention from the international community. Nevertheless, it has grown from almost complete oblivion t o such proportions that it must be taken into consideration as one of the most important forces shaping the future destiny of Central Europe. From the beginning of its existence Slovak nationalism was nurtured by ideas which followed the revolutionary changes of medieval, feudal society and laid the foundation for the birth of new political systems which we call "Western Democracy." But Slovak nationalism is Western not because of its ideological relationship alone. During  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Memorandum on Political Structure and Activities of Czechoslovakia Exiles Description An account of the resource Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), March 1958 pp. 28-46 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/2bff1fbc3d972fb941760624552ad0bb.pdf 3426d624405905543431722dd095a2bf PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA 25 OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! P.A. HROBAK When Dr. Edward Benes returned to Czecho-Slovakia in 1945, after deserting her in 1938, he became "president" again, but this time not by the will of the people of that hapless country, but by the grace of Stalin, the strong man of the Kremlin. Of course, not unconditionally: he became titular head, because he had promised to do a job for Stalin. This is the only plausible explanation of why the people of Czecho-Slovakia tolerated the man who cowardly fled his responsibilities in 1938, after selling out the Slovaks and the Czechs to Hitler without even consulting the Czecho-Slovak Parliament. Even before his return to Prague, Dr. Edward Benes, Czech Nazi No. 1, handpicked members of his government very carefully: no anti-socialists and anti-Communists were allowed. They lost no time in getting down to the job Benes had promised Stalin to do : eliminate all anti-Soviet elements from public life. The government controlled all political parties, the radio, press, schools, and industry; ecclesiastical properties were "nationalized" in Slovakia as early as 1945, and, later, in 1947-1948, also in Bohemia and Moravia. The Communist-dominated NATIONAL FRONT government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition would not tolerate any opposition; it ruled by decrees which were issued by Benes and approved and signed by members of his government. Thousands of Slovaks and Czechs were disfranchised, dispossessed and deported, hundreds were put to death by the "people's courts," many more thousands were persecuted and deported, and hundreds of thousands were confined to jails and concentration camps. All this was done in the name of "people's democracy" and T. G. Masaryk's "liberalism and humanitarianism''! Stalin appreciated that and so did the Czech Reds. When all "undesirable" elements had just about been purged from public life and over three million Sudeten Germans were transferred to Germany in a "humanely and orderly" manner, hundreds of thousands dying in the transfer, Stalin wanted to show his "appreciation" to Benes and his followers, so he ordered Gottwald, the leading Czech Red, to take over all power in Czecho-Slovakia and buzz the Benes Czechs to get, while the going was good. Gottwald had little trouble taking over on February 25, 1948, in fact, no trouble at all. And because the Benes Czechs had shown such a great eagerness to collaborate, with Moscow and the Czech Reds during the foregoing three years, Gottwald even allowed most of them to escape with their families to the West. The Benes Czechs exclusively were allowed to influence the Western Powers, particularly the United States, England and France; they were the sole authorities and the only "reliable" sources of information in matters Czecho-Slovakian during the war and after 1945; they served as "expert" advisors to the United States (Roosevelt), England (Churchill), and Soviet Russia (Stalin). Benes and his group, who had deserted their country in 1938 and surrendered the great war potential of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, did their �56 SLOVAKIA jobs well in IRO, OWI, the CIA, CIC, UNRRA, the military, etc., smearing all their political enemies and making it as miserable for them as they possibly could. The Slovaks, who always adamantly opposed Marxistic socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes, suffered most. After February 25, 1948, however, the Benes Czechs and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," found themselves out in the cold, when Gottwald and his Czech Reds told them to get, or else. So to the West they went as fast as they possibly could, experiencing little or no difficulty, and bewailing the "rough" treatCZECHOSLOVAK COUNCIL IN WASHINGTON "New National Councils are being formed in this country to represent the silenced people behind the Iron Curtain. They are being built up from the ever-increasing number of political emigrants who are arriving in the United States. Immense help can be given to the Western democracies by these councils. They can keep up communication through underground channels with the forces at home still fighting for freedom. They can inform the Voice of America of the most effective form of broadcast for their respective countries. They can become useful centers of help to DP's and can contribute greatly to employment and resettlement schemes. They can build up a close cooperation among themselves and thus prepare for a future federated Europe. Along with these possibilities comes a corresponding responsibility resting upon our own Government as to the choice of members for these councils. In certain instances, such as that of the Czechoslovak Council now being formed in Washington under the leadership of Dr. Peter Zenkl, the former Mayor of Prague, it is not quite clear how much evidence of this responsibility our State Department is showing. If there is to be but one council, and not two - Czech and Slovak separately - then the Slovaks should be represented by men acceptable to the people at home, men who represent not only the Lutheran minority but also the large Catholic majority in Slovakia. The most important prerequisite for eligibility to the Council should certainly be a clear-cut opposition to communism. Such a record can be seriously questioned in the case of at least one of the ten Czech politicians recently invited by the State Department to come to this country, since he is known for obstructing the opposition to communism in the past. The query naturally arises: just how accurately is our State Department informed as to the previous history of all the men whom it is inviting to our shores?" - (AMERICA, Feb. 19, 1949). ment they received from the Czech Reds after they performed so many invaluable services for them, as well as for Stalin. That's gratitude for you, they said, just as if things like that had never happened before. We know they did, and they should have known , too, because such is always the net result of collaborating with the Reds ·and Moscow. We are still waiting to hear or see a public statement by the Benes Czechs to the effect that they regret their collaboration with �SLOVAKIA 27 the Czech Reds and Moscow. All their public statements thus far are marked by the same tendency: an attempt to whitewash · and cover up their willing collaboration with the Reds. They . are not sorry for selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to the Czech Reds and Moscow, but they rather mourn the fact that the Reds threw them out of government, i.e., repudiated further collaboration! But the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats" were not finished yet, not by a long shot. Thanks to Socialist Benes, they had good connections in the West. How could the West abandon them now, after they had rendered so many fine services for the Czech "progressive and liberal" ideals of T. G. Masaryk's "humanitarian" democracy and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes? And they reckoned correctly; they were adopted by the West. The promoters of Czech National Socialism and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," claimed themselves "anti-communist, democratic" exiles from Czecho-Slovakia and posed as victims of communist tyranny. Shortly thereafter they were sitting in judgment over Slovak and Czech exiles in the West, advising the Western Powers exactly who was or was not "reliable" among those who had fled from Czecho-Slovakia prior to 1948, and pretending that only they were the "true" representatives of the Slovak and Czech nations and, hence, entitled to speak for them in the free world. We know that the gullible West, particularly the United States, rushed legislation to make it possible for the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, former members of the communist-dominated National Front government of Prague, to emigrate to the United States, England, and other free countries. The very people who, until February 25, 1948, sang praises to Stalin, the invincible Red liberators and the great achievements of Soviet Russia; the very same people who, unt~l February 25, 1948, blatantly insisted that the Soviet Union was not interfering in the internal affairs of Czecho-Slovakia, and that there was nothing so "democratic" as the new order promoted by the Kremlin, the new order of "people's" democracies! In November, 1948, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings prepared a "memorandum" on the political structure and activities of Slovak and Czech exiles, which was a grand effort to smear and vilify all true opponents of Communism, its handmaid Czech National Socialism, and the Soviet system, particularly the Catholic Slovaks and Czechs and the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican). At the same time, however, it does reveal the perverted hypocritical mind of the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, though I doubt it was intended to do so. The document, a copy of which was sent to me by a patriotic Czech whose conscience made him break with the Benes clique, has never been published or referred to publicly, to my knowledge, because all concerned wanted it to be kept "secret and confidential" by all recipients and particularly the State Department of the United States of America: According to my Czech informant, the "Memorandum" was sent to the mo, various U. S. departments of government, including the State Department, CIA, CIC, and :. also to some "very important and influential persons in America .and England. Here it is published in full for the first time for the edification of the American public and students of history. � SLOVAKIA 25 OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! P.A. HROBAK When Dr. Edward Benes returned to Czecho-Slovakia in 1945, after deserting her in 1938, he became "president" again, but this time not by the will of the people of that hapless country, but by the grace of Stalin, the strong man of the Kremlin. Of course, not unconditionally: he became titular head, because he had promised to do a job for Stalin. This is the only plausible explanation of why the people of Czecho-Slovakia tolerated the man who cowardly fled his responsibilities in 1938, after selling out the Slovaks and the Czechs to Hitler without even consulting the Czecho-Slovak Parliament. Even before his return to Prague, Dr. Edward Benes, Czech Nazi No. 1, handpicked members of his government very carefully: no anti-socialists and anti-Communists were allowed. They lost no time in getting down to the job Benes had promised Stalin to do : eliminate all anti-Soviet elements from public life. The government controlled all political parties, the radio, press, schools, and industry; ecclesiastical properties were "nationalized" in Slovakia as early as 1945, and, later, in 1947-1948, also in Bohemia and Moravia. The Communist-dominated NATIONAL FRONT government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition would not tolerate any opposition; it ruled by decrees which were issued by Benes and approved and signed by members of his government. Thousands of Slovaks and Czechs were disfranchised, dispossessed and deported, hundreds were put to death by the "people's courts," many more thousands were persecuted and deported, and hundreds of thousands were confined to jails and concentration camps. All this was done in the name of "people's democracy" and T. G. Masaryk's "liberalism and humanitarianism''! Stalin appreciated that and so did the Czech Reds. When all "undesirable" elements had just about been purged from public life and over three million Sudeten Germans were transferred to Germany in a "humanely and orderly" manner, hundreds of thousands dying in the transfer, Stalin wanted to show his "appreciation" to Benes and his followers, so he ordered Gottwald, the leading Czech Red, to take over all power in Czecho-Slovakia and buzz the Benes Czechs to get, while the going was good. Gottwald had little trouble taking over on February 25, 1948, in fact, no trouble at all. And because the Benes Czechs had shown such a great eagerness to collaborate, with Moscow and the Czech Reds during the foregoing three years, Gottwald even allowed most of them to escape with their families to the West. The Benes Czechs exclusively were allowed to influence the Western Powers, particularly the United States, England and France; they were the sole authorities and the only "reliable" sources of information in matters Czecho-Slovakian during the war and after 1945; they served as "expert" advisors to the United States (Roosevelt), England (Churchill), and Soviet Russia (Stalin). Benes and his group, who had deserted their country in 1938 and surrendered the great war potential of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, did their �56 SLOVAKIA jobs well in IRO, OWI, the CIA, CIC, UNRRA, the military, etc., smearing all their political enemies and making it as miserable for them as they possibly could. The Slovaks, who always adamantly opposed Marxistic socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes, suffered most. After February 25, 1948, however, the Benes Czechs and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," found themselves out in the cold, when Gottwald and his Czech Reds told them to get, or else. So to the West they went as fast as they possibly could, experiencing little or no difficulty, and bewailing the "rough" treatCZECHOSLOVAK COUNCIL IN WASHINGTON "New National Councils are being formed in this country to represent the silenced people behind the Iron Curtain. They are being built up from the ever-increasing number of political emigrants who are arriving in the United States. Immense help can be given to the Western democracies by these councils. They can keep up communication through underground channels with the forces at home still fighting for freedom. They can inform the Voice of America of the most effective form of broadcast for their respective countries. They can become useful centers of help to DP's and can contribute greatly to employment and resettlement schemes. They can build up a close cooperation among themselves and thus prepare for a future federated Europe. Along with these possibilities comes a corresponding responsibility resting upon our own Government as to the choice of members for these councils. In certain instances, such as that of the Czechoslovak Council now being formed in Washington under the leadership of Dr. Peter Zenkl, the former Mayor of Prague, it is not quite clear how much evidence of this responsibility our State Department is showing. If there is to be but one council, and not two - Czech and Slovak separately - then the Slovaks should be represented by men acceptable to the people at home, men who represent not only the Lutheran minority but also the large Catholic majority in Slovakia. The most important prerequisite for eligibility to the Council should certainly be a clear-cut opposition to communism. Such a record can be seriously questioned in the case of at least one of the ten Czech politicians recently invited by the State Department to come to this country, since he is known for obstructing the opposition to communism in the past. The query naturally arises: just how accurately is our State Department informed as to the previous history of all the men whom it is inviting to our shores?" - (AMERICA, Feb. 19, 1949). ment they received from the Czech Reds after they performed so many invaluable services for them, as well as for Stalin. That's gratitude for you, they said, just as if things like that had never happened before. We know they did, and they should have known , too, because such is always the net result of collaborating with the Reds ·and Moscow. We are still waiting to hear or see a public statement by the Benes Czechs to the effect that they regret their collaboration with �SLOVAKIA 27 the Czech Reds and Moscow. All their public statements thus far are marked by the same tendency: an attempt to whitewash · and cover up their willing collaboration with the Reds. They . are not sorry for selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to the Czech Reds and Moscow, but they rather mourn the fact that the Reds threw them out of government, i.e., repudiated further collaboration! But the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats" were not finished yet, not by a long shot. Thanks to Socialist Benes, they had good connections in the West. How could the West abandon them now, after they had rendered so many fine services for the Czech "progressive and liberal" ideals of T. G. Masaryk's "humanitarian" democracy and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes? And they reckoned correctly; they were adopted by the West. The promoters of Czech National Socialism and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," claimed themselves "anti-communist, democratic" exiles from Czecho-Slovakia and posed as victims of communist tyranny. Shortly thereafter they were sitting in judgment over Slovak and Czech exiles in the West, advising the Western Powers exactly who was or was not "reliable" among those who had fled from Czecho-Slovakia prior to 1948, and pretending that only they were the "true" representatives of the Slovak and Czech nations and, hence, entitled to speak for them in the free world. We know that the gullible West, particularly the United States, rushed legislation to make it possible for the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, former members of the communist-dominated National Front government of Prague, to emigrate to the United States, England, and other free countries. The very people who, until February 25, 1948, sang praises to Stalin, the invincible Red liberators and the great achievements of Soviet Russia; the very same people who, unt~l February 25, 1948, blatantly insisted that the Soviet Union was not interfering in the internal affairs of Czecho-Slovakia, and that there was nothing so "democratic" as the new order promoted by the Kremlin, the new order of "people's" democracies! In November, 1948, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings prepared a "memorandum" on the political structure and activities of Slovak and Czech exiles, which was a grand effort to smear and vilify all true opponents of Communism, its handmaid Czech National Socialism, and the Soviet system, particularly the Catholic Slovaks and Czechs and the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican). At the same time, however, it does reveal the perverted hypocritical mind of the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, though I doubt it was intended to do so. The document, a copy of which was sent to me by a patriotic Czech whose conscience made him break with the Benes clique, has never been published or referred to publicly, to my knowledge, because all concerned wanted it to be kept "secret and confidential" by all recipients and particularly the State Department of the United States of America: According to my Czech informant, the "Memorandum" was sent to the mo, various U. S. departments of government, including the State Department, CIA, CIC, and :. also to some "very important and influential persons in America .and England. Here it is published in full for the first time for the edification of the American public and students of history. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA 25 OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! P.A. HROBAK When Dr. Edward Benes returned to Czecho-Slovakia in 1945, after deserting her in 1938, he became "president" again, but this time not by the will of the people of that hapless country, but by the grace of Stalin, the strong man of the Kremlin. Of course, not unconditionally: he became titular head, because he had promised to do a job for Stalin. This is the only plausible explanation of why the people of Czecho-Slovakia tolerated the man who cowardly fled his responsibilities in 1938, after selling out the Slovaks and the Czechs to Hitler without even consulting the Czecho-Slovak Parliament. Even before his return to Prague, Dr. Edward Benes, Czech Nazi No. 1, handpicked members of his government very carefully: no anti-socialists and anti-Communists were allowed. They lost no time in getting down to the job Benes had promised Stalin to do : eliminate all anti-Soviet elements from public life. The government controlled all political parties, the radio, press, schools, and industry; ecclesiastical properties were "nationalized" in Slovakia as early as 1945, and, later, in 1947-1948, also in Bohemia and Moravia. The Communist-dominated NATIONAL FRONT government of the Benes-Gottwald coalition would not tolerate any opposition; it ruled by decrees which were issued by Benes and approved and signed by members of his government. Thousands of Slovaks and Czechs were disfranchised, dispossessed and deported, hundreds were put to death by the "people's courts," many more thousands were persecuted and deported, and hundreds of thousands were confined to jails and concentration camps. All this was done in the name of "people's democracy" and T. G. Masaryk's "liberalism and humanitarianism''! Stalin appreciated that and so did the Czech Reds. When all "undesirable" elements had just about been purged from public life and over three million Sudeten Germans were transferred to Germany in a "humanely and orderly" manner, hundreds of thousands dying in the transfer, Stalin wanted to show his "appreciation" to Benes and his followers, so he ordered Gottwald, the leading Czech Red, to take over all power in Czecho-Slovakia and buzz the Benes Czechs to get, while the going was good. Gottwald had little trouble taking over on February 25, 1948, in fact, no trouble at all. And because the Benes Czechs had shown such a great eagerness to collaborate, with Moscow and the Czech Reds during the foregoing three years, Gottwald even allowed most of them to escape with their families to the West. The Benes Czechs exclusively were allowed to influence the Western Powers, particularly the United States, England and France; they were the sole authorities and the only "reliable" sources of information in matters Czecho-Slovakian during the war and after 1945; they served as "expert" advisors to the United States (Roosevelt), England (Churchill), and Soviet Russia (Stalin). Benes and his group, who had deserted their country in 1938 and surrendered the great war potential of Czecho-Slovakia to Hitler, did their 56 SLOVAKIA jobs well in IRO, OWI, the CIA, CIC, UNRRA, the military, etc., smearing all their political enemies and making it as miserable for them as they possibly could. The Slovaks, who always adamantly opposed Marxistic socialism and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes, suffered most. After February 25, 1948, however, the Benes Czechs and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," found themselves out in the cold, when Gottwald and his Czech Reds told them to get, or else. So to the West they went as fast as they possibly could, experiencing little or no difficulty, and bewailing the "rough" treatCZECHOSLOVAK COUNCIL IN WASHINGTON "New National Councils are being formed in this country to represent the silenced people behind the Iron Curtain. They are being built up from the ever-increasing number of political emigrants who are arriving in the United States. Immense help can be given to the Western democracies by these councils. They can keep up communication through underground channels with the forces at home still fighting for freedom. They can inform the Voice of America of the most effective form of broadcast for their respective countries. They can become useful centers of help to DP's and can contribute greatly to employment and resettlement schemes. They can build up a close cooperation among themselves and thus prepare for a future federated Europe. Along with these possibilities comes a corresponding responsibility resting upon our own Government as to the choice of members for these councils. In certain instances, such as that of the Czechoslovak Council now being formed in Washington under the leadership of Dr. Peter Zenkl, the former Mayor of Prague, it is not quite clear how much evidence of this responsibility our State Department is showing. If there is to be but one council, and not two - Czech and Slovak separately - then the Slovaks should be represented by men acceptable to the people at home, men who represent not only the Lutheran minority but also the large Catholic majority in Slovakia. The most important prerequisite for eligibility to the Council should certainly be a clear-cut opposition to communism. Such a record can be seriously questioned in the case of at least one of the ten Czech politicians recently invited by the State Department to come to this country, since he is known for obstructing the opposition to communism in the past. The query naturally arises: just how accurately is our State Department informed as to the previous history of all the men whom it is inviting to our shores?" - (AMERICA, Feb. 19, 1949). ment they received from the Czech Reds after they performed so many invaluable services for them, as well as for Stalin. That's gratitude for you, they said, just as if things like that had never happened before. We know they did, and they should have known , too, because such is always the net result of collaborating with the Reds ·and Moscow. We are still waiting to hear or see a public statement by the Benes Czechs to the effect that they regret their collaboration with SLOVAKIA 27 the Czech Reds and Moscow. All their public statements thus far are marked by the same tendency: an attempt to whitewash · and cover up their willing collaboration with the Reds. They . are not sorry for selling out the Slovaks and Czechs to the Czech Reds and Moscow, but they rather mourn the fact that the Reds threw them out of government, i.e., repudiated further collaboration! But the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats" were not finished yet, not by a long shot. Thanks to Socialist Benes, they had good connections in the West. How could the West abandon them now, after they had rendered so many fine services for the Czech "progressive and liberal" ideals of T. G. Masaryk's "humanitarian" democracy and the pro-Soviet policy of Dr. Edward Benes? And they reckoned correctly; they were adopted by the West. The promoters of Czech National Socialism and their hirelings, the Lettrich Slovak "democrats," claimed themselves "anti-communist, democratic" exiles from Czecho-Slovakia and posed as victims of communist tyranny. Shortly thereafter they were sitting in judgment over Slovak and Czech exiles in the West, advising the Western Powers exactly who was or was not "reliable" among those who had fled from Czecho-Slovakia prior to 1948, and pretending that only they were the "true" representatives of the Slovak and Czech nations and, hence, entitled to speak for them in the free world. We know that the gullible West, particularly the United States, rushed legislation to make it possible for the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, former members of the communist-dominated National Front government of Prague, to emigrate to the United States, England, and other free countries. The very people who, until February 25, 1948, sang praises to Stalin, the invincible Red liberators and the great achievements of Soviet Russia; the very same people who, unt~l February 25, 1948, blatantly insisted that the Soviet Union was not interfering in the internal affairs of Czecho-Slovakia, and that there was nothing so "democratic" as the new order promoted by the Kremlin, the new order of "people's" democracies! In November, 1948, the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings prepared a "memorandum" on the political structure and activities of Slovak and Czech exiles, which was a grand effort to smear and vilify all true opponents of Communism, its handmaid Czech National Socialism, and the Soviet system, particularly the Catholic Slovaks and Czechs and the Roman Catholic Church (Vatican). At the same time, however, it does reveal the perverted hypocritical mind of the Benes Czechs and their Slovak hirelings, though I doubt it was intended to do so. The document, a copy of which was sent to me by a patriotic Czech whose conscience made him break with the Benes clique, has never been published or referred to publicly, to my knowledge, because all concerned wanted it to be kept "secret and confidential" by all recipients and particularly the State Department of the United States of America: According to my Czech informant, the "Memorandum" was sent to the mo, various U. S. departments of government, including the State Department, CIA, CIC, and :. also to some "very important and influential persons in America .and England. Here it is published in full for the first time for the edification of the American public and students of history.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Our Experts: The Czech Socialists! Description An account of the resource P. A. Hrobak Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), March 1958 pp. 25-27 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Hrobak, Philip Anthony, 1904-1964 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 LCNAF https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/d50783a331b225bc03870154ff45540b.pdf c10429c060fd41608051e2e5a04b0f59 PDF Text Text SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VIII quarterly by the Slovak League MARCH, 1958 of America NO. 1 (26) EUDOvtT STUR AND ms PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD By Joseph Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D. INTRODUCTORY NOTE Among Slovaks of the XIXth century who acquired their fame in the Slavic world, I'..udovit Stur (born 1815, died 1856) is among his contemporaries, poet Jan Kollar and ethnologist Pavel J. Safarik, one whose role and significance are still to be reconsidered and objectively reevaluated. Though nobody tried to claim him because some of his works were written in foreign languages, as it happened to Kollar and Safarik, who even now are classified as Czech poets and scholars, the literary value of Stur's works and the seriousness of his political and philosophical conceptions were questioned and often intentionally underestimated and distorted. While even scholars and literary historians at today's communist universities reevaluated - despite Sh1r's wellknown condemnation of Communism(!) his literary heritage and classified him among outstanding Slavic poets(2), philologists, philosophers and political leaders of the XIXth century - in many scholarly works in the free world he has been presented again and again "mediocre as a writer and thinker, but full of the typical sentimentalism and lyricism of the period, a man who like many at that time devoted all his life to the cause of his people and spent himself in its service."(3) · This judgment, which is quoted from Hans Kohn'. s "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," one of the most objective and up to date works on the subject, was uncritically repeated since it appeared for the first time in Ernest Denis' book "La Question d' Autriche - Les Slovaques," published in 1917.(4) Actually, this superficial and antagonistic view has been based on a thesis "Louis Stu.r �2 SLOVAKIA et l' idee d' independance slovaque," prepared by a young university student from Central Europe, H. Tourzer, who compiled unfavorable views and interpretations of Stur's work by contemporary Czech and Slovak literary critics and Stur's opponents. Instead of basing her judgment on a critical analysis of Stur's works, the young candidate for a Ph.D., Tourzer, presented Stur to the Western world in accordance with some political tendencies but in a highly unobjective light. Needless to say that neither Denis, nor Seton-Watson - another authority on the Slovak question - nor Hans Kohn, nor Kann ever analyzed and read Stur's works, some of them never translated into foreign languages and, consequently, the conclusions published in their books hardly resulted from their own analysis.(5) After a century, while commemorating Stur's centenary of death, we feel obliged to shed an objective light on Stur's work, his literary heritage, and his role in the Slavic world of the XIXth century. We are in a position to base our judgments not only on all his works - which until recently were not available in extenso - but on a hundred years span of time, which tested many of his conceptions and achievements and as the heat of the antagonists, who hated and debased him for political reasons, cooled down to a great extent by force of the vitality of Stur's ideas and the righteousness of his conceptions. Looking for Stur's place in the Slavic world, naturally we cannot avoid some purely Slovak cultural and political issues, though there is a great deal of truth in Hans Kohn's words that "the Slovak nation, with its own literary language, was definitely established"(6) by the merits of Stur's manifold activities, and this cannot, of course, be without interest for a student of the Slavic world in the field of linguistics, ethnology, history, or politics. Avoiding Stur's role and his historical achievements within a purely national range of his activities, an analysis of his works, conceptions, and lifelong struggles moves us to consider Stur's place in the Slavic world, 1) in the PanSlavic movement; 2) in the field of linguistics; and, 3) in literature. �SLOVAKIA 3 I I'..UDOVfT STUR AND PAN-SLAVISM Seton-Watson, one of the best English experts on Slovakia's past cultural and political struggles and aspirations, assessed Stur's significance in the Slavic world together with Kollar's and Safarik's role, stating that "their writings were of capital importance in the whole Slav revival of the last century, and form a strange sentimental link between the Western romantic school and the extravagancies of Pan-Slavism."(7) And referring to the first Slav Congress in Prague in 1848, Seton-Watson says that Stur "played a decisive part in the preparations for the Congress" and that at the Congress the four Slovaks - Safarik, Stur, Hurban and Hodza - played a part second to none save Palacky.(8) These two opinions on Stur's significance in the PanSlavic movement call for an analysis and completion in order to be understood properly. Quite a few of the experts on Slavic studies know Stur as a writer predominantly from his last work, written around 1855 in German and never published in Stur's native language, entitled "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), which was published in Russian translation in 1867, and its specially printed edition was presented to the foreign Slavic delegates to the Moscow Slav Congress in order to attract attention to the political views of the Russian organizers of the Congress. The book represents, according to Prof. Lednicki, an "integral PanSlavism, practically degenerating into Pan-Russianism, and a quite exceptional tribute to the cultural, moral and political forces of the Russian Empire.(9) And in view of a recent analysis by Michael Petrovich, which seems to be one of the best documented and objective, the work "is a romantic melange of science and poetry presented in a vigorous style and an argumentation which is remarkably consequential even when mistaken."(10) Though Stur was quite a prolific writer and his works embraced many fields of intellectual activities from history and poetry to philosophy and philology(ll), for the last hundred years it has been, nevertheless, the above �4 SLOVAKIA mentioned book which made Stur known among the students of Slavistics outside his native land and, therefore, an analysis seems to be opportune on this occasion. What are the main ideas and the principal reasons that this little book - probably only an introduction to a larger history of the Slavs - made Stur one of the major figures among the Slavic intelligentsia of the nineteenth century? Even if we do not accept the view of Prof. Lednicki that the work presents " the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia" - Seton-Watson's view is that even in this book Stur's aim was to preserve his own people - it was, among all reasons for its fame, Stur's political and philosophical conceptions which stirred the greatest interest in it. Stur adopted Hegel's and Herder's ideas that gave the Slavs the consciousness of a unity based upon the community of language and glorious destiny, and proclaimed them the coming leaders of Europe. He was thrilled by the vision of a gigantic empire sprawling from the Carpathians of his own native land to the shores of the Pacific. Drawing on history, philosophy, literature, philology, theology, and folklore, as well as on a penetrating insight into contemporary events, Stur emphasized that the Slavs have a mission to fulfill in universal history - or, in other words, that they have a historic vocation. This mission, however, they can fulfill only if united, and in his analysis of the world situation, in which he presents an apocalyptic vision of Western Europe's doom, there were three roads to consider: 1. Slavic federation without Russia. 2. Transformation of Austria into a Slavic federation. 3. Union with Russia - as a monarchic empire under Russian leadership, united in the Orthodox Church and the Russian literary language. Neither of the first two solutions had an appeal to Stur's vision of Slavdom's future and to his philosophy of history. Any attempt to organize a federation of European Slavic nations was doomed to failure in his opinion, because of the geographical situation, internal rivalries, re- �SLOVAKIA 5 ligious differences, cultural differentation, and intermingled non-Slavic elements. Though a few years ago, at the Slav Congress in Prague(12), he was not far from accepting Palacky's idea of Austroslavism and led the Slovaks on the side of the Habsburg's forces against the Magyars in the revolution of 1848, his books condemn in strong terms Austria and the idea of an Austro-Slavic federation. "There remains a third road," Stur insists, "the only one which is sure and has a future - the Union of all Slavs with Russia." "Russia is the prime mover and the leader of our national family," continues Stur. "Our people are but a fragment of a single nationality, they can be reborn and united into a single whole only by a related benevolent and great Power." That Power among the Slavs in Stur's time was only Russia. "Let us go forth together," urges Stur, "in the spirit of our people, under the leadership of the racial elders given to us by history." How was this Russian-led Slavic Union to come about? Stur recommended a return of all Slavs to the GrecoSlavic Church, urged the adoption of the Russian language and Cyrillic alphabet by all Slavs as a common literary language, but how to change the political situation of the Slavic peoples dominated by Austria and Turkey and bring them under the Russian leadership, Stur did not venture to say. He acknowledged that it could be realized only "under the pressure of grave political events" and therefore, he writes: "We do not consider it necessary, and we even consider it superfluous, to define prematurely the means of unification and degree of the reciprocal relations of the Slavs with Russia. The means and the degree of this unification will emerge from circumstances yet to come about. But it is useful," he concludes, "at least to raise the question, to speak about this subject and to prepare our minds for it." Stur's political and philosophical conceptions expressed in this book remain a puzzle even to such experts on his writings as Prof. Cizevskij(13), and they never were explained either by his own compatriots or anyone else. �6 SLOVAKIA Stur adopted Hegel's idea of the succession of various nations on the historical stage as a consecutive incarnation of the universal spirit while studying in Halle, where he came into contact with German nationalism and philosophy. After his return to his native land, however, Stur became a passionate champion of Slovak national independence and fought for a distinct Slovak literary language even against Kollar and his Czech friends. He was for the idea of Slavic reciprocity, and many things stirred his Slavic pride, but his Pan-Slavism was, until this book appeared, a cultural, more or less defensive movement, with emphasis on language, literature, and culture, and politically it aimed at the liberation of his people and other Slavic oppressed nations from foreign rule, with Russia's help, but not under Russia's hegemony. Cizevskij and some other experts on Stur's writings try to explain Stur's political re-orientation mainly as a result of political events in Central Europe and particularly in Slovakia after the unsuccessful revolution of 1848, and such is also our opinion. "It was in a conflicting mood of helplessness and inversely high hopes in salvation from Slavic Russia that Stur wrote his famous work," is the explanation of another Slavist, Prof. Petrovich. "The failure of the Slovak revolution and other political demonstrations (May 1, 1848, Lipt. sv. Mikulas) brought Stur to the conclusion that it was useless for his people to seek its own freedom alone or in the frame of Austroslavism." Stur made it clear, however, even in this book, that his principal aim was to preserve his own people, and besides he set out to accomplish four basic tasks: 1. To determine, largely by reviewing the Slavic past, whether the Slavs had a role of their own to fulfill in world history; 2. to describe the Slavic mission in universal history against the background of the cultural. differences between Western and Eastern Europe; 3. to show what advantages the Slavs possessed by comparing their institutions, traditions; and qualities with those of the West; 4. to demonstrate that the Slavs could accomplish their mission only through political unification under Russian leadership(14). �SLOVAKIA 7 No doubt, this was a new look on the Slavic world. Was it original? We cannot deny that he applied some Hegelian principles of philosophy, such as the primacy of the idea in man's development, Hegel's dialectical approach to historical evolution, and Herder's vision of Slavdom taking place in succession of the bearers of the idea. But there are many original approaches in his book which cannot be linked either with German philosophy or Russian Slavophils, which is the second of alleged influences. Cizevskij defends Stu.r's originality(15). Florinskij, in the preface to the second edition of Stu.r's book (1905), stresses that Stur is very close to the viewpoints of the Russian Slavophils, Chomiakov, Pogodin, Kiriejevski, Aksakov, and their successors, but he also says that "insofar as one can judge by known biographical data, Stu.r's views arose in him independently, apart from any influence of Russian Slavophilism whatsoever." And such also was the opinion of Prof. A. Budilovic and others(16). Stu.r's biographical data speak, in fact, against dependence on Slavophils, though he knew Bodianski, Pogodin, Sevyrev, Sreznevski, Raevski, and others. We can, therefore, defend his originality in many regards, especially if we consider the intellectual climate of Europe in Stu.r's time and if we take into account that Slovakia - with Kollar and Safarik and Herkel, who invented the term "panslavismus," - was the classic land of Slavic reciprocity and that "as in name, so in sentiment, the Slovak never ceased being a Slav." ' Since N. I. Danilevskij and R. A. Fadejev came many years after Stu.r's death(17), Stur can be rightly consider_e d as the founder of political Pan-Slavism, of which Kollar was the poet and Safarik the scientist. �8 SLOVAKIA II STUR'S ROLE IN LINGUISTICS AND PHILOLOGY The role of f,udovit Stur in the field of Slavic studies is generally little known outside of Slovakia. In English, French and German published works, Stur is presented mainly as a political leader(18), a mediocre poet, owing his fame in the Slavic world to his treatise "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" which is, as we mentioned before, a study of a political, sociological, and philosophical character. A few years ago Professor D. Cizevskij, in his German book - translated in the meantime into the Slovak under the title "Sturova filozofia zivota" (Stu.r's Philosophy of Life) -found however, that Stur was also a philosopher of considerable knowledge and originality(19). He shows, of course, dependence on Hegel and contemporary German philosophers. But to present him in such a light, as if he had blindly applied Hegel's philosophy to Slavic or Slovak life, as he was accused by his opponents, seems to be a malicious distortion. In view of Cizevskij's analysis, Stur's generation had several thinkers who tried to create their own philosophical system and who, in their time, among Slavic nations excelled in originality bf thinking. As for Stu.r's philosophy, Cizevskij refuted in his book the assertions that: 1. Stur was a simple follower of Hegel; 2. that his philosophical views were those of contemporary romantic philosophy. In Cizevskij's opinion Stur formed an independent philosophical system which in many ways differs from that of Hegel, and his approach to life's phenomena were highly realistic(20). This, however, is not our concern in the present analysis. Considering Stu.r's role in linguistics and philology, it would be unjust and incorrect not to recognize his merits(21). Stur was no J agic or Miklosic as far as overall Slavic philology is concerned, but without exaggeration we may say that the role, along with A. Bernolak, was that of Vuk Karadzic, Gaj, or Vraz in establishing new literary Slavic languages. There have been until recently many misconceptions as far as the Slovak language, its history and place among �SLOVAKIA 9 the Slavic languages are concerned. A thorough study of phonology, etymology, lexicography, and grammar now shows that the Slovak language is distinct from any other Slavic tongue. This was not so clear and evident one hundred years ago when contemporary theories in linguistics were still based on primitive methods and the science of philology was in its infancy. Modern techniques in linguistics have thrown new light on the subject and have been instrumental in giving us modified views that are far advanced beyond the hasty, unwarranted conclusions of a century ago. It is to Stur's credit that - after a century of clashes and discussions between Czech linguists and the Slovak Catholic intelligentsia, who replaced the Latin already in the 17th century with a Slovak literary language - the Slovak language was properly classified as the real and original national tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia since the dawn of history, and Stur helped to establish it irrevocably among Slavic languages of the Western group. Stur accepted the phonetic orthography of Bernolak which from the philological and practical standpoint best answered the purpose, but for scientific and ideological reasons he decided to adopt the dialect of Central Slovakia and not the western Slovak dialect used since 1635 at the University of Trnava and codified by Bernolak in his Grammar and huge dictionary, the latter in six languages(22). It would be superfluous now to point out that formulating purely scientific views on the proper relations between the Czech and Slovak languages, most of the Czech and other philologists and literary historians were influenced by political views and aspirations. The claim that Slovak is but a dialect of the older Czech was not based on facts of history or philology. It was, according to Stur a biased opinion of those who wished to deny to the Slovaks the right to their independent national life. Though Stur's works in the field of philology - "Narecia slovensko" (Slovak dialect) and his Grammar - are marked by amateurism of XIXth century patriots, and it would be difficult to call him "a scholar trained in the science �10 SLOVAKIA of philology," nevertheless he grasped the true basis of the Slovak language by a careful analysis of the fundamental roots of the Czech and Slovak languages and by a comparative study of their developments. Modern philological research gave Stur reason in many respects. According to Professor Bartek, Stur, who studied and spoke several Slavic languages and was acquainted with comparative philology, was "in his time an extraordinary good philologist, who intuitively often correctly came upon certain individual characteristics of the Slovak language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the correctness of many of Stu.r's linguistic findings, the justification for which science in that period could not prove(23). Stu.r's view that the Slovak language developed independently was confirmed also by Trubeckoj, who considers the disappearance of the lesser vowel sounds (slabe jery) in the Slavic derivatives as the last common change and the date of birth of the Slavic languages. The end of the vowel signs in fact caused a fundamental change in the phonological technique of the Slavic dialects, as well as in the original forms in many instances, so that the entire phonological structure was revised, not uniformly but individually, in each Slavic dialect, which fact brought into being the independent Slavic languages as we have them today(24). Stur considered the Slovak language as the central and cardinal language among all the Slavic tongues. We, of course, can question this from the linguistical point of view and accept that Stur wished to emphasize the central position of Slovakia linguistically, historically, and geographically as the centrum of all Slavdom. Stur viewec' the position of the Slovak language as a central clearinghouse ' mainly because he was conscious of many of its similarities with the Slavic tongues of the East, West, North and South, especially noting the agreement with the Yugoslav dialects with which the Slovak came into intimate contact in the tenth century as is evident from the presence of Yugoslavism in the Slovak language even today. According to Stur, in the ninth century the Old Sla- �SLOVAKIA 11 vonic was still the common tongue of the Slavs with a unified phonology. From the ninth century different dialects developed into distinct Slavic languages, among them also the Slovak tongue. This thesis is strengthened also by the fact that the Slovak territory in the eleventh century was annexed by Hungary and, hence, the only contact the Slovaks had with the Czechs was through the Moravians who have continued to speak a Slovakian dialect in spite of the pressure of the Czechs from the West and to the present time have retained their own phonological structure. Stur's claim that the Slovak language never was a part of the Czech, or the so-called "czechoslovak" language, was based on assumptions many of which were in the meantime proven correct by scientific research of authorities on the subject(25). Professor Senn formulated the results of the new research in this regard in his study on Slavic linguistics, published in "A Handbook of Slavic Studies," edited by Prof. Strakhovsky, and Prof. Henry Bartek from the University of Bratislava, who dedicated to this problem several of his works, says that "we may rightly claim that at the time of the disintegration of the Old Slavonic, the era saw the rise of new, independent Slavic languages, among them being also the Slovak, whose development cannot be identified with that of the Czech language." According to Bartek, the ancient phonological nature of the Slovak language certainly indicates that even in the centuries that followed the disappearance of the Old Slavonic, the Slovak tongue was not subject to a common evolution with the Czech which possesses its own unique phonological system, which is quite different from the Slovak." "In conclusion," says Bartek, "we may say that the Slovak language is by every right of its origin and development an independent tongue having its rightful place of equality alongside the Czech or any other Slavic tongue," as Stur asserted over a hundred years ago. �12 SLOVAKIA III STUR'S LITERARY AESTHETICS AND CULTURAL ACHIEVEMENTS There was for a long time no unanimity among literary historians and critics as to whether Stur was in the first plaee "f homme de pensee," or if in his activities prevailed "f homme d' action." His role in the Slav Congress in Prague, in 1848, his many contacts with Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav intellectuals, his part in the Slovak revolution of 1848, and his role in the Hungarian Diet definitely mark him as "l' homme d' action." From his correspondence we know now that he had direct relations with the leaders of all Slavic peoples and, when sentenced to death for his part in the Slovak revolution, he removed himself to Vienna and there came into contact with other Slav representatives, notably the Slovene Stanko Vraz, and still more important with Ban Jelacic and the Serbian Patriarch Rajacic, who were working hand in hand and paid a joint visit to the Imperial Court. On the other hand, Stur played the most important role among the young generation of his time in the Slovak national revival, in the reform of the Slovak literary language, and in the resulting unity of the Slovak people which was followed by flourishing cultural and literary activities(26). Consequently, to measure Stur's significance and to see objectively his achievements, his intellectual profile and spiritual foundations, we have to consider his activities also in the Slovak cultural and political life. There his significance was great and far-reaching not only in the development of Slovak literature and the Slovak national ideology, but also in philosophy and politics. Slovakia and the Slovak people being a part of the Slav world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival, logically a part of hi.; manifold contributions, is also to be considered within the framework of the Slavic world. Under Stur's leadership, the Slovak intelligentsia composed mostly of Catholic and Protestant clergy, a few teachers, lawyers, and other members of the middle class �SLOVAKIA 13 - continued to build a new national culture which centered in the Catholic university of Trnava (founded 1635) and was successfully developed by a group of Catholic writers, scholars, and poets, among whom particularly the learned linguist Anton Bernolak and the poet Jan Holly played leading r6les(27). This new Slovak culture was necessarily and intentionally based on the Slovak peasantry, on small towns and villages with their own specific traditions and artistic creative genius manifested in flourishing folk songs, artistically designed architecture, toolmaking, and resourceful popular music. Since the Slovak gentry continued to lose its national characteristics and assimilated with the Magyar gentry, abandoning the Slovak people in the middle of rising nationalism and political transformations, the Slovak intellectuals could not but take over the culture of the Slovak peasants, middle classes, and a handful of nationally-minded petty aristocrats and from it, before and especially in Sb1r's time, they developed their own national culture and new national consciousness. As in political thinking and planning, so in Stur's cultural activities, his creative work was in harmony with the climate of the epoch in Western and especially in Central Europe, where among the smaller nations romanticism and nationalism were either identical or very related, and national and historical consciousness and popular art, folksongs, sagas, and fairy tales were the focus of interest. In this climate Stur successfully organized his literary school and cultural activities which marked a new era in Slovak national life. His approach was philosophical, since he had a mystic idea of the nation and a respect for it as a person, and there was a strong spiritualism and idealism in his literary and cultural activities. His literary school adopted aesthetic and philosophical principles which became the real basis of last century's Slovak national revival and marked especially the literary and cultural life of Slovakia. During the revolution of 1848-49, Stur's literary school, as correctly says Gudrun Apel,(28) fulfilled to a large extent the function of a political and military leadership; with Stur, Hurban, Hodza among the �14 SLOVAKIA main leaders. The members of this school "imposed the most exacting task on themselves in order to elevate the Slovak people to the same cultural level as the rest of Europe, to release their creative energies, and to enable a new national culture to arise from the existing popular art and language."(29) Stu.r's influence was so strong that some of the principles of Stu.r's ideology and aesthetic principles lived in the cultural life of Slovakia until her subjugation by the present Communist rule. For a long time the folk-song was the basis of all poetic style, and Slovak poetry was mainly an expression of the national idea, national sufferings, joys, hopes, and struggles, as Stur demanded and practiced. Stu.r's claim - that the poet had to be the herald and prophet of a new and better world, something of a was resocial revolutionary and a national leader spected during the past one hundred years in Slovak literature not only in the nationalist era, but also the first years under Communism. Many literary critics refer to Stu.r's poetry and prose as romantic. But in Stu.r's poetry, as in his philosophy, is an evident lack of some principal elements of romanticism. The leading motives of his poetry - as well as of that of his group - were anti-feudal and anti-aristocratic; he made common cause with the people and fought for its rights; he was full of enthusiasm and faith in a new life. Stur advocated national solidarity of an ethical and emotional nature. According to Stu.r's words: "the course of time ... should rouse the poet to exalt songs of life and not of sickness, despair and hopelessness ... " As in his analysis of Janko Kral's poetry G. Apel rightly noticed, Stur and his group knew longing, but their longing was directed toward concrete political and social goals, especially in the years preceding the revolution of 1848-49, which were full of enthusiasm for the struggle and hope for victory. Consequently, Stur and his contemporaries created a literature which echoed not only melancholy and restlessness, but also the call for revolution and the demand for a better world. �SLOVAKIA 15 The lyrical lament is strong in Stiir's poetry as in his prose. But he passed from the sphere of personal and social into that of national and Slavic thought in all his works. The soul of the nation - or of the Slavs - was his constant subject, and the pain of the nation's sufferings, struggles and failures form the pervading atmosphere of his writings. On the whole, Sb'.lr and his followers combined a realist's keen insight into contemporary social problems(30) with the romantic inheritance of warm-hearted attachment to their country and people and, of course, to Slavdom. They advocated democratic enlightenment in relation to unprivileged classes - peasants and workers - and glorified their qualities, as they glorified the Slavs and their past. One of them, Samo Tomasik, created the Slav anthem "Hej, Slovania." And they gave to the Slovak people not only a new hope and a new ideal, but also a pride expressed in Vajansky's famous verse: I am proud to be a Slovak, Elegant is my race; A hundred million souls it numbers, Over half the world it governs. With the Slovak tongue you traverse The four parts of the earth: One my brother palms does plant, Another eternal ice does scan, A third o'er the sea does fly! From this Kollar-inspired phantasy of one great Slav nation and one Slav language, the Slovaks, as rightly says Hans Kohn, "feeling abandoned in Hungary and their national existence threatened, ~ay have drawn strength and faith in the indestructibility of the Slovak people and language," and it helped to continue to maintain contacts with the cultural life of other Slavic peoples. In fact, Stur and his followers transplanted into Slovakia not only Pushkin's poetry, but also Mickiewicz, Sevcenko and Yugoslav poets. Stur's contemporaries demonstrated their Pan-Slavic sympathy and tendencies by read- �16 SLOVAKIA ing Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav authors in the original, and famous Mickiewicz's "Ode to Youth," according to W. Bobek, "not even in Poland had been so enthusiastically received as in Slovakia." We can say that Slovak literature since Stu.r's time developed under a strong influence of the outstanding works of Slav authors and was marked, like Polish and Russian literature, by an extensive use of folk tradition and regionalism, drawing on folklore and legend in the same way and to the same extent as did the literature of other Slavs.(31) �SLOVAKIA 17 IV REVOLUTIONARY, IDEALIST, ROMANTIC, OR REALIST? During the past one hundred years, opponents and adherents of Sh1r's achievements and conceptions classified him differently. To the Hungarian gentry who persecuted and sentenced him to death, he was a revolutionary and a rebel. He was idealist or romantic to those in Central Europe who did not believe in the final victory of truth and natural rights of the oppressed peoples arid did not wish to see Slovaks develop culturally, socially and politically into a distinct national entity. Stur was a romantic day-dreamer for all those who disliked the idea of Slavic reciprocity, his vision of a great future for Slavdom, or his assiduous work for equal rights of the Slovak people with other Central European nations, including Slovak national independence which he advocated in the following terms: "Each nation is only one part of humanity, and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has attained the best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit. "So that we (Slovaks) might be r evived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves; because a nation which is enslaved has its hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." Considered purely on the basis of his writings, Shir appears to a superficial critic as a revolutionary and als·o a romantic idealist. When all parliamentary and political methods proved unsuccessful, he led, in 1848, the Slovak people in armed resistance against the revolution of the Magyar aristocrats and for Slovak autonomy within th:e framework of the Habsburg Monarchy. But before this happened Stur tried all possible peaceful means, as even a brief look into his activities would show. �18 SLOVAKIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·-· - ·-· ··-· . -· By advocating the Slovak national cause and uniting the Slovak Catholics and Protestants by means of a common literary language, Stur aimed at a higher cultural level of the broad masses and thereby to gain theqi for the struggle for national equality in Hungary. "Stur was clearly aware of the fact," writes Bartek, "that unity in the literary language was not the ultimate goal of his nation, but only a medium of further national development. The Slovaks, therefore, felt that the proper course had been taken in regard to their literary language. Even John Holly, not only the greatest Slovak poet at that time, but also the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stur's action his blessing and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority of the Slovak nation.(32) As a member of the Hungarian Diet, Stur appears as an enlightened fighter for freedom and social progress. A review of his speeches and articles from that time reveals that he demanded equal rights for all nationalities in Hungary, in cultural and political life, and insisted on the adoption by the Diet of laws to free the peasant masses from the feudalistic Robot system and labor , rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schools in national tongues. Among many of his recommendations to the Diet, we also read his fervent demand to industrialize Slovakia and to adopt humanitarian laws regarding relations between gentry and the working class, the State authorities and citizens. The obsolete social and political structure of Hungary was one of the main topics of Stur's speeches. He recommended a federalistic system giving justice to all nationalities and appealed to the magnates to give attention to the development of the State in the spirit of new social and political ideas, and to make it a part of modern Europe. Stur was not a rebel, according to Bartek. As long as there was any hope of settlement with the Magyars, he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarian State. He warned the ruling Magyar class that they could not forever ignore and suppress the inherent rights of nationalities and exploit the Slovaks and other peoples of �SLOVAKIA 19 Hungary without expecting them to strike back with their righteous demands for a free national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsburg Empire. When all these demands hit upon deaf ears, only then did L. Stur and his group decide to organize the Slovak revolution of 1848-49 in which Stur played the leading role together with J. M. Hurban and M. M. Hodza, and which marked, though defeated and betrayed by Vienna, an important milestone in Slovak history. The torch of national consciousness, which Stur and his group had taken over from the followers of Bernolak and J. Holly, as a result of this revolution, became a lasting light for Slovakia's national struggles and aspirations. As for the assertion that Stur was a daydreamer in politics and a romantic in philosophy, recent analysis of his writings by Prof. D. Cizevskij, Prof. S. Polakovic, Dr. S. S. Osusky, and many others, completely repudiates this view. In his book "Stu.r's Philosophy of Life," Prof. Cizevskij proves that Stur was in many respects an original philosopher and not merely an epigon of Hegel and German romantic thinkers. On the contrary, Stu.r's philosophy lacks several characteristic features of German romanticism, according to Cizevskij's thorough analysis which finds him a realist in his approaches to the phenomena of life. Strangely and unfortunately enough, but recent political developments in Central and Eastern Europe proved that even Stu.r's big dream of united Slavic peoples under Russia may become a reality. Not under an enlightened Russian czar with humanistic and liberal views, not as a community dedicated to the Orthodox Church and struggling for the highest ideals of freedom and respect for human beings, as Stur wished to see it in his work "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future) . Moscow has become the political powerhouse of the Slav world under quite different circumstances, but Stu.r's vision of a single united Slavic world under Russian leadership has technically materialized. �20 SLOVAKIA Stur's v1s1on of Slovak cultural, political, and social . life did not prove to be daydreaming either. There is a Slovak nation with its own literature, cultural institutions, and is practically without illiteracy. There is a strong national consciousness and a sound social stratification, unbalanced only by the present Communist regime. And there is also a fighting spirit of the new Slovak generations for national and social justice among Central European peoples and a constant resistance against Communist ideology, about which over a century ago E. Stur wrote : "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against all civil society .. . but it also ruins all personal initiative, endeavor and enthusiasm. It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It degrades man to animal level. . . . "Communism has matured to the same degree as atheism and defection from Christianity. . . . In all types of Communism, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life. It brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind . . . . " Despite Stur's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities, as well as those of his group, were admirably manysided. Besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the national cause, Stur and his followers became a model for many generations in their thorough preparation for the role which they marked out for themselves in Slovak life. Because they were human, they did make mistakes, but enemies of the Slovak national revival are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistakes were the mistakes of the century in which they lived, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' Autriche-Les Slovaques," published in 1917. Their smallness or greatness, their realism or romanticism can be measured only against the background of the conditions and of the period in which they lived, and against the results of their work which brought a new and more dynamic life to the Slovak people.(33) To summarize, it is certainly proper and correct to say �SLOVAKIA 21 that the significance of r.udovit Stur was great and farreaching, in the first place, in the revival of Slovak national life, where Stur played the role of reformer of the Slovak literary language, greatly contributed to the modern Slovak national ideology, gave to his people a new vision of political freedom and of a better future, and by his own example, his writings embracing poetry, philosophy, history, sociology, etc., gave a strong impetus to Slovak life in general. Since Slovakia and the Slovak people are surely a part of the Slavic world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival is logically a part of his manifold contributions to be considered within the over-all Slavic world, too. On his position among Slav intellectuals of the XIXth century speaks not only the role he played at the first Slavic Congress in Prague, his rich correspondence with practically all outstanding Slavic leaders, but also the fact that his work "Slavdom and the World of the Future" was translated and twice published by Russian intellectuals in the last and at the beginning of this century. Being endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions, Stur belongs with Jan Kollar and Pavel J. Safarik to the Slovaks of the XIXth century who can rightly be regarded as great figures of the Slavic world. �22 SLOVAKIA NOTES 1. Stur's condemnation of Communism around 1850 became a part of the Slovak national ideology and has been quoted again and again. According to Stur, Communism "ranks among the wildest of offshoots ever conceived by the human brain ... it brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind, it shatters all the bonds of social living and opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution and indulgence. In place of holy ties, it offers profiteering, rioting and their like and thus it degrades man to animal level etc . ... " 2. A. Mraz, professor at the University of Bratislava, in his German book "Die Literature der Slowaken" and in his new · book "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948, says that "Stur war nicht nur ein glilcklicher Reformator und genialer Organisator und Initiator, er ragte auch als Dichter for" (p. 92). 3. Cfr. Hans Kohn, "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 1953, (p. 20). Les Slovaques," 4. Ernest Denis, "La Question d' Autriche Paris, Librairie Delagrave, (pp. 162- 170). 5. Objective studies on Stur in foreign languages were published by Prof. Dimitrij Cizevskij , "l!udovit ~tur's Philosophie des Litbens," Halle, 1938, and by Michael B. Petrovich, "The Emergence of Russian Pan-Slavism 1856-1870," Columbia University Press, 1956. 6. Ibidem, (p. 21). 7. Prof. Seton-Watson, "History of the Czechs and Slovaks," London, 1942, (p. 259). 8. Ibidem, (p. 262). See also Louis Leger, "Le Panslavisme et I' inte''l.!uderet francaise," Paris, Ernest Flammarion, 1917, (p. 164) vit Stur etait Slovaque, comme Kollar, comme Schafarik. On voit quel role les Slovaques si oublies chez nous, pour ne pas dire si ignores, ont joue dans la vie de la race slave au XIXe siecle." Leger confirms that the appeal to the Slavs for the First Congress in Prague in 1848 "avait ete redige par l' ectivain slovaque I.!udevit stur. " 9. Cfr. W. Lednicki, "Panslavism, in European Ideologies," ed. by Felix Gross, New York, 1948, (p. 838). 10. Journal of Central European Affairs, XII, 1952, I, 1- 19. 11. Stur's writings were published in several volumes. To his most important published works belong the following: Songs and Poems ; Ancient and New History of the Slovaks; Slavdom and the Future of the World ; Slovak Vernacular and the Need to Write In It; Slovak Grammar, and a great number of articles and studies, some of them published recently under the title : Slova na c!ase. He also was founder and editor of newspapers and reviews : Slovak National Review, The Eagle, etc. 12. Cfr. Louis Leger, "Le Panslavism et I' interet francais," (pp. 164-202). 13. See "~turova filozofia iivota," Bratislava, 1941, SUS, (p. III). 14. Cfr. I.!udovit Stur, "Slavianstvo i mir budushchago; Poslanie �SLOVAKIA 23 Slavianam s beregov Dunaja," translated from the German MS by V. L Lamanskij in "Chteniia lmperatorskago Obschchestva lstorii i Drevnostei Rossiiskich pri Moskovskom Universitete, Ill, Material y slavianskie," Books 1-3, Moscow, 1867, (pp. 1-191). For an analysis of Stur's work, see M. B. . Petrovich's "The Emergence of Russian Panslavism" and his "l!udovit ~tur and Russian Panslavism" in the Journal of Central European Affairs, April, 1952, 1-19. In German an objective analysis can be found in Alfred Fischel's book "Der Panslavismus bis zum Weltkrieg," Stuttgart and Berlin, 1919. 15. Cfr. "~turova filozofia zivota" and also Doc. S. Polako~ic, "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filozofie," Bratislava, 1944. 16. Cfr. Petrovich's works. 17. Danilevskii's first series of articles were published in 1869 in "Zaria" and so was his remarkable book "Rossiia i Evropa; vzgliad na kulturnyia i politicheskija otnosheniia slavianskago mira k germano-romanskomu." R. A. Fadieev published his "Mnienie o vostochnom voprosie" also in 1870; Stur died in 1856. 18. Cfr. works by Seton-Watson, Ernest Denis, Louis Leger, A. Fischel, H. Kohn, etc. For E. Denis "Stur reste encore aujourd' hui le nom le plus illustre de l' histoire slovaque . . . et l' ame de la resistance nationale .. . il ne vivait que pour sa cause et son ame debordait d' amour et de foi . .. " (p. 164). 19. Cfr. also Polakovic's "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filo• zofie," (p. 56). 20. Cfr. Cizevskij's chapter "Stur and Hegel" and also statement by him on p. 107 of his work. 21. See "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June 1956, article by Prof. H. Bartek. 22. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," Scranton, Pa., 1947, (pp. 90-100). 23. See H. Bartek : "l!udovit Shir a slovencina," Bratislava, 1943, and also his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956 (p. 9). 24. Cfr. "Revue des Etudes slaves," Paris, II, (pp. 217-18), article by H. Bartek. 25. Stur also adopted the view that the archaic Czech language, which was used for some time in Slovakia by the Protestant intelli· gentsia, was merely a borrowed language, and that the Slovak Protestants used it for liturgy and literature in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. This thesis was supported before Stur by many Catholic Slovak writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Cfr. "Slovak Literature Under the Soviet Impact," by J . M. Kirschbaum, Vol. I, 1956, Slavic and Easf European Studies. 26. Cfr. Prof. A. Mraz, "Die Literature der Slowaken," as well as his recent work "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948. 27. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," (pp. 103-105). 28. See, "A Byronic Hero in Slovak Literature," The Slavonic and East European Review, Volume XXXIV, No. 83, June, 1956, (pp. 338-354). 29. Ibidem, (pp. 33941). 30. On Stur's social ideas see Dr. J . Pauco, "l!udovychova u �24 SLOVAKIA Sturovcov," Turc. sv. Martin, 1943, and his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, March, 1956. In Pauco's view Stur and his followers "concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they also fought with equal vigor against alcoholism, illiteracy, etc." 31. Cfr. "A Note On Two Slovak Translators of Mickiewicz," by J. M. Kirschbaum , in "Mickiewic z in World Literature," Univ. of California Press, 1956. See also Cizevskij's contributio n: "Mickiewicz, Stur and Kral," Ibidem, (pp. 469-484). 32. H. Bartek, "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956. 33. See "Uudovit Stur po sto rokoch," by J. M. Kirschbaum , Most, Vol. III, No. 4. 195. � SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VIII quarterly by the Slovak League MARCH, 1958 of America NO. 1 (26) EUDOvtT STUR AND ms PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD By Joseph Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D. INTRODUCTORY NOTE Among Slovaks of the XIXth century who acquired their fame in the Slavic world, I'..udovit Stur (born 1815, died 1856) is among his contemporaries, poet Jan Kollar and ethnologist Pavel J. Safarik, one whose role and significance are still to be reconsidered and objectively reevaluated. Though nobody tried to claim him because some of his works were written in foreign languages, as it happened to Kollar and Safarik, who even now are classified as Czech poets and scholars, the literary value of Stur's works and the seriousness of his political and philosophical conceptions were questioned and often intentionally underestimated and distorted. While even scholars and literary historians at today's communist universities reevaluated - despite Sh1r's wellknown condemnation of Communism(!) his literary heritage and classified him among outstanding Slavic poets(2), philologists, philosophers and political leaders of the XIXth century - in many scholarly works in the free world he has been presented again and again "mediocre as a writer and thinker, but full of the typical sentimentalism and lyricism of the period, a man who like many at that time devoted all his life to the cause of his people and spent himself in its service."(3) · This judgment, which is quoted from Hans Kohn'. s "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," one of the most objective and up to date works on the subject, was uncritically repeated since it appeared for the first time in Ernest Denis' book "La Question d' Autriche - Les Slovaques," published in 1917.(4) Actually, this superficial and antagonistic view has been based on a thesis "Louis Stu.r �2 SLOVAKIA et l' idee d' independance slovaque," prepared by a young university student from Central Europe, H. Tourzer, who compiled unfavorable views and interpretations of Stur's work by contemporary Czech and Slovak literary critics and Stur's opponents. Instead of basing her judgment on a critical analysis of Stur's works, the young candidate for a Ph.D., Tourzer, presented Stur to the Western world in accordance with some political tendencies but in a highly unobjective light. Needless to say that neither Denis, nor Seton-Watson - another authority on the Slovak question - nor Hans Kohn, nor Kann ever analyzed and read Stur's works, some of them never translated into foreign languages and, consequently, the conclusions published in their books hardly resulted from their own analysis.(5) After a century, while commemorating Stur's centenary of death, we feel obliged to shed an objective light on Stur's work, his literary heritage, and his role in the Slavic world of the XIXth century. We are in a position to base our judgments not only on all his works - which until recently were not available in extenso - but on a hundred years span of time, which tested many of his conceptions and achievements and as the heat of the antagonists, who hated and debased him for political reasons, cooled down to a great extent by force of the vitality of Stur's ideas and the righteousness of his conceptions. Looking for Stur's place in the Slavic world, naturally we cannot avoid some purely Slovak cultural and political issues, though there is a great deal of truth in Hans Kohn's words that "the Slovak nation, with its own literary language, was definitely established"(6) by the merits of Stur's manifold activities, and this cannot, of course, be without interest for a student of the Slavic world in the field of linguistics, ethnology, history, or politics. Avoiding Stur's role and his historical achievements within a purely national range of his activities, an analysis of his works, conceptions, and lifelong struggles moves us to consider Stur's place in the Slavic world, 1) in the PanSlavic movement; 2) in the field of linguistics; and, 3) in literature. �SLOVAKIA 3 I I'..UDOVfT STUR AND PAN-SLAVISM Seton-Watson, one of the best English experts on Slovakia's past cultural and political struggles and aspirations, assessed Stur's significance in the Slavic world together with Kollar's and Safarik's role, stating that "their writings were of capital importance in the whole Slav revival of the last century, and form a strange sentimental link between the Western romantic school and the extravagancies of Pan-Slavism."(7) And referring to the first Slav Congress in Prague in 1848, Seton-Watson says that Stur "played a decisive part in the preparations for the Congress" and that at the Congress the four Slovaks - Safarik, Stur, Hurban and Hodza - played a part second to none save Palacky.(8) These two opinions on Stur's significance in the PanSlavic movement call for an analysis and completion in order to be understood properly. Quite a few of the experts on Slavic studies know Stur as a writer predominantly from his last work, written around 1855 in German and never published in Stur's native language, entitled "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), which was published in Russian translation in 1867, and its specially printed edition was presented to the foreign Slavic delegates to the Moscow Slav Congress in order to attract attention to the political views of the Russian organizers of the Congress. The book represents, according to Prof. Lednicki, an "integral PanSlavism, practically degenerating into Pan-Russianism, and a quite exceptional tribute to the cultural, moral and political forces of the Russian Empire.(9) And in view of a recent analysis by Michael Petrovich, which seems to be one of the best documented and objective, the work "is a romantic melange of science and poetry presented in a vigorous style and an argumentation which is remarkably consequential even when mistaken."(10) Though Stur was quite a prolific writer and his works embraced many fields of intellectual activities from history and poetry to philosophy and philology(ll), for the last hundred years it has been, nevertheless, the above �4 SLOVAKIA mentioned book which made Stur known among the students of Slavistics outside his native land and, therefore, an analysis seems to be opportune on this occasion. What are the main ideas and the principal reasons that this little book - probably only an introduction to a larger history of the Slavs - made Stur one of the major figures among the Slavic intelligentsia of the nineteenth century? Even if we do not accept the view of Prof. Lednicki that the work presents " the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia" - Seton-Watson's view is that even in this book Stur's aim was to preserve his own people - it was, among all reasons for its fame, Stur's political and philosophical conceptions which stirred the greatest interest in it. Stur adopted Hegel's and Herder's ideas that gave the Slavs the consciousness of a unity based upon the community of language and glorious destiny, and proclaimed them the coming leaders of Europe. He was thrilled by the vision of a gigantic empire sprawling from the Carpathians of his own native land to the shores of the Pacific. Drawing on history, philosophy, literature, philology, theology, and folklore, as well as on a penetrating insight into contemporary events, Stur emphasized that the Slavs have a mission to fulfill in universal history - or, in other words, that they have a historic vocation. This mission, however, they can fulfill only if united, and in his analysis of the world situation, in which he presents an apocalyptic vision of Western Europe's doom, there were three roads to consider: 1. Slavic federation without Russia. 2. Transformation of Austria into a Slavic federation. 3. Union with Russia - as a monarchic empire under Russian leadership, united in the Orthodox Church and the Russian literary language. Neither of the first two solutions had an appeal to Stur's vision of Slavdom's future and to his philosophy of history. Any attempt to organize a federation of European Slavic nations was doomed to failure in his opinion, because of the geographical situation, internal rivalries, re- �SLOVAKIA 5 ligious differences, cultural differentation, and intermingled non-Slavic elements. Though a few years ago, at the Slav Congress in Prague(12), he was not far from accepting Palacky's idea of Austroslavism and led the Slovaks on the side of the Habsburg's forces against the Magyars in the revolution of 1848, his books condemn in strong terms Austria and the idea of an Austro-Slavic federation. "There remains a third road," Stur insists, "the only one which is sure and has a future - the Union of all Slavs with Russia." "Russia is the prime mover and the leader of our national family," continues Stur. "Our people are but a fragment of a single nationality, they can be reborn and united into a single whole only by a related benevolent and great Power." That Power among the Slavs in Stur's time was only Russia. "Let us go forth together," urges Stur, "in the spirit of our people, under the leadership of the racial elders given to us by history." How was this Russian-led Slavic Union to come about? Stur recommended a return of all Slavs to the GrecoSlavic Church, urged the adoption of the Russian language and Cyrillic alphabet by all Slavs as a common literary language, but how to change the political situation of the Slavic peoples dominated by Austria and Turkey and bring them under the Russian leadership, Stur did not venture to say. He acknowledged that it could be realized only "under the pressure of grave political events" and therefore, he writes: "We do not consider it necessary, and we even consider it superfluous, to define prematurely the means of unification and degree of the reciprocal relations of the Slavs with Russia. The means and the degree of this unification will emerge from circumstances yet to come about. But it is useful," he concludes, "at least to raise the question, to speak about this subject and to prepare our minds for it." Stur's political and philosophical conceptions expressed in this book remain a puzzle even to such experts on his writings as Prof. Cizevskij(13), and they never were explained either by his own compatriots or anyone else. �6 SLOVAKIA Stur adopted Hegel's idea of the succession of various nations on the historical stage as a consecutive incarnation of the universal spirit while studying in Halle, where he came into contact with German nationalism and philosophy. After his return to his native land, however, Stur became a passionate champion of Slovak national independence and fought for a distinct Slovak literary language even against Kollar and his Czech friends. He was for the idea of Slavic reciprocity, and many things stirred his Slavic pride, but his Pan-Slavism was, until this book appeared, a cultural, more or less defensive movement, with emphasis on language, literature, and culture, and politically it aimed at the liberation of his people and other Slavic oppressed nations from foreign rule, with Russia's help, but not under Russia's hegemony. Cizevskij and some other experts on Stur's writings try to explain Stur's political re-orientation mainly as a result of political events in Central Europe and particularly in Slovakia after the unsuccessful revolution of 1848, and such is also our opinion. "It was in a conflicting mood of helplessness and inversely high hopes in salvation from Slavic Russia that Stur wrote his famous work," is the explanation of another Slavist, Prof. Petrovich. "The failure of the Slovak revolution and other political demonstrations (May 1, 1848, Lipt. sv. Mikulas) brought Stur to the conclusion that it was useless for his people to seek its own freedom alone or in the frame of Austroslavism." Stur made it clear, however, even in this book, that his principal aim was to preserve his own people, and besides he set out to accomplish four basic tasks: 1. To determine, largely by reviewing the Slavic past, whether the Slavs had a role of their own to fulfill in world history; 2. to describe the Slavic mission in universal history against the background of the cultural. differences between Western and Eastern Europe; 3. to show what advantages the Slavs possessed by comparing their institutions, traditions; and qualities with those of the West; 4. to demonstrate that the Slavs could accomplish their mission only through political unification under Russian leadership(14). �SLOVAKIA 7 No doubt, this was a new look on the Slavic world. Was it original? We cannot deny that he applied some Hegelian principles of philosophy, such as the primacy of the idea in man's development, Hegel's dialectical approach to historical evolution, and Herder's vision of Slavdom taking place in succession of the bearers of the idea. But there are many original approaches in his book which cannot be linked either with German philosophy or Russian Slavophils, which is the second of alleged influences. Cizevskij defends Stu.r's originality(15). Florinskij, in the preface to the second edition of Stu.r's book (1905), stresses that Stur is very close to the viewpoints of the Russian Slavophils, Chomiakov, Pogodin, Kiriejevski, Aksakov, and their successors, but he also says that "insofar as one can judge by known biographical data, Stu.r's views arose in him independently, apart from any influence of Russian Slavophilism whatsoever." And such also was the opinion of Prof. A. Budilovic and others(16). Stu.r's biographical data speak, in fact, against dependence on Slavophils, though he knew Bodianski, Pogodin, Sevyrev, Sreznevski, Raevski, and others. We can, therefore, defend his originality in many regards, especially if we consider the intellectual climate of Europe in Stu.r's time and if we take into account that Slovakia - with Kollar and Safarik and Herkel, who invented the term "panslavismus," - was the classic land of Slavic reciprocity and that "as in name, so in sentiment, the Slovak never ceased being a Slav." ' Since N. I. Danilevskij and R. A. Fadejev came many years after Stu.r's death(17), Stur can be rightly consider_e d as the founder of political Pan-Slavism, of which Kollar was the poet and Safarik the scientist. �8 SLOVAKIA II STUR'S ROLE IN LINGUISTICS AND PHILOLOGY The role of f,udovit Stur in the field of Slavic studies is generally little known outside of Slovakia. In English, French and German published works, Stur is presented mainly as a political leader(18), a mediocre poet, owing his fame in the Slavic world to his treatise "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" which is, as we mentioned before, a study of a political, sociological, and philosophical character. A few years ago Professor D. Cizevskij, in his German book - translated in the meantime into the Slovak under the title "Sturova filozofia zivota" (Stu.r's Philosophy of Life) -found however, that Stur was also a philosopher of considerable knowledge and originality(19). He shows, of course, dependence on Hegel and contemporary German philosophers. But to present him in such a light, as if he had blindly applied Hegel's philosophy to Slavic or Slovak life, as he was accused by his opponents, seems to be a malicious distortion. In view of Cizevskij's analysis, Stur's generation had several thinkers who tried to create their own philosophical system and who, in their time, among Slavic nations excelled in originality bf thinking. As for Stu.r's philosophy, Cizevskij refuted in his book the assertions that: 1. Stur was a simple follower of Hegel; 2. that his philosophical views were those of contemporary romantic philosophy. In Cizevskij's opinion Stur formed an independent philosophical system which in many ways differs from that of Hegel, and his approach to life's phenomena were highly realistic(20). This, however, is not our concern in the present analysis. Considering Stu.r's role in linguistics and philology, it would be unjust and incorrect not to recognize his merits(21). Stur was no J agic or Miklosic as far as overall Slavic philology is concerned, but without exaggeration we may say that the role, along with A. Bernolak, was that of Vuk Karadzic, Gaj, or Vraz in establishing new literary Slavic languages. There have been until recently many misconceptions as far as the Slovak language, its history and place among �SLOVAKIA 9 the Slavic languages are concerned. A thorough study of phonology, etymology, lexicography, and grammar now shows that the Slovak language is distinct from any other Slavic tongue. This was not so clear and evident one hundred years ago when contemporary theories in linguistics were still based on primitive methods and the science of philology was in its infancy. Modern techniques in linguistics have thrown new light on the subject and have been instrumental in giving us modified views that are far advanced beyond the hasty, unwarranted conclusions of a century ago. It is to Stur's credit that - after a century of clashes and discussions between Czech linguists and the Slovak Catholic intelligentsia, who replaced the Latin already in the 17th century with a Slovak literary language - the Slovak language was properly classified as the real and original national tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia since the dawn of history, and Stur helped to establish it irrevocably among Slavic languages of the Western group. Stur accepted the phonetic orthography of Bernolak which from the philological and practical standpoint best answered the purpose, but for scientific and ideological reasons he decided to adopt the dialect of Central Slovakia and not the western Slovak dialect used since 1635 at the University of Trnava and codified by Bernolak in his Grammar and huge dictionary, the latter in six languages(22). It would be superfluous now to point out that formulating purely scientific views on the proper relations between the Czech and Slovak languages, most of the Czech and other philologists and literary historians were influenced by political views and aspirations. The claim that Slovak is but a dialect of the older Czech was not based on facts of history or philology. It was, according to Stur a biased opinion of those who wished to deny to the Slovaks the right to their independent national life. Though Stur's works in the field of philology - "Narecia slovensko" (Slovak dialect) and his Grammar - are marked by amateurism of XIXth century patriots, and it would be difficult to call him "a scholar trained in the science �10 SLOVAKIA of philology," nevertheless he grasped the true basis of the Slovak language by a careful analysis of the fundamental roots of the Czech and Slovak languages and by a comparative study of their developments. Modern philological research gave Stur reason in many respects. According to Professor Bartek, Stur, who studied and spoke several Slavic languages and was acquainted with comparative philology, was "in his time an extraordinary good philologist, who intuitively often correctly came upon certain individual characteristics of the Slovak language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the correctness of many of Stu.r's linguistic findings, the justification for which science in that period could not prove(23). Stu.r's view that the Slovak language developed independently was confirmed also by Trubeckoj, who considers the disappearance of the lesser vowel sounds (slabe jery) in the Slavic derivatives as the last common change and the date of birth of the Slavic languages. The end of the vowel signs in fact caused a fundamental change in the phonological technique of the Slavic dialects, as well as in the original forms in many instances, so that the entire phonological structure was revised, not uniformly but individually, in each Slavic dialect, which fact brought into being the independent Slavic languages as we have them today(24). Stur considered the Slovak language as the central and cardinal language among all the Slavic tongues. We, of course, can question this from the linguistical point of view and accept that Stur wished to emphasize the central position of Slovakia linguistically, historically, and geographically as the centrum of all Slavdom. Stur viewec' the position of the Slovak language as a central clearinghouse ' mainly because he was conscious of many of its similarities with the Slavic tongues of the East, West, North and South, especially noting the agreement with the Yugoslav dialects with which the Slovak came into intimate contact in the tenth century as is evident from the presence of Yugoslavism in the Slovak language even today. According to Stur, in the ninth century the Old Sla- �SLOVAKIA 11 vonic was still the common tongue of the Slavs with a unified phonology. From the ninth century different dialects developed into distinct Slavic languages, among them also the Slovak tongue. This thesis is strengthened also by the fact that the Slovak territory in the eleventh century was annexed by Hungary and, hence, the only contact the Slovaks had with the Czechs was through the Moravians who have continued to speak a Slovakian dialect in spite of the pressure of the Czechs from the West and to the present time have retained their own phonological structure. Stur's claim that the Slovak language never was a part of the Czech, or the so-called "czechoslovak" language, was based on assumptions many of which were in the meantime proven correct by scientific research of authorities on the subject(25). Professor Senn formulated the results of the new research in this regard in his study on Slavic linguistics, published in "A Handbook of Slavic Studies," edited by Prof. Strakhovsky, and Prof. Henry Bartek from the University of Bratislava, who dedicated to this problem several of his works, says that "we may rightly claim that at the time of the disintegration of the Old Slavonic, the era saw the rise of new, independent Slavic languages, among them being also the Slovak, whose development cannot be identified with that of the Czech language." According to Bartek, the ancient phonological nature of the Slovak language certainly indicates that even in the centuries that followed the disappearance of the Old Slavonic, the Slovak tongue was not subject to a common evolution with the Czech which possesses its own unique phonological system, which is quite different from the Slovak." "In conclusion," says Bartek, "we may say that the Slovak language is by every right of its origin and development an independent tongue having its rightful place of equality alongside the Czech or any other Slavic tongue," as Stur asserted over a hundred years ago. �12 SLOVAKIA III STUR'S LITERARY AESTHETICS AND CULTURAL ACHIEVEMENTS There was for a long time no unanimity among literary historians and critics as to whether Stur was in the first plaee "f homme de pensee," or if in his activities prevailed "f homme d' action." His role in the Slav Congress in Prague, in 1848, his many contacts with Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav intellectuals, his part in the Slovak revolution of 1848, and his role in the Hungarian Diet definitely mark him as "l' homme d' action." From his correspondence we know now that he had direct relations with the leaders of all Slavic peoples and, when sentenced to death for his part in the Slovak revolution, he removed himself to Vienna and there came into contact with other Slav representatives, notably the Slovene Stanko Vraz, and still more important with Ban Jelacic and the Serbian Patriarch Rajacic, who were working hand in hand and paid a joint visit to the Imperial Court. On the other hand, Stur played the most important role among the young generation of his time in the Slovak national revival, in the reform of the Slovak literary language, and in the resulting unity of the Slovak people which was followed by flourishing cultural and literary activities(26). Consequently, to measure Stur's significance and to see objectively his achievements, his intellectual profile and spiritual foundations, we have to consider his activities also in the Slovak cultural and political life. There his significance was great and far-reaching not only in the development of Slovak literature and the Slovak national ideology, but also in philosophy and politics. Slovakia and the Slovak people being a part of the Slav world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival, logically a part of hi.; manifold contributions, is also to be considered within the framework of the Slavic world. Under Stur's leadership, the Slovak intelligentsia composed mostly of Catholic and Protestant clergy, a few teachers, lawyers, and other members of the middle class �SLOVAKIA 13 - continued to build a new national culture which centered in the Catholic university of Trnava (founded 1635) and was successfully developed by a group of Catholic writers, scholars, and poets, among whom particularly the learned linguist Anton Bernolak and the poet Jan Holly played leading r6les(27). This new Slovak culture was necessarily and intentionally based on the Slovak peasantry, on small towns and villages with their own specific traditions and artistic creative genius manifested in flourishing folk songs, artistically designed architecture, toolmaking, and resourceful popular music. Since the Slovak gentry continued to lose its national characteristics and assimilated with the Magyar gentry, abandoning the Slovak people in the middle of rising nationalism and political transformations, the Slovak intellectuals could not but take over the culture of the Slovak peasants, middle classes, and a handful of nationally-minded petty aristocrats and from it, before and especially in Sb1r's time, they developed their own national culture and new national consciousness. As in political thinking and planning, so in Stur's cultural activities, his creative work was in harmony with the climate of the epoch in Western and especially in Central Europe, where among the smaller nations romanticism and nationalism were either identical or very related, and national and historical consciousness and popular art, folksongs, sagas, and fairy tales were the focus of interest. In this climate Stur successfully organized his literary school and cultural activities which marked a new era in Slovak national life. His approach was philosophical, since he had a mystic idea of the nation and a respect for it as a person, and there was a strong spiritualism and idealism in his literary and cultural activities. His literary school adopted aesthetic and philosophical principles which became the real basis of last century's Slovak national revival and marked especially the literary and cultural life of Slovakia. During the revolution of 1848-49, Stur's literary school, as correctly says Gudrun Apel,(28) fulfilled to a large extent the function of a political and military leadership; with Stur, Hurban, Hodza among the �14 SLOVAKIA main leaders. The members of this school "imposed the most exacting task on themselves in order to elevate the Slovak people to the same cultural level as the rest of Europe, to release their creative energies, and to enable a new national culture to arise from the existing popular art and language."(29) Stu.r's influence was so strong that some of the principles of Stu.r's ideology and aesthetic principles lived in the cultural life of Slovakia until her subjugation by the present Communist rule. For a long time the folk-song was the basis of all poetic style, and Slovak poetry was mainly an expression of the national idea, national sufferings, joys, hopes, and struggles, as Stur demanded and practiced. Stu.r's claim - that the poet had to be the herald and prophet of a new and better world, something of a was resocial revolutionary and a national leader spected during the past one hundred years in Slovak literature not only in the nationalist era, but also the first years under Communism. Many literary critics refer to Stu.r's poetry and prose as romantic. But in Stu.r's poetry, as in his philosophy, is an evident lack of some principal elements of romanticism. The leading motives of his poetry - as well as of that of his group - were anti-feudal and anti-aristocratic; he made common cause with the people and fought for its rights; he was full of enthusiasm and faith in a new life. Stur advocated national solidarity of an ethical and emotional nature. According to Stu.r's words: "the course of time ... should rouse the poet to exalt songs of life and not of sickness, despair and hopelessness ... " As in his analysis of Janko Kral's poetry G. Apel rightly noticed, Stur and his group knew longing, but their longing was directed toward concrete political and social goals, especially in the years preceding the revolution of 1848-49, which were full of enthusiasm for the struggle and hope for victory. Consequently, Stur and his contemporaries created a literature which echoed not only melancholy and restlessness, but also the call for revolution and the demand for a better world. �SLOVAKIA 15 The lyrical lament is strong in Stiir's poetry as in his prose. But he passed from the sphere of personal and social into that of national and Slavic thought in all his works. The soul of the nation - or of the Slavs - was his constant subject, and the pain of the nation's sufferings, struggles and failures form the pervading atmosphere of his writings. On the whole, Sb'.lr and his followers combined a realist's keen insight into contemporary social problems(30) with the romantic inheritance of warm-hearted attachment to their country and people and, of course, to Slavdom. They advocated democratic enlightenment in relation to unprivileged classes - peasants and workers - and glorified their qualities, as they glorified the Slavs and their past. One of them, Samo Tomasik, created the Slav anthem "Hej, Slovania." And they gave to the Slovak people not only a new hope and a new ideal, but also a pride expressed in Vajansky's famous verse: I am proud to be a Slovak, Elegant is my race; A hundred million souls it numbers, Over half the world it governs. With the Slovak tongue you traverse The four parts of the earth: One my brother palms does plant, Another eternal ice does scan, A third o'er the sea does fly! From this Kollar-inspired phantasy of one great Slav nation and one Slav language, the Slovaks, as rightly says Hans Kohn, "feeling abandoned in Hungary and their national existence threatened, ~ay have drawn strength and faith in the indestructibility of the Slovak people and language," and it helped to continue to maintain contacts with the cultural life of other Slavic peoples. In fact, Stur and his followers transplanted into Slovakia not only Pushkin's poetry, but also Mickiewicz, Sevcenko and Yugoslav poets. Stur's contemporaries demonstrated their Pan-Slavic sympathy and tendencies by read- �16 SLOVAKIA ing Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav authors in the original, and famous Mickiewicz's "Ode to Youth," according to W. Bobek, "not even in Poland had been so enthusiastically received as in Slovakia." We can say that Slovak literature since Stu.r's time developed under a strong influence of the outstanding works of Slav authors and was marked, like Polish and Russian literature, by an extensive use of folk tradition and regionalism, drawing on folklore and legend in the same way and to the same extent as did the literature of other Slavs.(31) �SLOVAKIA 17 IV REVOLUTIONARY, IDEALIST, ROMANTIC, OR REALIST? During the past one hundred years, opponents and adherents of Sh1r's achievements and conceptions classified him differently. To the Hungarian gentry who persecuted and sentenced him to death, he was a revolutionary and a rebel. He was idealist or romantic to those in Central Europe who did not believe in the final victory of truth and natural rights of the oppressed peoples arid did not wish to see Slovaks develop culturally, socially and politically into a distinct national entity. Stur was a romantic day-dreamer for all those who disliked the idea of Slavic reciprocity, his vision of a great future for Slavdom, or his assiduous work for equal rights of the Slovak people with other Central European nations, including Slovak national independence which he advocated in the following terms: "Each nation is only one part of humanity, and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has attained the best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit. "So that we (Slovaks) might be r evived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves; because a nation which is enslaved has its hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." Considered purely on the basis of his writings, Shir appears to a superficial critic as a revolutionary and als·o a romantic idealist. When all parliamentary and political methods proved unsuccessful, he led, in 1848, the Slovak people in armed resistance against the revolution of the Magyar aristocrats and for Slovak autonomy within th:e framework of the Habsburg Monarchy. But before this happened Stur tried all possible peaceful means, as even a brief look into his activities would show. �18 SLOVAKIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·-· - ·-· ··-· . -· By advocating the Slovak national cause and uniting the Slovak Catholics and Protestants by means of a common literary language, Stur aimed at a higher cultural level of the broad masses and thereby to gain theqi for the struggle for national equality in Hungary. "Stur was clearly aware of the fact," writes Bartek, "that unity in the literary language was not the ultimate goal of his nation, but only a medium of further national development. The Slovaks, therefore, felt that the proper course had been taken in regard to their literary language. Even John Holly, not only the greatest Slovak poet at that time, but also the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stur's action his blessing and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority of the Slovak nation.(32) As a member of the Hungarian Diet, Stur appears as an enlightened fighter for freedom and social progress. A review of his speeches and articles from that time reveals that he demanded equal rights for all nationalities in Hungary, in cultural and political life, and insisted on the adoption by the Diet of laws to free the peasant masses from the feudalistic Robot system and labor , rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schools in national tongues. Among many of his recommendations to the Diet, we also read his fervent demand to industrialize Slovakia and to adopt humanitarian laws regarding relations between gentry and the working class, the State authorities and citizens. The obsolete social and political structure of Hungary was one of the main topics of Stur's speeches. He recommended a federalistic system giving justice to all nationalities and appealed to the magnates to give attention to the development of the State in the spirit of new social and political ideas, and to make it a part of modern Europe. Stur was not a rebel, according to Bartek. As long as there was any hope of settlement with the Magyars, he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarian State. He warned the ruling Magyar class that they could not forever ignore and suppress the inherent rights of nationalities and exploit the Slovaks and other peoples of �SLOVAKIA 19 Hungary without expecting them to strike back with their righteous demands for a free national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsburg Empire. When all these demands hit upon deaf ears, only then did L. Stur and his group decide to organize the Slovak revolution of 1848-49 in which Stur played the leading role together with J. M. Hurban and M. M. Hodza, and which marked, though defeated and betrayed by Vienna, an important milestone in Slovak history. The torch of national consciousness, which Stur and his group had taken over from the followers of Bernolak and J. Holly, as a result of this revolution, became a lasting light for Slovakia's national struggles and aspirations. As for the assertion that Stur was a daydreamer in politics and a romantic in philosophy, recent analysis of his writings by Prof. D. Cizevskij, Prof. S. Polakovic, Dr. S. S. Osusky, and many others, completely repudiates this view. In his book "Stu.r's Philosophy of Life," Prof. Cizevskij proves that Stur was in many respects an original philosopher and not merely an epigon of Hegel and German romantic thinkers. On the contrary, Stu.r's philosophy lacks several characteristic features of German romanticism, according to Cizevskij's thorough analysis which finds him a realist in his approaches to the phenomena of life. Strangely and unfortunately enough, but recent political developments in Central and Eastern Europe proved that even Stu.r's big dream of united Slavic peoples under Russia may become a reality. Not under an enlightened Russian czar with humanistic and liberal views, not as a community dedicated to the Orthodox Church and struggling for the highest ideals of freedom and respect for human beings, as Stur wished to see it in his work "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future) . Moscow has become the political powerhouse of the Slav world under quite different circumstances, but Stu.r's vision of a single united Slavic world under Russian leadership has technically materialized. �20 SLOVAKIA Stur's v1s1on of Slovak cultural, political, and social . life did not prove to be daydreaming either. There is a Slovak nation with its own literature, cultural institutions, and is practically without illiteracy. There is a strong national consciousness and a sound social stratification, unbalanced only by the present Communist regime. And there is also a fighting spirit of the new Slovak generations for national and social justice among Central European peoples and a constant resistance against Communist ideology, about which over a century ago E. Stur wrote : "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against all civil society .. . but it also ruins all personal initiative, endeavor and enthusiasm. It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It degrades man to animal level. . . . "Communism has matured to the same degree as atheism and defection from Christianity. . . . In all types of Communism, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life. It brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind . . . . " Despite Stur's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities, as well as those of his group, were admirably manysided. Besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the national cause, Stur and his followers became a model for many generations in their thorough preparation for the role which they marked out for themselves in Slovak life. Because they were human, they did make mistakes, but enemies of the Slovak national revival are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistakes were the mistakes of the century in which they lived, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' Autriche-Les Slovaques," published in 1917. Their smallness or greatness, their realism or romanticism can be measured only against the background of the conditions and of the period in which they lived, and against the results of their work which brought a new and more dynamic life to the Slovak people.(33) To summarize, it is certainly proper and correct to say �SLOVAKIA 21 that the significance of r.udovit Stur was great and farreaching, in the first place, in the revival of Slovak national life, where Stur played the role of reformer of the Slovak literary language, greatly contributed to the modern Slovak national ideology, gave to his people a new vision of political freedom and of a better future, and by his own example, his writings embracing poetry, philosophy, history, sociology, etc., gave a strong impetus to Slovak life in general. Since Slovakia and the Slovak people are surely a part of the Slavic world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival is logically a part of his manifold contributions to be considered within the over-all Slavic world, too. On his position among Slav intellectuals of the XIXth century speaks not only the role he played at the first Slavic Congress in Prague, his rich correspondence with practically all outstanding Slavic leaders, but also the fact that his work "Slavdom and the World of the Future" was translated and twice published by Russian intellectuals in the last and at the beginning of this century. Being endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions, Stur belongs with Jan Kollar and Pavel J. Safarik to the Slovaks of the XIXth century who can rightly be regarded as great figures of the Slavic world. �22 SLOVAKIA NOTES 1. Stur's condemnation of Communism around 1850 became a part of the Slovak national ideology and has been quoted again and again. According to Stur, Communism "ranks among the wildest of offshoots ever conceived by the human brain ... it brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind, it shatters all the bonds of social living and opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution and indulgence. In place of holy ties, it offers profiteering, rioting and their like and thus it degrades man to animal level etc . ... " 2. A. Mraz, professor at the University of Bratislava, in his German book "Die Literature der Slowaken" and in his new · book "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948, says that "Stur war nicht nur ein glilcklicher Reformator und genialer Organisator und Initiator, er ragte auch als Dichter for" (p. 92). 3. Cfr. Hans Kohn, "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 1953, (p. 20). Les Slovaques," 4. Ernest Denis, "La Question d' Autriche Paris, Librairie Delagrave, (pp. 162- 170). 5. Objective studies on Stur in foreign languages were published by Prof. Dimitrij Cizevskij , "l!udovit ~tur's Philosophie des Litbens," Halle, 1938, and by Michael B. Petrovich, "The Emergence of Russian Pan-Slavism 1856-1870," Columbia University Press, 1956. 6. Ibidem, (p. 21). 7. Prof. Seton-Watson, "History of the Czechs and Slovaks," London, 1942, (p. 259). 8. Ibidem, (p. 262). See also Louis Leger, "Le Panslavisme et I' inte''l.!uderet francaise," Paris, Ernest Flammarion, 1917, (p. 164) vit Stur etait Slovaque, comme Kollar, comme Schafarik. On voit quel role les Slovaques si oublies chez nous, pour ne pas dire si ignores, ont joue dans la vie de la race slave au XIXe siecle." Leger confirms that the appeal to the Slavs for the First Congress in Prague in 1848 "avait ete redige par l' ectivain slovaque I.!udevit stur. " 9. Cfr. W. Lednicki, "Panslavism, in European Ideologies," ed. by Felix Gross, New York, 1948, (p. 838). 10. Journal of Central European Affairs, XII, 1952, I, 1- 19. 11. Stur's writings were published in several volumes. To his most important published works belong the following: Songs and Poems ; Ancient and New History of the Slovaks; Slavdom and the Future of the World ; Slovak Vernacular and the Need to Write In It; Slovak Grammar, and a great number of articles and studies, some of them published recently under the title : Slova na c!ase. He also was founder and editor of newspapers and reviews : Slovak National Review, The Eagle, etc. 12. Cfr. Louis Leger, "Le Panslavism et I' interet francais," (pp. 164-202). 13. See "~turova filozofia iivota," Bratislava, 1941, SUS, (p. III). 14. Cfr. I.!udovit Stur, "Slavianstvo i mir budushchago; Poslanie �SLOVAKIA 23 Slavianam s beregov Dunaja," translated from the German MS by V. L Lamanskij in "Chteniia lmperatorskago Obschchestva lstorii i Drevnostei Rossiiskich pri Moskovskom Universitete, Ill, Material y slavianskie," Books 1-3, Moscow, 1867, (pp. 1-191). For an analysis of Stur's work, see M. B. . Petrovich's "The Emergence of Russian Panslavism" and his "l!udovit ~tur and Russian Panslavism" in the Journal of Central European Affairs, April, 1952, 1-19. In German an objective analysis can be found in Alfred Fischel's book "Der Panslavismus bis zum Weltkrieg," Stuttgart and Berlin, 1919. 15. Cfr. "~turova filozofia zivota" and also Doc. S. Polako~ic, "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filozofie," Bratislava, 1944. 16. Cfr. Petrovich's works. 17. Danilevskii's first series of articles were published in 1869 in "Zaria" and so was his remarkable book "Rossiia i Evropa; vzgliad na kulturnyia i politicheskija otnosheniia slavianskago mira k germano-romanskomu." R. A. Fadieev published his "Mnienie o vostochnom voprosie" also in 1870; Stur died in 1856. 18. Cfr. works by Seton-Watson, Ernest Denis, Louis Leger, A. Fischel, H. Kohn, etc. For E. Denis "Stur reste encore aujourd' hui le nom le plus illustre de l' histoire slovaque . . . et l' ame de la resistance nationale .. . il ne vivait que pour sa cause et son ame debordait d' amour et de foi . .. " (p. 164). 19. Cfr. also Polakovic's "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filo• zofie," (p. 56). 20. Cfr. Cizevskij's chapter "Stur and Hegel" and also statement by him on p. 107 of his work. 21. See "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June 1956, article by Prof. H. Bartek. 22. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," Scranton, Pa., 1947, (pp. 90-100). 23. See H. Bartek : "l!udovit Shir a slovencina," Bratislava, 1943, and also his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956 (p. 9). 24. Cfr. "Revue des Etudes slaves," Paris, II, (pp. 217-18), article by H. Bartek. 25. Stur also adopted the view that the archaic Czech language, which was used for some time in Slovakia by the Protestant intelli· gentsia, was merely a borrowed language, and that the Slovak Protestants used it for liturgy and literature in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. This thesis was supported before Stur by many Catholic Slovak writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Cfr. "Slovak Literature Under the Soviet Impact," by J . M. Kirschbaum, Vol. I, 1956, Slavic and Easf European Studies. 26. Cfr. Prof. A. Mraz, "Die Literature der Slowaken," as well as his recent work "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948. 27. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," (pp. 103-105). 28. See, "A Byronic Hero in Slovak Literature," The Slavonic and East European Review, Volume XXXIV, No. 83, June, 1956, (pp. 338-354). 29. Ibidem, (pp. 33941). 30. On Stur's social ideas see Dr. J . Pauco, "l!udovychova u �24 SLOVAKIA Sturovcov," Turc. sv. Martin, 1943, and his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, March, 1956. In Pauco's view Stur and his followers "concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they also fought with equal vigor against alcoholism, illiteracy, etc." 31. Cfr. "A Note On Two Slovak Translators of Mickiewicz," by J. M. Kirschbaum , in "Mickiewic z in World Literature," Univ. of California Press, 1956. See also Cizevskij's contributio n: "Mickiewicz, Stur and Kral," Ibidem, (pp. 469-484). 32. H. Bartek, "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956. 33. See "Uudovit Stur po sto rokoch," by J. M. Kirschbaum , Most, Vol. III, No. 4. 195. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document SLOVAKIA Published VOL. VIII quarterly by the Slovak League MARCH, 1958 of America NO. 1 (26) EUDOvtT STUR AND ms PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD By Joseph Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D. INTRODUCTORY NOTE Among Slovaks of the XIXth century who acquired their fame in the Slavic world, I'..udovit Stur (born 1815, died 1856) is among his contemporaries, poet Jan Kollar and ethnologist Pavel J. Safarik, one whose role and significance are still to be reconsidered and objectively reevaluated. Though nobody tried to claim him because some of his works were written in foreign languages, as it happened to Kollar and Safarik, who even now are classified as Czech poets and scholars, the literary value of Stur's works and the seriousness of his political and philosophical conceptions were questioned and often intentionally underestimated and distorted. While even scholars and literary historians at today's communist universities reevaluated - despite Sh1r's wellknown condemnation of Communism(!) his literary heritage and classified him among outstanding Slavic poets(2), philologists, philosophers and political leaders of the XIXth century - in many scholarly works in the free world he has been presented again and again "mediocre as a writer and thinker, but full of the typical sentimentalism and lyricism of the period, a man who like many at that time devoted all his life to the cause of his people and spent himself in its service."(3) · This judgment, which is quoted from Hans Kohn'. s "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," one of the most objective and up to date works on the subject, was uncritically repeated since it appeared for the first time in Ernest Denis' book "La Question d' Autriche - Les Slovaques," published in 1917.(4) Actually, this superficial and antagonistic view has been based on a thesis "Louis Stu.r 2 SLOVAKIA et l' idee d' independance slovaque," prepared by a young university student from Central Europe, H. Tourzer, who compiled unfavorable views and interpretations of Stur's work by contemporary Czech and Slovak literary critics and Stur's opponents. Instead of basing her judgment on a critical analysis of Stur's works, the young candidate for a Ph.D., Tourzer, presented Stur to the Western world in accordance with some political tendencies but in a highly unobjective light. Needless to say that neither Denis, nor Seton-Watson - another authority on the Slovak question - nor Hans Kohn, nor Kann ever analyzed and read Stur's works, some of them never translated into foreign languages and, consequently, the conclusions published in their books hardly resulted from their own analysis.(5) After a century, while commemorating Stur's centenary of death, we feel obliged to shed an objective light on Stur's work, his literary heritage, and his role in the Slavic world of the XIXth century. We are in a position to base our judgments not only on all his works - which until recently were not available in extenso - but on a hundred years span of time, which tested many of his conceptions and achievements and as the heat of the antagonists, who hated and debased him for political reasons, cooled down to a great extent by force of the vitality of Stur's ideas and the righteousness of his conceptions. Looking for Stur's place in the Slavic world, naturally we cannot avoid some purely Slovak cultural and political issues, though there is a great deal of truth in Hans Kohn's words that "the Slovak nation, with its own literary language, was definitely established"(6) by the merits of Stur's manifold activities, and this cannot, of course, be without interest for a student of the Slavic world in the field of linguistics, ethnology, history, or politics. Avoiding Stur's role and his historical achievements within a purely national range of his activities, an analysis of his works, conceptions, and lifelong struggles moves us to consider Stur's place in the Slavic world, 1) in the PanSlavic movement; 2) in the field of linguistics; and, 3) in literature. SLOVAKIA 3 I I'..UDOVfT STUR AND PAN-SLAVISM Seton-Watson, one of the best English experts on Slovakia's past cultural and political struggles and aspirations, assessed Stur's significance in the Slavic world together with Kollar's and Safarik's role, stating that "their writings were of capital importance in the whole Slav revival of the last century, and form a strange sentimental link between the Western romantic school and the extravagancies of Pan-Slavism."(7) And referring to the first Slav Congress in Prague in 1848, Seton-Watson says that Stur "played a decisive part in the preparations for the Congress" and that at the Congress the four Slovaks - Safarik, Stur, Hurban and Hodza - played a part second to none save Palacky.(8) These two opinions on Stur's significance in the PanSlavic movement call for an analysis and completion in order to be understood properly. Quite a few of the experts on Slavic studies know Stur as a writer predominantly from his last work, written around 1855 in German and never published in Stur's native language, entitled "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future), which was published in Russian translation in 1867, and its specially printed edition was presented to the foreign Slavic delegates to the Moscow Slav Congress in order to attract attention to the political views of the Russian organizers of the Congress. The book represents, according to Prof. Lednicki, an "integral PanSlavism, practically degenerating into Pan-Russianism, and a quite exceptional tribute to the cultural, moral and political forces of the Russian Empire.(9) And in view of a recent analysis by Michael Petrovich, which seems to be one of the best documented and objective, the work "is a romantic melange of science and poetry presented in a vigorous style and an argumentation which is remarkably consequential even when mistaken."(10) Though Stur was quite a prolific writer and his works embraced many fields of intellectual activities from history and poetry to philosophy and philology(ll), for the last hundred years it has been, nevertheless, the above 4 SLOVAKIA mentioned book which made Stur known among the students of Slavistics outside his native land and, therefore, an analysis seems to be opportune on this occasion. What are the main ideas and the principal reasons that this little book - probably only an introduction to a larger history of the Slavs - made Stur one of the major figures among the Slavic intelligentsia of the nineteenth century? Even if we do not accept the view of Prof. Lednicki that the work presents " the most complete and consistently developed program for the subjugation of Slavs to Russia" - Seton-Watson's view is that even in this book Stur's aim was to preserve his own people - it was, among all reasons for its fame, Stur's political and philosophical conceptions which stirred the greatest interest in it. Stur adopted Hegel's and Herder's ideas that gave the Slavs the consciousness of a unity based upon the community of language and glorious destiny, and proclaimed them the coming leaders of Europe. He was thrilled by the vision of a gigantic empire sprawling from the Carpathians of his own native land to the shores of the Pacific. Drawing on history, philosophy, literature, philology, theology, and folklore, as well as on a penetrating insight into contemporary events, Stur emphasized that the Slavs have a mission to fulfill in universal history - or, in other words, that they have a historic vocation. This mission, however, they can fulfill only if united, and in his analysis of the world situation, in which he presents an apocalyptic vision of Western Europe's doom, there were three roads to consider: 1. Slavic federation without Russia. 2. Transformation of Austria into a Slavic federation. 3. Union with Russia - as a monarchic empire under Russian leadership, united in the Orthodox Church and the Russian literary language. Neither of the first two solutions had an appeal to Stur's vision of Slavdom's future and to his philosophy of history. Any attempt to organize a federation of European Slavic nations was doomed to failure in his opinion, because of the geographical situation, internal rivalries, re- SLOVAKIA 5 ligious differences, cultural differentation, and intermingled non-Slavic elements. Though a few years ago, at the Slav Congress in Prague(12), he was not far from accepting Palacky's idea of Austroslavism and led the Slovaks on the side of the Habsburg's forces against the Magyars in the revolution of 1848, his books condemn in strong terms Austria and the idea of an Austro-Slavic federation. "There remains a third road," Stur insists, "the only one which is sure and has a future - the Union of all Slavs with Russia." "Russia is the prime mover and the leader of our national family," continues Stur. "Our people are but a fragment of a single nationality, they can be reborn and united into a single whole only by a related benevolent and great Power." That Power among the Slavs in Stur's time was only Russia. "Let us go forth together," urges Stur, "in the spirit of our people, under the leadership of the racial elders given to us by history." How was this Russian-led Slavic Union to come about? Stur recommended a return of all Slavs to the GrecoSlavic Church, urged the adoption of the Russian language and Cyrillic alphabet by all Slavs as a common literary language, but how to change the political situation of the Slavic peoples dominated by Austria and Turkey and bring them under the Russian leadership, Stur did not venture to say. He acknowledged that it could be realized only "under the pressure of grave political events" and therefore, he writes: "We do not consider it necessary, and we even consider it superfluous, to define prematurely the means of unification and degree of the reciprocal relations of the Slavs with Russia. The means and the degree of this unification will emerge from circumstances yet to come about. But it is useful," he concludes, "at least to raise the question, to speak about this subject and to prepare our minds for it." Stur's political and philosophical conceptions expressed in this book remain a puzzle even to such experts on his writings as Prof. Cizevskij(13), and they never were explained either by his own compatriots or anyone else. 6 SLOVAKIA Stur adopted Hegel's idea of the succession of various nations on the historical stage as a consecutive incarnation of the universal spirit while studying in Halle, where he came into contact with German nationalism and philosophy. After his return to his native land, however, Stur became a passionate champion of Slovak national independence and fought for a distinct Slovak literary language even against Kollar and his Czech friends. He was for the idea of Slavic reciprocity, and many things stirred his Slavic pride, but his Pan-Slavism was, until this book appeared, a cultural, more or less defensive movement, with emphasis on language, literature, and culture, and politically it aimed at the liberation of his people and other Slavic oppressed nations from foreign rule, with Russia's help, but not under Russia's hegemony. Cizevskij and some other experts on Stur's writings try to explain Stur's political re-orientation mainly as a result of political events in Central Europe and particularly in Slovakia after the unsuccessful revolution of 1848, and such is also our opinion. "It was in a conflicting mood of helplessness and inversely high hopes in salvation from Slavic Russia that Stur wrote his famous work," is the explanation of another Slavist, Prof. Petrovich. "The failure of the Slovak revolution and other political demonstrations (May 1, 1848, Lipt. sv. Mikulas) brought Stur to the conclusion that it was useless for his people to seek its own freedom alone or in the frame of Austroslavism." Stur made it clear, however, even in this book, that his principal aim was to preserve his own people, and besides he set out to accomplish four basic tasks: 1. To determine, largely by reviewing the Slavic past, whether the Slavs had a role of their own to fulfill in world history; 2. to describe the Slavic mission in universal history against the background of the cultural. differences between Western and Eastern Europe; 3. to show what advantages the Slavs possessed by comparing their institutions, traditions; and qualities with those of the West; 4. to demonstrate that the Slavs could accomplish their mission only through political unification under Russian leadership(14). SLOVAKIA 7 No doubt, this was a new look on the Slavic world. Was it original? We cannot deny that he applied some Hegelian principles of philosophy, such as the primacy of the idea in man's development, Hegel's dialectical approach to historical evolution, and Herder's vision of Slavdom taking place in succession of the bearers of the idea. But there are many original approaches in his book which cannot be linked either with German philosophy or Russian Slavophils, which is the second of alleged influences. Cizevskij defends Stu.r's originality(15). Florinskij, in the preface to the second edition of Stu.r's book (1905), stresses that Stur is very close to the viewpoints of the Russian Slavophils, Chomiakov, Pogodin, Kiriejevski, Aksakov, and their successors, but he also says that "insofar as one can judge by known biographical data, Stu.r's views arose in him independently, apart from any influence of Russian Slavophilism whatsoever." And such also was the opinion of Prof. A. Budilovic and others(16). Stu.r's biographical data speak, in fact, against dependence on Slavophils, though he knew Bodianski, Pogodin, Sevyrev, Sreznevski, Raevski, and others. We can, therefore, defend his originality in many regards, especially if we consider the intellectual climate of Europe in Stu.r's time and if we take into account that Slovakia - with Kollar and Safarik and Herkel, who invented the term "panslavismus," - was the classic land of Slavic reciprocity and that "as in name, so in sentiment, the Slovak never ceased being a Slav." ' Since N. I. Danilevskij and R. A. Fadejev came many years after Stu.r's death(17), Stur can be rightly consider_e d as the founder of political Pan-Slavism, of which Kollar was the poet and Safarik the scientist. 8 SLOVAKIA II STUR'S ROLE IN LINGUISTICS AND PHILOLOGY The role of f,udovit Stur in the field of Slavic studies is generally little known outside of Slovakia. In English, French and German published works, Stur is presented mainly as a political leader(18), a mediocre poet, owing his fame in the Slavic world to his treatise "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" which is, as we mentioned before, a study of a political, sociological, and philosophical character. A few years ago Professor D. Cizevskij, in his German book - translated in the meantime into the Slovak under the title "Sturova filozofia zivota" (Stu.r's Philosophy of Life) -found however, that Stur was also a philosopher of considerable knowledge and originality(19). He shows, of course, dependence on Hegel and contemporary German philosophers. But to present him in such a light, as if he had blindly applied Hegel's philosophy to Slavic or Slovak life, as he was accused by his opponents, seems to be a malicious distortion. In view of Cizevskij's analysis, Stur's generation had several thinkers who tried to create their own philosophical system and who, in their time, among Slavic nations excelled in originality bf thinking. As for Stu.r's philosophy, Cizevskij refuted in his book the assertions that: 1. Stur was a simple follower of Hegel; 2. that his philosophical views were those of contemporary romantic philosophy. In Cizevskij's opinion Stur formed an independent philosophical system which in many ways differs from that of Hegel, and his approach to life's phenomena were highly realistic(20). This, however, is not our concern in the present analysis. Considering Stu.r's role in linguistics and philology, it would be unjust and incorrect not to recognize his merits(21). Stur was no J agic or Miklosic as far as overall Slavic philology is concerned, but without exaggeration we may say that the role, along with A. Bernolak, was that of Vuk Karadzic, Gaj, or Vraz in establishing new literary Slavic languages. There have been until recently many misconceptions as far as the Slovak language, its history and place among SLOVAKIA 9 the Slavic languages are concerned. A thorough study of phonology, etymology, lexicography, and grammar now shows that the Slovak language is distinct from any other Slavic tongue. This was not so clear and evident one hundred years ago when contemporary theories in linguistics were still based on primitive methods and the science of philology was in its infancy. Modern techniques in linguistics have thrown new light on the subject and have been instrumental in giving us modified views that are far advanced beyond the hasty, unwarranted conclusions of a century ago. It is to Stur's credit that - after a century of clashes and discussions between Czech linguists and the Slovak Catholic intelligentsia, who replaced the Latin already in the 17th century with a Slovak literary language - the Slovak language was properly classified as the real and original national tongue of the inhabitants of Slovakia since the dawn of history, and Stur helped to establish it irrevocably among Slavic languages of the Western group. Stur accepted the phonetic orthography of Bernolak which from the philological and practical standpoint best answered the purpose, but for scientific and ideological reasons he decided to adopt the dialect of Central Slovakia and not the western Slovak dialect used since 1635 at the University of Trnava and codified by Bernolak in his Grammar and huge dictionary, the latter in six languages(22). It would be superfluous now to point out that formulating purely scientific views on the proper relations between the Czech and Slovak languages, most of the Czech and other philologists and literary historians were influenced by political views and aspirations. The claim that Slovak is but a dialect of the older Czech was not based on facts of history or philology. It was, according to Stur a biased opinion of those who wished to deny to the Slovaks the right to their independent national life. Though Stur's works in the field of philology - "Narecia slovensko" (Slovak dialect) and his Grammar - are marked by amateurism of XIXth century patriots, and it would be difficult to call him "a scholar trained in the science 10 SLOVAKIA of philology," nevertheless he grasped the true basis of the Slovak language by a careful analysis of the fundamental roots of the Czech and Slovak languages and by a comparative study of their developments. Modern philological research gave Stur reason in many respects. According to Professor Bartek, Stur, who studied and spoke several Slavic languages and was acquainted with comparative philology, was "in his time an extraordinary good philologist, who intuitively often correctly came upon certain individual characteristics of the Slovak language, so that even a modern philological analysis of his work will confirm the correctness of many of Stu.r's linguistic findings, the justification for which science in that period could not prove(23). Stu.r's view that the Slovak language developed independently was confirmed also by Trubeckoj, who considers the disappearance of the lesser vowel sounds (slabe jery) in the Slavic derivatives as the last common change and the date of birth of the Slavic languages. The end of the vowel signs in fact caused a fundamental change in the phonological technique of the Slavic dialects, as well as in the original forms in many instances, so that the entire phonological structure was revised, not uniformly but individually, in each Slavic dialect, which fact brought into being the independent Slavic languages as we have them today(24). Stur considered the Slovak language as the central and cardinal language among all the Slavic tongues. We, of course, can question this from the linguistical point of view and accept that Stur wished to emphasize the central position of Slovakia linguistically, historically, and geographically as the centrum of all Slavdom. Stur viewec' the position of the Slovak language as a central clearinghouse ' mainly because he was conscious of many of its similarities with the Slavic tongues of the East, West, North and South, especially noting the agreement with the Yugoslav dialects with which the Slovak came into intimate contact in the tenth century as is evident from the presence of Yugoslavism in the Slovak language even today. According to Stur, in the ninth century the Old Sla- SLOVAKIA 11 vonic was still the common tongue of the Slavs with a unified phonology. From the ninth century different dialects developed into distinct Slavic languages, among them also the Slovak tongue. This thesis is strengthened also by the fact that the Slovak territory in the eleventh century was annexed by Hungary and, hence, the only contact the Slovaks had with the Czechs was through the Moravians who have continued to speak a Slovakian dialect in spite of the pressure of the Czechs from the West and to the present time have retained their own phonological structure. Stur's claim that the Slovak language never was a part of the Czech, or the so-called "czechoslovak" language, was based on assumptions many of which were in the meantime proven correct by scientific research of authorities on the subject(25). Professor Senn formulated the results of the new research in this regard in his study on Slavic linguistics, published in "A Handbook of Slavic Studies," edited by Prof. Strakhovsky, and Prof. Henry Bartek from the University of Bratislava, who dedicated to this problem several of his works, says that "we may rightly claim that at the time of the disintegration of the Old Slavonic, the era saw the rise of new, independent Slavic languages, among them being also the Slovak, whose development cannot be identified with that of the Czech language." According to Bartek, the ancient phonological nature of the Slovak language certainly indicates that even in the centuries that followed the disappearance of the Old Slavonic, the Slovak tongue was not subject to a common evolution with the Czech which possesses its own unique phonological system, which is quite different from the Slovak." "In conclusion," says Bartek, "we may say that the Slovak language is by every right of its origin and development an independent tongue having its rightful place of equality alongside the Czech or any other Slavic tongue," as Stur asserted over a hundred years ago. 12 SLOVAKIA III STUR'S LITERARY AESTHETICS AND CULTURAL ACHIEVEMENTS There was for a long time no unanimity among literary historians and critics as to whether Stur was in the first plaee "f homme de pensee," or if in his activities prevailed "f homme d' action." His role in the Slav Congress in Prague, in 1848, his many contacts with Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav intellectuals, his part in the Slovak revolution of 1848, and his role in the Hungarian Diet definitely mark him as "l' homme d' action." From his correspondence we know now that he had direct relations with the leaders of all Slavic peoples and, when sentenced to death for his part in the Slovak revolution, he removed himself to Vienna and there came into contact with other Slav representatives, notably the Slovene Stanko Vraz, and still more important with Ban Jelacic and the Serbian Patriarch Rajacic, who were working hand in hand and paid a joint visit to the Imperial Court. On the other hand, Stur played the most important role among the young generation of his time in the Slovak national revival, in the reform of the Slovak literary language, and in the resulting unity of the Slovak people which was followed by flourishing cultural and literary activities(26). Consequently, to measure Stur's significance and to see objectively his achievements, his intellectual profile and spiritual foundations, we have to consider his activities also in the Slovak cultural and political life. There his significance was great and far-reaching not only in the development of Slovak literature and the Slovak national ideology, but also in philosophy and politics. Slovakia and the Slovak people being a part of the Slav world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival, logically a part of hi.; manifold contributions, is also to be considered within the framework of the Slavic world. Under Stur's leadership, the Slovak intelligentsia composed mostly of Catholic and Protestant clergy, a few teachers, lawyers, and other members of the middle class SLOVAKIA 13 - continued to build a new national culture which centered in the Catholic university of Trnava (founded 1635) and was successfully developed by a group of Catholic writers, scholars, and poets, among whom particularly the learned linguist Anton Bernolak and the poet Jan Holly played leading r6les(27). This new Slovak culture was necessarily and intentionally based on the Slovak peasantry, on small towns and villages with their own specific traditions and artistic creative genius manifested in flourishing folk songs, artistically designed architecture, toolmaking, and resourceful popular music. Since the Slovak gentry continued to lose its national characteristics and assimilated with the Magyar gentry, abandoning the Slovak people in the middle of rising nationalism and political transformations, the Slovak intellectuals could not but take over the culture of the Slovak peasants, middle classes, and a handful of nationally-minded petty aristocrats and from it, before and especially in Sb1r's time, they developed their own national culture and new national consciousness. As in political thinking and planning, so in Stur's cultural activities, his creative work was in harmony with the climate of the epoch in Western and especially in Central Europe, where among the smaller nations romanticism and nationalism were either identical or very related, and national and historical consciousness and popular art, folksongs, sagas, and fairy tales were the focus of interest. In this climate Stur successfully organized his literary school and cultural activities which marked a new era in Slovak national life. His approach was philosophical, since he had a mystic idea of the nation and a respect for it as a person, and there was a strong spiritualism and idealism in his literary and cultural activities. His literary school adopted aesthetic and philosophical principles which became the real basis of last century's Slovak national revival and marked especially the literary and cultural life of Slovakia. During the revolution of 1848-49, Stur's literary school, as correctly says Gudrun Apel,(28) fulfilled to a large extent the function of a political and military leadership; with Stur, Hurban, Hodza among the 14 SLOVAKIA main leaders. The members of this school "imposed the most exacting task on themselves in order to elevate the Slovak people to the same cultural level as the rest of Europe, to release their creative energies, and to enable a new national culture to arise from the existing popular art and language."(29) Stu.r's influence was so strong that some of the principles of Stu.r's ideology and aesthetic principles lived in the cultural life of Slovakia until her subjugation by the present Communist rule. For a long time the folk-song was the basis of all poetic style, and Slovak poetry was mainly an expression of the national idea, national sufferings, joys, hopes, and struggles, as Stur demanded and practiced. Stu.r's claim - that the poet had to be the herald and prophet of a new and better world, something of a was resocial revolutionary and a national leader spected during the past one hundred years in Slovak literature not only in the nationalist era, but also the first years under Communism. Many literary critics refer to Stu.r's poetry and prose as romantic. But in Stu.r's poetry, as in his philosophy, is an evident lack of some principal elements of romanticism. The leading motives of his poetry - as well as of that of his group - were anti-feudal and anti-aristocratic; he made common cause with the people and fought for its rights; he was full of enthusiasm and faith in a new life. Stur advocated national solidarity of an ethical and emotional nature. According to Stu.r's words: "the course of time ... should rouse the poet to exalt songs of life and not of sickness, despair and hopelessness ... " As in his analysis of Janko Kral's poetry G. Apel rightly noticed, Stur and his group knew longing, but their longing was directed toward concrete political and social goals, especially in the years preceding the revolution of 1848-49, which were full of enthusiasm for the struggle and hope for victory. Consequently, Stur and his contemporaries created a literature which echoed not only melancholy and restlessness, but also the call for revolution and the demand for a better world. SLOVAKIA 15 The lyrical lament is strong in Stiir's poetry as in his prose. But he passed from the sphere of personal and social into that of national and Slavic thought in all his works. The soul of the nation - or of the Slavs - was his constant subject, and the pain of the nation's sufferings, struggles and failures form the pervading atmosphere of his writings. On the whole, Sb'.lr and his followers combined a realist's keen insight into contemporary social problems(30) with the romantic inheritance of warm-hearted attachment to their country and people and, of course, to Slavdom. They advocated democratic enlightenment in relation to unprivileged classes - peasants and workers - and glorified their qualities, as they glorified the Slavs and their past. One of them, Samo Tomasik, created the Slav anthem "Hej, Slovania." And they gave to the Slovak people not only a new hope and a new ideal, but also a pride expressed in Vajansky's famous verse: I am proud to be a Slovak, Elegant is my race; A hundred million souls it numbers, Over half the world it governs. With the Slovak tongue you traverse The four parts of the earth: One my brother palms does plant, Another eternal ice does scan, A third o'er the sea does fly! From this Kollar-inspired phantasy of one great Slav nation and one Slav language, the Slovaks, as rightly says Hans Kohn, "feeling abandoned in Hungary and their national existence threatened, ~ay have drawn strength and faith in the indestructibility of the Slovak people and language," and it helped to continue to maintain contacts with the cultural life of other Slavic peoples. In fact, Stur and his followers transplanted into Slovakia not only Pushkin's poetry, but also Mickiewicz, Sevcenko and Yugoslav poets. Stur's contemporaries demonstrated their Pan-Slavic sympathy and tendencies by read- 16 SLOVAKIA ing Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, Czech, and Yugoslav authors in the original, and famous Mickiewicz's "Ode to Youth," according to W. Bobek, "not even in Poland had been so enthusiastically received as in Slovakia." We can say that Slovak literature since Stu.r's time developed under a strong influence of the outstanding works of Slav authors and was marked, like Polish and Russian literature, by an extensive use of folk tradition and regionalism, drawing on folklore and legend in the same way and to the same extent as did the literature of other Slavs.(31) SLOVAKIA 17 IV REVOLUTIONARY, IDEALIST, ROMANTIC, OR REALIST? During the past one hundred years, opponents and adherents of Sh1r's achievements and conceptions classified him differently. To the Hungarian gentry who persecuted and sentenced him to death, he was a revolutionary and a rebel. He was idealist or romantic to those in Central Europe who did not believe in the final victory of truth and natural rights of the oppressed peoples arid did not wish to see Slovaks develop culturally, socially and politically into a distinct national entity. Stur was a romantic day-dreamer for all those who disliked the idea of Slavic reciprocity, his vision of a great future for Slavdom, or his assiduous work for equal rights of the Slovak people with other Central European nations, including Slovak national independence which he advocated in the following terms: "Each nation is only one part of humanity, and no nation can claim for itself that it alone has attained the best human evolution and possible perfection. Therefore, no nation has a right to force upon another nation its way of life when that nation wants to move for itself and educate itself as it sees fit. "So that we (Slovaks) might be r evived and take the place in history which according to our strength and abilities belongs to us, we must once and for all free ourselves from the hated alien yoke and gain state independence for ourselves; because a nation which is enslaved has its hands tied, its spirit stifled, and is forever threatened with the danger that sooner or later it will perish." Considered purely on the basis of his writings, Shir appears to a superficial critic as a revolutionary and als·o a romantic idealist. When all parliamentary and political methods proved unsuccessful, he led, in 1848, the Slovak people in armed resistance against the revolution of the Magyar aristocrats and for Slovak autonomy within th:e framework of the Habsburg Monarchy. But before this happened Stur tried all possible peaceful means, as even a brief look into his activities would show. 18 SLOVAKIA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·-· - ·-· ··-· . -· By advocating the Slovak national cause and uniting the Slovak Catholics and Protestants by means of a common literary language, Stur aimed at a higher cultural level of the broad masses and thereby to gain theqi for the struggle for national equality in Hungary. "Stur was clearly aware of the fact," writes Bartek, "that unity in the literary language was not the ultimate goal of his nation, but only a medium of further national development. The Slovaks, therefore, felt that the proper course had been taken in regard to their literary language. Even John Holly, not only the greatest Slovak poet at that time, but also the greatest ideologist of his nation, gave Stur's action his blessing and, therefore, Stur was joined by the Catholics, representing five-sixths, the absolute majority of the Slovak nation.(32) As a member of the Hungarian Diet, Stur appears as an enlightened fighter for freedom and social progress. A review of his speeches and articles from that time reveals that he demanded equal rights for all nationalities in Hungary, in cultural and political life, and insisted on the adoption by the Diet of laws to free the peasant masses from the feudalistic Robot system and labor , rent, so that the culture of the country might increase by the foundation of schools in national tongues. Among many of his recommendations to the Diet, we also read his fervent demand to industrialize Slovakia and to adopt humanitarian laws regarding relations between gentry and the working class, the State authorities and citizens. The obsolete social and political structure of Hungary was one of the main topics of Stur's speeches. He recommended a federalistic system giving justice to all nationalities and appealed to the magnates to give attention to the development of the State in the spirit of new social and political ideas, and to make it a part of modern Europe. Stur was not a rebel, according to Bartek. As long as there was any hope of settlement with the Magyars, he did not advocate the destruction of the Hungarian State. He warned the ruling Magyar class that they could not forever ignore and suppress the inherent rights of nationalities and exploit the Slovaks and other peoples of SLOVAKIA 19 Hungary without expecting them to strike back with their righteous demands for a free national life, for the same rights the Magyars were resolved to fight for in the Habsburg Empire. When all these demands hit upon deaf ears, only then did L. Stur and his group decide to organize the Slovak revolution of 1848-49 in which Stur played the leading role together with J. M. Hurban and M. M. Hodza, and which marked, though defeated and betrayed by Vienna, an important milestone in Slovak history. The torch of national consciousness, which Stur and his group had taken over from the followers of Bernolak and J. Holly, as a result of this revolution, became a lasting light for Slovakia's national struggles and aspirations. As for the assertion that Stur was a daydreamer in politics and a romantic in philosophy, recent analysis of his writings by Prof. D. Cizevskij, Prof. S. Polakovic, Dr. S. S. Osusky, and many others, completely repudiates this view. In his book "Stu.r's Philosophy of Life," Prof. Cizevskij proves that Stur was in many respects an original philosopher and not merely an epigon of Hegel and German romantic thinkers. On the contrary, Stu.r's philosophy lacks several characteristic features of German romanticism, according to Cizevskij's thorough analysis which finds him a realist in his approaches to the phenomena of life. Strangely and unfortunately enough, but recent political developments in Central and Eastern Europe proved that even Stu.r's big dream of united Slavic peoples under Russia may become a reality. Not under an enlightened Russian czar with humanistic and liberal views, not as a community dedicated to the Orthodox Church and struggling for the highest ideals of freedom and respect for human beings, as Stur wished to see it in his work "Das Slawenthum und die Welt der Zukunft" (Slavdom and the World of the Future) . Moscow has become the political powerhouse of the Slav world under quite different circumstances, but Stu.r's vision of a single united Slavic world under Russian leadership has technically materialized. 20 SLOVAKIA Stur's v1s1on of Slovak cultural, political, and social . life did not prove to be daydreaming either. There is a Slovak nation with its own literature, cultural institutions, and is practically without illiteracy. There is a strong national consciousness and a sound social stratification, unbalanced only by the present Communist regime. And there is also a fighting spirit of the new Slovak generations for national and social justice among Central European peoples and a constant resistance against Communist ideology, about which over a century ago E. Stur wrote : "Communism not only commits outrageous injustice against all civil society .. . but it also ruins all personal initiative, endeavor and enthusiasm. It divides the family, it destroys the household and thus it opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution, and indulgence. It degrades man to animal level. . . . "Communism has matured to the same degree as atheism and defection from Christianity. . . . In all types of Communism, whatever their classification may be, the outlook is only toward a dismal life. It brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind . . . . " Despite Stur's comparatively youthful age, his education and activities, as well as those of his group, were admirably manysided. Besides an ardent love and sacrifice for the national cause, Stur and his followers became a model for many generations in their thorough preparation for the role which they marked out for themselves in Slovak life. Because they were human, they did make mistakes, but enemies of the Slovak national revival are pointing to and magnifying these in vain. Their mistakes were the mistakes of the century in which they lived, as Ernest Denis so understandingly reflected in his "La Question d' Autriche-Les Slovaques," published in 1917. Their smallness or greatness, their realism or romanticism can be measured only against the background of the conditions and of the period in which they lived, and against the results of their work which brought a new and more dynamic life to the Slovak people.(33) To summarize, it is certainly proper and correct to say SLOVAKIA 21 that the significance of r.udovit Stur was great and farreaching, in the first place, in the revival of Slovak national life, where Stur played the role of reformer of the Slovak literary language, greatly contributed to the modern Slovak national ideology, gave to his people a new vision of political freedom and of a better future, and by his own example, his writings embracing poetry, philosophy, history, sociology, etc., gave a strong impetus to Slovak life in general. Since Slovakia and the Slovak people are surely a part of the Slavic world, Stur's role in the Slovak national revival is logically a part of his manifold contributions to be considered within the over-all Slavic world, too. On his position among Slav intellectuals of the XIXth century speaks not only the role he played at the first Slavic Congress in Prague, his rich correspondence with practically all outstanding Slavic leaders, but also the fact that his work "Slavdom and the World of the Future" was translated and twice published by Russian intellectuals in the last and at the beginning of this century. Being endowed with extraordinary natural capacity for creative and original conceptions, Stur belongs with Jan Kollar and Pavel J. Safarik to the Slovaks of the XIXth century who can rightly be regarded as great figures of the Slavic world. 22 SLOVAKIA NOTES 1. Stur's condemnation of Communism around 1850 became a part of the Slovak national ideology and has been quoted again and again. According to Stur, Communism "ranks among the wildest of offshoots ever conceived by the human brain ... it brings in its wake despotism of the grossest kind, it shatters all the bonds of social living and opens wide the door to every type of immorality, dissolution and indulgence. In place of holy ties, it offers profiteering, rioting and their like and thus it degrades man to animal level etc . ... " 2. A. Mraz, professor at the University of Bratislava, in his German book "Die Literature der Slowaken" and in his new · book "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948, says that "Stur war nicht nur ein glilcklicher Reformator und genialer Organisator und Initiator, er ragte auch als Dichter for" (p. 92). 3. Cfr. Hans Kohn, "Pan-Slavism, Its History and Ideology," University of Notre Dame Press, 1953, (p. 20). Les Slovaques," 4. Ernest Denis, "La Question d' Autriche Paris, Librairie Delagrave, (pp. 162- 170). 5. Objective studies on Stur in foreign languages were published by Prof. Dimitrij Cizevskij , "l!udovit ~tur's Philosophie des Litbens," Halle, 1938, and by Michael B. Petrovich, "The Emergence of Russian Pan-Slavism 1856-1870," Columbia University Press, 1956. 6. Ibidem, (p. 21). 7. Prof. Seton-Watson, "History of the Czechs and Slovaks," London, 1942, (p. 259). 8. Ibidem, (p. 262). See also Louis Leger, "Le Panslavisme et I' inte''l.!uderet francaise," Paris, Ernest Flammarion, 1917, (p. 164) vit Stur etait Slovaque, comme Kollar, comme Schafarik. On voit quel role les Slovaques si oublies chez nous, pour ne pas dire si ignores, ont joue dans la vie de la race slave au XIXe siecle." Leger confirms that the appeal to the Slavs for the First Congress in Prague in 1848 "avait ete redige par l' ectivain slovaque I.!udevit stur. " 9. Cfr. W. Lednicki, "Panslavism, in European Ideologies," ed. by Felix Gross, New York, 1948, (p. 838). 10. Journal of Central European Affairs, XII, 1952, I, 1- 19. 11. Stur's writings were published in several volumes. To his most important published works belong the following: Songs and Poems ; Ancient and New History of the Slovaks; Slavdom and the Future of the World ; Slovak Vernacular and the Need to Write In It; Slovak Grammar, and a great number of articles and studies, some of them published recently under the title : Slova na c!ase. He also was founder and editor of newspapers and reviews : Slovak National Review, The Eagle, etc. 12. Cfr. Louis Leger, "Le Panslavism et I' interet francais," (pp. 164-202). 13. See "~turova filozofia iivota," Bratislava, 1941, SUS, (p. III). 14. Cfr. I.!udovit Stur, "Slavianstvo i mir budushchago; Poslanie SLOVAKIA 23 Slavianam s beregov Dunaja," translated from the German MS by V. L Lamanskij in "Chteniia lmperatorskago Obschchestva lstorii i Drevnostei Rossiiskich pri Moskovskom Universitete, Ill, Material y slavianskie," Books 1-3, Moscow, 1867, (pp. 1-191). For an analysis of Stur's work, see M. B. . Petrovich's "The Emergence of Russian Panslavism" and his "l!udovit ~tur and Russian Panslavism" in the Journal of Central European Affairs, April, 1952, 1-19. In German an objective analysis can be found in Alfred Fischel's book "Der Panslavismus bis zum Weltkrieg," Stuttgart and Berlin, 1919. 15. Cfr. "~turova filozofia zivota" and also Doc. S. Polako~ic, "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filozofie," Bratislava, 1944. 16. Cfr. Petrovich's works. 17. Danilevskii's first series of articles were published in 1869 in "Zaria" and so was his remarkable book "Rossiia i Evropa; vzgliad na kulturnyia i politicheskija otnosheniia slavianskago mira k germano-romanskomu." R. A. Fadieev published his "Mnienie o vostochnom voprosie" also in 1870; Stur died in 1856. 18. Cfr. works by Seton-Watson, Ernest Denis, Louis Leger, A. Fischel, H. Kohn, etc. For E. Denis "Stur reste encore aujourd' hui le nom le plus illustre de l' histoire slovaque . . . et l' ame de la resistance nationale .. . il ne vivait que pour sa cause et son ame debordait d' amour et de foi . .. " (p. 164). 19. Cfr. also Polakovic's "Zaciatky slovenskej narodnej filo• zofie," (p. 56). 20. Cfr. Cizevskij's chapter "Stur and Hegel" and also statement by him on p. 107 of his work. 21. See "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June 1956, article by Prof. H. Bartek. 22. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," Scranton, Pa., 1947, (pp. 90-100). 23. See H. Bartek : "l!udovit Shir a slovencina," Bratislava, 1943, and also his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956 (p. 9). 24. Cfr. "Revue des Etudes slaves," Paris, II, (pp. 217-18), article by H. Bartek. 25. Stur also adopted the view that the archaic Czech language, which was used for some time in Slovakia by the Protestant intelli· gentsia, was merely a borrowed language, and that the Slovak Protestants used it for liturgy and literature in the same way as the Catholics used Latin. This thesis was supported before Stur by many Catholic Slovak writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Cfr. "Slovak Literature Under the Soviet Impact," by J . M. Kirschbaum, Vol. I, 1956, Slavic and Easf European Studies. 26. Cfr. Prof. A. Mraz, "Die Literature der Slowaken," as well as his recent work "Dejiny slovenskej literatury," Bratislava, 1948. 27. Cfr. Peter P. Yurchak, "The Slovaks," (pp. 103-105). 28. See, "A Byronic Hero in Slovak Literature," The Slavonic and East European Review, Volume XXXIV, No. 83, June, 1956, (pp. 338-354). 29. Ibidem, (pp. 33941). 30. On Stur's social ideas see Dr. J . Pauco, "l!udovychova u 24 SLOVAKIA Sturovcov," Turc. sv. Martin, 1943, and his article in "Slovakia," Vol. VI, March, 1956. In Pauco's view Stur and his followers "concerned themselves with the welfare of the entire nation. They fought to improve their economy, but they also fought with equal vigor against alcoholism, illiteracy, etc." 31. Cfr. "A Note On Two Slovak Translators of Mickiewicz," by J. M. Kirschbaum , in "Mickiewic z in World Literature," Univ. of California Press, 1956. See also Cizevskij's contributio n: "Mickiewicz, Stur and Kral," Ibidem, (pp. 469-484). 32. H. Bartek, "Slovakia," Vol. VI, June, 1956. 33. See "Uudovit Stur po sto rokoch," by J. M. Kirschbaum , Most, Vol. III, No. 4. 195.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Ľudovít Štúr and His Place in the Slavic World Description An account of the resource Joseph Kirschbaum, LL.D., Ph.D.<br />Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26), March 1958<br />pp. 1-24<br /><ol type="I"><li>Ľudovít Štúr and Pan-Slavism, pp. 3-7</li> <li>Štúr's Role in Linguistics and Philology, pp. 8-11</li> <li>Štúr's Literary Aesthetics and Cultural Achievements, pp. 12-16</li> <li>Revolutionary Idealist, Romantic, or Realist?, pp. 17-21</li> </ol> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Kirschbaum, Jozef M., 1913-2001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958 SNK https://slovakia.wordsofpassage.net/files/original/9e114fd13afdb937bd65377a2a212f50.pdf acae0707c5a2b0d373a35a4cc4928fd3 PDF Text Text MARCH, 1958 VOL. VIII NO. l (26) IN THIS ISSUE: UUDOViT STUR AND HIS PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD : I Uudovit Stur and Pan-Slavism II Stur's Role in Linguistics and Philology III Stur's Literary Aesthetics and Cultural Achievements IV Revolutionary, Idealist, Romantic, or Realist? ''.MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOV AKIA EXILES" OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! - SLOVAK NAT IONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 59 Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA �SLOVAK.IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Mldl1!etown, Pa. � MARCH, 1958 VOL. VIII NO. l (26) IN THIS ISSUE: UUDOViT STUR AND HIS PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD : I Uudovit Stur and Pan-Slavism II Stur's Role in Linguistics and Philology III Stur's Literary Aesthetics and Cultural Achievements IV Revolutionary, Idealist, Romantic, or Realist? ''.MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOV AKIA EXILES" OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! - SLOVAK NAT IONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 59 Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA �SLOVAK.IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Mldl1!etown, Pa. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource 1958, Vol. 8 Description An account of the resource <ul><li>Issue 1 (No. 26), March 1958.</li> <li>Issue 2 (No. 27), June 1958.</li> <li>Issue 3 (No. 28), December 1958.</li> </ul> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Slovak League of America Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1958 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document MARCH, 1958 VOL. VIII NO. l (26) IN THIS ISSUE: UUDOViT STUR AND HIS PLACE IN THE SLAVIC WORLD : I Uudovit Stur and Pan-Slavism II Stur's Role in Linguistics and Philology III Stur's Literary Aesthetics and Cultural Achievements IV Revolutionary, Idealist, Romantic, or Realist? ''.MEMORANDUM ON POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ACTIVITIES OF CZECHOSLOV AKIA EXILES" OUR EXPERTS: THE CZECH SOCIALISTS! - SLOVAK NAT IONALISM: THE ORIGINS OF SLOVAK NATIONALISM THE HISTORY OF SLOVAKIA (Continued) WHO SAID IT: P. 59 Edited and compiled by PHILIP A. HROBAK SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. • • • Published by THE SLOVAK LEAGUE OF AMERICA SLOVAK.IA is published periodically by the Slovak League of America, a cultural and civic federation of Americans of Slovak descent. The chief purpose of SLOVAK.IA is to promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Slovak nation and its long struggle for freedom and independence. As Americans, members of the Slovak League of America firmly believe that the Slovak nation, just as all nations, has an inherent and God-given right to freedom and independence. They are dedicated to the cause of the American way of life, Slovak freedom and world peace and are determined to oppose the plague of Communism and all other totalitarian political systems. Subscription to Slovakia $1.00 per year in the U. S. A. - $2.00 elsewhere. Send subscriptions to: SLOVAKIA Box 150 Middletown, Pa. Printed in the U. S. A. JEDNOTA PRESS Mldl1!etown, Pa.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Front Matter, Slovakia, Vol. 8, No. 1 (26) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1958